UNITAB -Flexi's Multi's etc

[G]

I have just spoken to someone from Unitab in QLD and was amazed at their proposal re Quaddies, Trebles etc.

She told me Quaddies will only be on meetings conducted in QLD and SA meaning no Quaddies on meetings such as Moonee Valley, Harold Park, Flemington, Caulfield etc, etc.

After enquiring about the wisdom of having Trebs and Quads on the same meetings, I was told the Quaddies will be on races 4,5,6 and 7 and the Trebles will be on races 5,6 and 7. Her reasoning was that if you got kicked out of the Quaddie in the 1st leg you would be able to reload into the Trebles.

I tried to explain that I would prefer Trebs on 2,3,and 4 and the Quads on 4,5,6 and 7 so as you arent doubling up on the same races as much but hey, what do mugs like me know. Im only trying to survive on the punt so Im sure the pen pushers in QLD know better.

[mighty_tiger_79]

G

did they give you a date when it would be started???

as far as i know its been put back twice and now looks like middle of january before starting.

Peter Smith at the greyhounds mentioned the treble would be on other races not in the quaddie which seems a good idea.

obviously people in unitab dont want money invested into Spring Carnival QUADDIES.

i wonder when they will put flexi-betting onto everything. I think the plan to start with is only tri's and f4's......

surely they should have it cover everything from the start.

i think the QUADDIE races interstate are the last 4 races at the meeting (for gallops), im not sure if that has changed or not.

[mal]

Have to agree with G on this one
I already bet on quaddies on our trots on my NSW + VIC accounts
they are races 4567
to have our quaddies on 4567 will still appeal
to have a treble on 567 is lunacy,
keep it to 234 or I wont bother investing into them
Also
I wish our Unitab treble would stay fixed on the same races
it varies from week to week for the Trebles
234
345
456
keep it the same I say

[another grub]

again 100% correct mal....

[mighty_tiger_79]

i guess the results will be in the pool sizes

i can see quaddies being a good thing while the treble just completely loses out and has a pool the size of an any 2 on kalgoorlie trots

[the wonder elephant]

Have to agree with G on this one
I already bet on quaddies on our trots on my NSW + VIC accounts
they are races 4567
to have our quaddies on 4567 will still appeal
to have a treble on 567 is lunacy,
keep it to 234 or I wont bother investing into them
Also
I wish our Unitab treble would stay fixed on the same races
it varies from week to week for the Trebles
234
345
456
keep it the same I say

mal speaking with a friend at trsa they try to have the treble legs on the bigger fields as to make it a wider market as small fields norMALly throw up a short price fav there for lowering turnover..
but what g and your great self are saying is correct the treble should be on the earlier races and the quaddie on the last 4 races i think this will increase there turnover if they do it this way as those that bet on the trebles and doubles will also be quaddie players ...i say bring back the fortune 8

[mighty_tiger_79]

TWE

the fortune 8 used to be good, i used to use my phone number as the tips!!!!!!!!

bring back fortune 8 with flexi betting

[the wonder elephant]

TWE

the fortune 8 used to be good, i used to use my phone number as the tips!!!!!!!!

bring back fortune 8 with flexi betting

mt79 no wonder it was hard to get using your mobile no..

[mighty_tiger_79]

TWE

the fortune 8 used to be good, i used to use my phone number as the tips!!!!!!!!

bring back fortune 8 with flexi betting

mt79 no wonder it was hard to get using your mobile no..

no landline number

[Plunge Penguin]

One thing with flexis - are we suddenly going to see "record" dividends that never actually occur?

Eg - let's say there is a huge race with a $500,000 trifecta pool and say, 20 runners. Someone takes a box 7, for example, normally costing $105, but they take it $10 - close enough to 10%. They are the only correct winner of the whole pool.

Does that make the "offical" trifecta dividend $5,000,000 - given they have scooped the whole pool, yet have only actually received $500,000 - or am I missing something?

[mighty_tiger_79]

good point PP, because we've seen the first 4 divvies show up when there wasnt that much in the pool.

but dont get too carried away with it just yet PP, it will be x-mas by the time it comes in knowing how slow unitab are

[robber]

One thing with flexis - are we suddenly going to see "record" dividends that never actually occur?

Eg - let's say there is a huge race with a $500,000 trifecta pool and say, 20 runners. Someone takes a box 7, for example, normally costing $105, but they take it $10 - close enough to 10%. They are the only correct winner of the whole pool.

Does that make the "offical" trifecta dividend $5,000,000 - given they have scooped the whole pool, yet have only actually received $500,000 - or am I missing something?

You dont get the whole pool with percentages in Melbourne so there has to be some chance you wont get the lot here either. (fair enough for mine).

i.e you get it for 10% you get 50k of the 500k pool whereas percentages over 49% on their own get the whole pool.

[rooburger]

http://www.tabinfo.com.au/betcalculator/index.asp try this link to play with flexi bets and rover pick 4s.
plenty of time to learn before we get it in mid jan

[MAY-Z]

One thing with flexis - are we suddenly going to see "record" dividends that never actually occur?

Eg - let's say there is a huge race with a $500,000 trifecta pool and say, 20 runners. Someone takes a box 7, for example, normally costing $105, but they take it $10 - close enough to 10%. They are the only correct winner of the whole pool.

Does that make the "offical" trifecta dividend $5,000,000 - given they have scooped the whole pool, yet have only actually received $500,000 - or am I missing something?

this was something i was also thinking about - quite often at globe the first 4 doesnt go off so i was thinking about taking f/f/f/f and seeing if the pool got paid out with only 1 winner