Tether is the most popular stablecoin with the highest liqiudity for stablecons. Many people use it and they have to trust it.
These are merely good points about the USDT, but as good as it is, do you think you can entirely trust it? Well, it is what I use with my exchanges as we all know that many top exchanges do not allow the USD in many of their transactions, so I never had the chance. Had it been I have the choice, I would not use USDT, I would only be converting my cryptos to USD back and forth for safer reasons. As we all know, the USDT is being claimed to be pegged with the USD but in reality, it is not so, the value is not always $1=1USDT unless we are deceiving ourselves. And there was a time that the value shited significantly and they were just apologizing and citing reasons. But this cannot make me trust it totally. Though it is good and has proven itself to be somewhat safer, still, no one knows the worst that will happen tomorrow. This is even as it is not decentralized, anything can happen due to this. |
|
|
|
Both names/abbreviation make perfect sense IMO, but I believe that the majority here, including me has been accustomed to the abbreviation BTT, while the last two later “T” makes it even easier to pronounce; Therefore it will be nice to continue with the Abbreviation BTT because changing to BCT will have to take people some amount of time to master, we will even see a situation where people will still be writing BTT instead of BCT or even write BTC. I vote BTT.
I haven't been able to vote but I'm on the BCT more because for me it makes sense that it's the abbreviation, Bit Coin Talk but at the end of the day, I don't think that this will matter a lot because we're all different individuals and I guess use what you're most comfortable with, what works for you sometimes doesn't work for me at all. I like your concluding part as I was just wondering why people will be using syllables for this even when the BTC from Bitcoin which is widely accepted doesn't prove to be formed through syllables. I believe it is beyond this even as the forum is a Bitcoin forum in which Talk is included in the name, which makes it so easily called BTC...Talk (BTCT). I was even surprised to see an external site that just started campaigning here to use it as "BTCtalk" in their traffic referring page if one views it through their HTTPS link. This means that some people are even seeing it better than some on the forum, as the BTC and Talk can't be mistaken. Well, like you said, we have different views about this and we must respect that, so we should spell it the way we like. Mine is even BTCt...lol |
|
|
|
Everyone has their own opinion in choosing a coin to hold on to during the bull run, I personally prefer to keep old coins that have definitely gone through ups and downs.
New tokens are only for momentary profit, not for investment
You are on point, we have our choices and preferences, and the way we follow these coins and tokens varies and matters a lot. As for me, old and new projects are always good, it depends on the particular ones we are talking about. You can see the recently launched $DYM, what a beautiful project. Though I missed out due to my laxity, I didn't just know why I never took it seriously despite seeing the price at about $2.3. It nevertheless moved to over $8 in a few days, which means I would have conveniently earned x3 in less than 3 days. Going forward, I believe this project will continue to make headway, it is a good project, and despite being new, you can see it moving in multiple of its current value in the next 1.5 years from now. There are many other examples I can cite. Is it PENDLE, INJ and many more? It is all about many other factors and not only about old or new projects alone. But in all, I believe that new projects are performing better than most old projects, we should be smart about this. |
|
|
|
|
Without beating about the bush, the DCA is a very good strategy, it will limit your risk for you, or should I say that it will average it for you on both the miss and the save sides where you might start the investment at a high price even when the asset will still move lower against your position (save), and you might start the investment at a very low price even when you can invest all and will be in your favour (miss). Regardless of the condition, DCA will always help investors to average their investments and will not miss too much which is the main thing here.
But this can make you miss higher gains also, which is why the investment of all your money at once could be good at times. But you will have to understand the market before such can be risked. As a good speculator, one can know the bullish and the bearish times of the market, and one can know when the market has bottomed even if it is still bearish in trend. And with the knowledge of this, you can invest all your money at once if the market is bullish or has hit the bottom.
The choice is yours, and some people observe the two to be better cautious.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't view it as the OP viewed it, I do not think that intending traders would want to trade and earn but not learn, how is that even possible? You can only do what you know. We can only say that the minds of some of them are fixed on the money they want to make than the learning, but no one will want to trade without learning, they will not do the magic, it is not possible. Also, it could be misconstrued if some people are learning but because they do not have anything good to show for it, people will think they are not learning or not doing enough, but this may not be the case with many people.
Many are just trying their best but have no way out, and if you look around you, you might see enough people who had tried to trade, learned it and trained about it for months or even years but abandoned it when it was not working for them. For this, as much as I value learning and encourage people to learn, I do not like it when we make it look as if people are just lazy or unwilling about it, it is not always like that. Trading itself is very tough and can be so frustrating. It is only a few that will make it through it. That's just the truth.
|
|
|
|
So I have been trying to wrap my head around which is a better option, day trading crypto or buying for long term keep.
While they both have their pros and cons, they both come with a form of risk and they are meant to generate profit.
The major difference between them is that day trading tend to make profit from small market volatility, while hodling make profit from the bigger change in crypto value.
Day trading involves more techniques, self discipline and rational decision making.
Which do you prefer and think is better
Well, when you are talking about trading, I advise you to remove the context of HODLing from it, that is for investment, and not for retail traders like us. You can hold your trading position for long-term purposes, but it is not as in investment that people are mistaking a mere monthly investment for HODLing, you should be advised about it. As for your inquisition, let me say that day trading is all the trades you open and conclude daily, meaning you are not leaving your position till the next day. This is short-term trading where traders can analyse the market for a short duration purpose and either scalp or trade within minutes and hours, but it will not be more than 24 hours depending on the time the trade opened the trade. A lot of strategies can be used here but most traders use between 1m-4H chart for it mostly. But this doesn't stop some traders from using higher charts for clarity, but will still close the trade on that day. They can also open and close many trades within a day. For long-term trading, the context is relative, it could be a matter of days, weeks, or months, it all depends, though they are all called long-term trading. You can also use 4H-1M for this analysis. Both (Long and short-term trading) are nevertheless good for earning, it only depends on you as a trader. Your time for trading, the pattern, convenience, emotion and many other considerations are important to choosing what kind of trader you will be. This is even as all need discipline, expertise and management, and not better than each other as you believed. It depends on you. |
|
|
|
Well, I do not see it as you made it look here, and what I even read in the article posted was a donation, and this is fine. Well, talking about banks if that is what really happens, I don't still see the reason why we should be heating the polity, this is just unnecessary. Do you think that Bitcoin projects will be done without money involved, especially this time when Bitcoin is in the mainstream of the financial market and ETF is approved? This, of course, would have increased the cost of services, you do not think that this will just be done at the expense of individuals, groups or companies without plans, loans (if possible) and expectations for reward in some cases? All these are being planned well before execution, and those who seek funds or receive donations know the reason why they do that, and this doesn't mean that the banks that will fund them will be part of that project, they are only offering funds and doing their business. Even if they will be a partner in it, why not? This is a business opportunity, and for banks to be involved in a crypto project is also a welcome development, and not otherwise as some of you will make it look like. If banks now say they do not want to deal with crypto projects, the same people will be the ones to talk opposition. What do you even want? I'm just saying generally... |
|
|
|
Women by nature are more conservative than men. They are better manager of resources and know how to prioritise things. This is what is needed for successful gambling because with it, the chances of using funds meant for basic needs in gambling will be minimised.
So do you think women will make better gamblers than men?
I strongly disagree with you about your comparison of men and women, men are better constructive in my opinion, and women are even otherwise, except for a few. Where men will behave more politely and maturely, women often do otherwise, well, in some cases, certain settings/factors/differences will prevail if the environment is to be considered, still, when it is in general, I will give it to men and not women. However, the issue men have is the pressure of responsibilities on their necks. Had it been men and women are by nature believed to be the same and must provide for themselves and their families the same way, then the pressure on men would be reduced and they would handle many things that have to do with money and risk better. You will always see men going for more risks and chasing more dreams and goals better than women, that is manly in nature, and this is not their fault, no serious man would want to be a liability to any woman, unlike how many women are a liability to men. This is why you see them handling the things of money and risk better than men. Though it is not in all cases, but they (women) are less burdened, so what do you expect? Really? Painting with a wide brush (men this, women that) is oversimplified. Are we still using these outdated binaries in 2024? Come on. Discuss facts, not fiction. Healthy gambling (balancing risk and reward) is something men and women thrive at when given equal opportunity. Society shapes our view of natural ability. Exposure, education, and empowerment matter, not gender. Given the correct environment, women can take chances and pursue ambitions too Talking about liability? Relic of the past. Dependency nowadays is situational, not gender-specific. All genders want financial independence. The concept that men are better at money and risk is outmoded and contradictory to gender equality. Our thought should evolve, not devolve You might see this as unacceptable by you, but that is the reality, especially where I am. I may not be more elaborate about this, as of course, many other factors contribute to this like religion and feminity itself, yet what I said is so justifiable regardless. Women are less burdened than men and if at all they are so "desperate" to make money and are too lazy to work, my brother, men are their next target to turn to. That's a fact, and this is not rampant the other way round. This mindset alone is a burden lifter for women and they are not always desperate towards gambling as a means to earn them money because of this, they will not even think towards gambling in most cases since it is not an easy way for them, except for a few. Fine, this can't justify all cases, but I can assure you that it justifies most cases. I do not know the country you are in as things vary too based on location, but I speak out of my knowledge of many countries and based on the narration of the people I know far and near. This could be odd to you, but the psychological things could be odd at times as well even as this is one of the reasons, there are others. And even if most ladies gamble, they do not risk as high as men, and this is particularly true with my gambling experience of over 2 decades. Something must have made that happen, which is less desperation like men, and something must have reduced that desperation which is certainly not feminity as we all have responsibilities, except the means to solve them vary. |
|
|
|
Although the chances of winning for the lottery are small, many players still buy lottery coupons because of a promise that if they win, they will get a lot of money and can make them rich in just 1 lottery coupon. lotteries in mainland America and Europe have very large prizes and rewards.
But yes, winning is very difficult, mostly just a dream for coupon buyers but certainly there are those who win the lottery so spending a little money, for example cigarette money is reduced to buy coupons, will not be burdensome.
They still hope to win the huge jackpot prize so they still buy lottery coupons. Even if they have to use more money, it doesn't matter to them because they likely still have more money or have even allocated some funds to buy the lottery coupons. It is their desires, hopes and dreams of becoming winners of lottery coupons that lead them to buy lottery coupons in large quantities. Those of us who don't understand might say it doesn't make sense but not for them because they still dream of being the winner. Meanwhile, people who don't have any intention of buying lottery coupons want to experience buying lottery coupons. But these are the ones who can sometimes be the winners of their lottery coupons. I think those who use more money do still have doubts but at the end they still continue their plans because they are after the jackpot and says that all of their expenses will still be compensated once they hit it. Many of us already understand how the lottery works or on why people buy a lottery ticket but we still can say that it's better to not risk money on it because the odds are so big that hitting the jackpot is already close to being impossible. Although the last thing that you said are no doubt true, as I also heard a couple of news about it. I'm afraid a lot of newbies in the lottery scene are going to jump as well and try their luck. And it may be the start of their addiction to it. Like gambling buying too many lottery tickets can become an addiction. Nowadays it is seen that some people are increasing their inclination towards gambling lottery online games. Get addicted to this game crime is increasing day by day. Lottery or online games have seen many people become destitute in many cases. Addicted to these games many people have been seen to indulge in criminal activities without realizing it. Do you mean all these cons are for gambling? I don't think so. Gambling is not as bad as that, am I not gambling? Are you not? Even though I do not know you in person, I know that with your education and experience, and for also striving to still be part of a campaign here means that you are not just frustrated like what you explained of gamblers. In gambling, we all have our choices, it is either we choose the good path or the bad path, and if we eventually choose the bad path, should we now blame everything on gambling? I don't think so. People are too greedy, unreasonable and insensitive towards them, that is some of the reasons why they are in the gambling mess they found themselves in. But like criminality, I don't even see the direct relationship between it and gambling, all I could see that could push people to criminality is desperation and frustration. Is that even the right answer to the situation if they are wise? Now, is it gambling that made them desperate/frustrated or their foolishness towards it? And why is the same criminality not being mentioned in trading? Are they not both the means by which people can lose money, and even lose it very fast? So, I believe that people are only downgrading gambling too much, it is all about your choice, and if you are wise and smart enough, you will gamble and nothing bad will happen to you whether you lose or you gain. If you win, you will be happy and keep the cool and still continue to try your luck in it, and if you lose, you should keep the cool as well, unless you never planned your gambling well from the beginning where you need to exercise patience, plan, budget, and also follow the due principles of responsible gambling. It is all about you, bro. Those who are not gambling are even criminals, so it is not the direct factor to make someone bad in my opinion, it is our choice. |
|
|
|
Risk is a small amount or big amount is differs from person to person. Those who have 5k$ think a small amount or big is different from those people who have 5 Billion dollars. But the risk should be taken only those amounts which a person can afford to lose. And it depends on the person's affordable. A rich man may not afford the amount which a poor man may do. So, it can not be measured by rich man or poor man.
Affordability is very important in gambling and I believe this is the first warning to all gamblers, only that they do not often follow it. Well, the rich will always have more money in their possession and getting it ready to be wasted since they do not have much use for it, and at times, it will not even affect them since they have channels that are earning them money. For this reason alone, the poor can't behave in gambling the way the rich would, yet the number of gambles could vary. What I mean by the number of gambling is the number of times they wager, the poor may continue to wager his money consistently and uninterruptedly, but with a little money per betting. Whereas, if the rich are wagering too much per time, he might feel it when it gets to a certain level unless he is a fool, which is not a good characteristic. We should not be wasting money anyhow, there are other purposes we can use money for even if we want to expel some of the money anyhow. This attitude should still even be reflected as responsible gambling in the rich people whether or not they have enough money for gambling. Above all, if this context is to be adhered to, I stick to the rich here as my choice, they have more money and resources, and even the environment of their gambling at times is so encouraging and entertaining compared to that of the poor. So they are the ones who are supposed to take more risks. Also, in my opinion, even if they are not consistent about it, they are still the ones who are taking the higher risk due to their worth. |
|
|
|
-snip
Question:who has been in this scenario before? And how did you managed with your emotions then?
Let me first say that I've never been in this shoe before, but possibly I can be in it in the future, nevertheless, one thing that is certain about me is that I am always polite and try to act like my real self always and not as what the thing I am facing or the situation I am in wants of me. For this, if I am in the same situation as you, the fault for unruly behaviour can't come from me. Besides, I always challenge my younger brother in this regard but he has never obliged me of it despite being richer than me.  I always tell him that we should bet, but in my case, my demand is way more than yours, I've never challenged him with less than $1,000, but he has never obliged me. Maybe I can tell better in this situation if he did, but still, I doubt it that I will be unruly because it is one of the ways I trained myself. Money or no money, it shouldn't cloud my judgement and real self, so I do not think that I will be so sentimental about betting. But I don't know if the other party is now initiating an annoying attitude instead of being neutral and well-behaved about it. It is only that annoying attitude that can provoke me, and as a human being, we are entitled to that when we are not foolish. |
|
|
|
Gambling though is a risky game that the chances of winning and losing is in equilibrium but however in other for one to have a possibility of winning, it requires a steady income.
Having a steady and regular income is very important as a gambler because it would enable you to scrap out money you should use for gambling, feeding, taking care of yourself and family and other miscellaneous.
A gambler who has a steady and regular income can have the possibility of winning because his gambling habit can not affect his personal obligations as a man even if he's an addict because being addicted to gambling doesn't actually implies that one will eventually stake all his money on bets but rather someone who plays gambling frequently. By having a steady income, he can take care of other life responsibilities without being affected by his gambling activities and moreover, someone who have a stable income can be aiming to win higher amount in his bets and might be lucky of winning one day and use the money to establish an investment.
Your thoughts on this
Rich people or people who have different sources of income have the opportunity to enjoy gambling because not all people have the money to continuously play their gambling activity, actually in my self i believe that gambling is not for poor people, even though they keep saying how about luck if you are a poor person who can't play a lot of games how you can have the chance to win a gambling game if have limited resources, those rich people have a good amount of money to play with but those who are not seems like not a good thing to deal with. I don't think it is about being rich or poor here but about the consistency of playing. If the rich is not careful, such can be playing senselessly and will be wagering big always which is not advisable in gambling. Even if you are rich, you need to apply wisdom to it, and you can imagine the person who is worth $40M wagering $5M per bet. Is that reasonable? Won't that makes the person lose all his money over time? Even if the person is wise and run away from gambling after some losses, can the person be consistent about it again? That is why we shouldn't use the rich or poor in this context but use the source of income for it. Whether you bet big or small, all that matters is for you to continue to bet and either enjoy the fun or try your luck consistently. This is the real gist of the context. What could do this for us is regular money making, if we have a regular source of income or sources of it, I think that this will be possible easily regardless of whether you are rich or poor. |
|
|
|
Really speaking, older men are the ones to enjoy gambling most than the youth. Since they (old men) have experienced and accomplished the majority of life's goals, they know how to follow gambling without putting too much pressure on themselves to win a bet before giving up or even betting more than they can afford to lose.
Therefore, since they are no longer responsible for caring for and supporting their family(because their kids have all grown), their old age should be a time to relax and have more fun while gambling.
I understand your view and plight and I must say that you are constructive enough. But again, you brought that view out of a school of thought, however, in another school of thought, it might not be like that. This is why I conclude that whether you are right or wrong, we should base it on factors. We can't just assume all the good things you attributed to the old people and believe it is the same reason for gambling. What if they are gambling because they actually need money? This is why we have to treat it individually because what some old people are facing is what the young people are facing, and some young people are even more financially independent than some old people, so it can't be the same for all categories. Nonetheless, I believe that the reason why they gamble has to be ascertained first, it is not all the old people who are financially independent, they might be pushed to gamble just like the women who appeared in one of the OPs on this gambling section of the forum. It is true that the minds of young people are on fire for worldly things, but their motives could vary as well. |
|
|
|
Just as we have expressed our concerns about certain gambling advertisements serving as potential triggers, I have observed and I think that there are gambling proverbs or quotes can also play a role in influencing individuals. Look at this Chinese proverb, "If you don’t gamble, you won’t know how lucky you are." From this proverb, it can spur a regular person to explore gambling as a means to test their luck and become hooked. Also, the person who has been gambling will want to continue gambling while being hopeful that someday they would eventually be lucky and hit the jackpot.
What other proverbs or sayings could potentially act as triggers, enticing individuals to initiate or perpetuate their gambling activities?
I think that traditional investment proverbs in general will always be useful for betting, because to a certain extent they are the same. But I always like to diversify and be open to possibilities. That's why I really like betting, especially online. Well, you are right that many sayings, adages and proverbs could work for both gambling and trading but not all as gambling is way more risky with a different model of working compared to trading. The only thing they have in common is the risk involved, both are risky and the expertise of the traders/bettors is heavily needed before success can be made. This is even as luck is more needed in gambling than in trading, and once you are experienced and trade rightly, you are good to go in trading unlike in most aspects of gambling where you need luck the most. But irrespective of these, one must know that both are better in their practical experiences than in one adage or proverb. The proverbs/adages may not reflect the reality of trading and gambling. Just like what is in the OP, everyone should know that it is not practical in real life because I do not see how the gambling results could be the gauge of how lucky you are as a person. And even if you are lucky today that doesn't mean you can replicate the luck tomorrow. This doesn't make it consistent, and also the proof that luck is not what we can measure per person, it only happens when it wants and people should rather express it that way rather than how they make it look reality. |
|
|
|
When it comes to gambling, everything that's financially related is just possible to achieve even with the least amount of money. I've been able to see someone win over $50,000 with a stake price of just $5 five year ago and even up to this very moment, we still hear reports of such outrageous wins from other parts of the world.
However the possibility of getting such wins are very slim and if a gambler starts sports betting just to become a millionaire through it, there's every possiblity that things might not turn out well the way he thinks of it. So it's very possible to become a millionaire from sports betting but the truth is that it's very rare to see people who achieve that especially low income stakers
It is critical that anyone that is seriously considering becoming a professional sport bettor also keeps their expectations in check, for what I know a good sport bettor can earn up to 50% of their initial capital during a whole year, so someone that started out with 100k dollars will need 6 years to achieve their goal of becoming a millionaire, and as you can see a huge amount of money is needed for that to be true, so I would guess very few people actually have what it is necessary to become millionaires with gambling. And you think that it is easy like that, that everyone can conveniently have that $100,000 to start with? Regardless, gambling has never been easy, that is the truth, though, it is a means that one can make money, and that money could be made so big. But the two factors that will determine that are luck and efforts/expertise, and when the gambler is good with what he does, I think that this is more feasible. Nonetheless, I love the fact that you mentioned sports betting, and that is where I know that one can be practical with gambling earning, and not the casino branch of it if we have to be sincere here. Not that people do not win in casinos too but it is too reliant on luck which is why I will not base my outcome on what will force me to rely on luck. I prefer to rely on my ability and efforts. Sports betting somewhat makes this possible, and anyone can still plan well on it and strive to make the plan work. |
|
|
|
First bull run coming up for me and I am just wondering what we should all realistically be expecting over the next 18 months or so?
Looking at the last bull run, Bitcoin hit $61k in March 2021 then crashed back down to $31k 4 months later and then hit all time high in November 2021.
Is the crash down to $31k normal during a bull run or did something happen?
I am just trying to put my plan together when it comes to selling and don't want to sell too much too soon.
Nothing is bad in asking questions, and personally, I know that you seek more understanding, which is normal and I believe is the best, but be wise to refine the answers you get so that they will not contradict or cause you to make mistakes. Left to me alone, Bitcoin will buy, and for it to have bottomed around $38,500 means that it will probably not move lower than that level this year again. You can take my word for it. Also, be careful of using the past behaviour of Bitcoin to totally indicate what it would do in the future, such can't be tallying forever, you need a better guiding means. And as you have narrated in the past though, it shows that there are bullish and bearish seasons, so enjoy it on the buying side when it is in its bullish season, just like what we experience now. But liquidate your asset when the bearish season comes into play. This is what I call a smart move. Then repeat the process again in the future. Good luck! |
|
|
|
Hating myself? Never done that when I lose, maybe I regretted my decision but it was never a hate. However, I would just be able to accept it within 24 hours as I don't want it to bother me on my upcoming session in gambling. I made a mistake, I learn from it, that's the only process but sometimes when I go overboard, I need to stop for awhile to evaluate my mistakes and reflect on it.
We are human so we are prone to make mistakes, and since gambling does involve our emotion, it's important that we are not weak, otherwise, we will easily get addicted and it could possibly ruin our life. But let us not allow it will happen to our lives, best thing to do all the time is, learn how to forgive ourselves.
Some people will be liberal and not hate themselves but another part will be frightened by the flawed version of themselves as they indulge in gambling more, like it was a moment where their regrets were voiced and their repentance was expressed but even so, the feeling of disgust should not be maintained, hating more and more only makes us become a more damaged version of ourselves. As you mentioned, it is a lesson and an improvement in personality, each shell of the buggy version will be the maturity of a future version with powerful fixes I don't know the reason why gamblers should hate themselves because of losing if not for the fault of the gambler himself from the beginning. You do not just gamble senselessly, but if you did, then you can blame yourself or even hate yourself if that is what is nice for you to do so that you will not repeat it again. So why not? Gambling rightly has approaches to it, you can't miss it if you follow the right approaches and due process, and you can only miss it if you do otherwise. Missing it entails the fact that the gambler is gambling anyhow, and some will be gambling within gambling itself, which makes it so ill. Gamblers must have certain gambling styles and approaches, and if these approaches are good enough, they will bring about better gambling results and even pleasant experiences for the gamblers. But in the absence of this, it will be losses and mismanagement of the gambling account, so no gambler should be exonerated in this regard. They must be blamed and they can be bitter with themselves to enforce a change if that is what it takes. All that matters is for them to stop making mistakes and treat gambling as it should be done. Or else, they will continue to lose in their folly. |
|
|
|
Was reading a gambling related article just this morning and it was talking on random issues cut across gambling responsibly, many of which I agree with. However, there were two terms that were made mentioned of which stole my interest unfortunately they weren't explained but only mentioned. I could have just checked them on Google but I felt reluctant and said let me bring it to the community let make it a discussion among us. The two terms were Problem Gambling and Compulsive Gambling. I want to know if they are different in meaning and how different is their effect on their victims. And moreso, there's a statement I read in the comment section which is in the quote below. I would love to have the views of slot lovers in the forum on this. How true is this statement. All slot players are long term losers.
Well, let me start with Problem gambling and Compulsive gambling. The two are real and you can see them all around you with the way gamblers are losing and having issues associated with them. A good gambling activity is possible depending on how we accept and play it. It has enough problems associated with it as well if care is not taken. But without going deep into this, one can still avoid many of these problems if they are good players, and with managerial skills included in their plays. Also, with compulsive gambling, no one is making anything compulsory in gambling, we can only be compulsive about things at our own discretion. If we are not careful, we can be addicted, and addiction is compulsive in nature because we are already obsessed with it. How is that the fault of gambling as a context, if not our fault? Lastly, the losing remark on the Slots game is what the author believes, but it could be different with another person. But one thing that is sure is that gambling on Slot games is primarily about luck, and if you are not lucky when you play, you might be a loser at that time. Yet, this doesn't stop others from playing before or after you win their games. |
|
|
|
Many people think that gambling is a matter of luck in winning any bet. In my opinion, gambling depends on you yourself in determining the choices you want to play. Because gambling doesn't just rely on luck, but gambling also requires skills that you actually use in the game, so it will be very easy for you to make a profit in your bets. However, you need to remember that gambling carries a huge risk of losing money. Never judge that luck is always present in every gambling, because if you rely on luck it will definitely make you regret it later.
We can say of both the luck in gambling and also of the work of the person in gambling, so it is a two-way thing for those who can think better. Luck is good and we can't remove it from gambling, it is such that will happen in some particular games before you can win from them whether you like it or not, you will just be the victim of that good circumstance and you will win easily. It is of the best deed for us to learn and believe we can win in casinos, but without luck in some cases, our efforts will be in futility. A good example is in Slot games and many others. But in such like sports betting, you do not need luck before you can win, you need your experience and good speculative efforts and instincts, and you will be right most times. Such who are planning their first getting very well will know that they win more through good work/effort and not solely on luck just like what we need in most casinos. For these, we can say that luck exists in gambling but not in all cases as some people might think or believe. |
|
|
|
I have followed various sporting activities and I noticed something that hardly make complete sense to me and that is the rationale behind firing a coach when the players do perform poorly. What drew my attention to this is a news flash about Jose Mourinho's case in Roma. According to the article, Mourinho left Roma angry and feeling betrayed by the players. Is it even possible that players will intentionally lose matches because they want their coach out at the expense of their own careers? If this is true, why will the club management reprimand the coach and not the players? I know some people will argue that the coach is the leader of the team and should be responsible for building the unity and love the team need to play in high morale, but in a case the players happen to have hated the coach and have decided to lose matches as punishment for their coach, is it right to fire the coach? My brother, I see it just the way you see it and I am baffled often just the way you are baffled and I've complained about it many times even on this forum. It doesn't truly make sense, and it has never solved the problem in my opinion. This is so rampant in Europe, that most clubs are not patient with their coach, and a little underperformance will easily show the coach the exit which I think is not supposed to be so. You can see what is happening in Chealse, several coaches have been sacked, I mean the coaches that were supposed to have been given time to stabilise the club in most cases (although not in all cases as some coaches are obviously bad and deserved it) will just be sacked abruptly, which is bad in my opinion. I do see it and am always so surprised, even some external coaches will speak against it as they were also shocked. Well, let me say that too much money is intoxicating these clubs as many of these coaches would have their deals terminated before their time and this attracts more money against the club. But clubs like Liverpool which didn't sack their coach for a long period of time even when the club was being challenged have it better these days. You can't compare the Liverpool of 10 years ago with the Liverpool of now, that is what we are talking about. At times, some coaches need more time to stabilise the clubs, this is even as they need the cooperation of the players and not fair to always absorb all the faults in this case which the club will always want to put on them. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
