I don't think anyone could be so conversant with the listed casinos by then OP, and if you read it well, some of them dated back to 2000, a year that many online casinos we have now are not in existence. In that year, the internet connection had just been introduced to my country and I do not think that an ordinary person had started using it back then not to talk of people developing their platforms for gambling online.

The OP has stated that he came about the list based on liquidity as guided by a certain Financial Index (Financial Index DATA40: iGaming (iG-D40)). But this is not how the website was spelt, still, it might be the truth as I see it. The OP did not even add a link to make it suspicious as though he has something to sell. I also believe that all these casinos are strong and recognized offline casinos, yet, they should all have their present online even if their strongest base is offline. I just searched for the first one (PhilWeb) and I was able to see their website.

I share your feelings and opinions about this as well. No one says that any establishments should not do their business, but when it is becoming too much, it could be an issue on its own. That is what we experience in the casino industry now, they are just too many, and many of them are not solely in the industry for the business and accountability, but to swindle unsuspecting individuals, and this is indeed annoying. Well, we should still be wise about it, and that is why I always advise new gamblers and some old ones who care to listen to stick to their old casinos if they are treating them fairly and also have the games needed.

And even if they want to have an alternative, they can still go for the old ones that have their reputation built in the course of years and not the new ones that need time to build a reputation. That's if they will be reputable at all. With this, I am sure that there are no alternative reasons why you need another casino that they will not have.

This is not to entirely discredit the new casinos but to ensure that we do not get scammed cheaply.

I even see it beyond this. The responsibility of a gambler is more than about the money alone, it also entails the attitude of the gambler towards gambling. In this sense, I mean about addiction, we should not be addicted to it, if not, we will be irresponsible even if we do not lose so much about it. Gambling is a very good means to have fun and perhaps make money as well, but in all, we should be cautious and make sure that we are not engrossed by it. You can imagine in one of the threads here where a father left his twin children to gamble and leave them for over 5 hours for the activity. This is so ill of the man, and can that ever be termed a responsible man?

About the money, good, the money involvement has to be well planned and managed but we have to always know that it is all about our good behaviours towards gambling. Whether it is about the money we use to play it, the lifestyle we have towards it, and generally, it doesn't matter, but how we could work it out to the extent that it will not affect any aspect of our life, be it financial aspect or otherwise, it will be fine that way. We may do it to the extent that when people hear that we gamble, they will not even bother again because they can't point to a specific area of our life it affects. That's what we call responsible gambling.

You were exploitative and you are proud of it? No wonder casinos are strict with some rules. I even checked your profile here, but it doesn't reflect the time you claimed you started here, or maybe I didn't get you clearly. It might be you mean the activeness with the exploitative means, but I do not think it is the best especially if you have a conscience.

It might be possible at that time you perpetrated it because it's been long, but now, it will be difficult to exploit a casino, not to mention that casinos have enough brains working for them now that will be blocking every style that can be exploitative in nature. This will even put the account of the gambler in danger which makes it not advisable to follow your path.

Needless to say, you stylishly advertise AMA, just don't think we do not know. Well, I've gone through the website, and it could be productive for those who need such services.

I'm not trying to take a side here and not defending any purpose of the creation of the thread by the OP, yet, one thing that is good that I noticed is that the OP has tried his best to make a reply and clarity. This is at least in replies, and in replying to mine as well, I think he had done that twice already. Initially, I must say that I was more hesitant and of a critic nature to this thread, but the way the OP handled it and didn't argue as well shows bravery and ingenuity to me.

You might not get the gist correctly, but all the replies he made to people are not a waste, you may want to read through them to get your queries answered. Also, about the OP itself, this is not about big money, but it can still give little incentives that can be used to trade and have your fun. Peradventure you need big money, you may deposit it there to wager more, it is a choice.

I think I understand you even though you didn't explain it well. Luck is too overemphasised by many and I've always said that it is such that shouldn't even be mentioned in some contexts as people often misuse it in that context. What I realise is that to make money in gambling, you will at least do the needful on your part, not that you will relax and expect the luck to do everything for you. My brother, the person will fail in this regard. It is when you know how to gamble, use your instinct rightly, plan on your budget and also apply what you know about gambling rightly before you can achieve your goal consistently.

For clarity and instance, some people might just gamble without knowing anything about the game, and if they win, then they are lucky. But can that be consistent? That's not possible. In this case, you can rightly use luck in the context. Also, some people who are playing games like slots, they can be lucky as well, we all know how slot games work. But for those who are gambling on games like cricket and football, won't their expertise in analysis be needed? That's not a thing of luck when they win. In gambling, it is either you win or lose, and one must happen. Only that people often attribute it to luck when they win, but it is not supposed to be. Your effort and expertise to choose rightly are worth commending as well.

You have a good point and I can attest to the first three out of all the casinos you listed above to be good, especially Stake.com which is more stable in my experience, and the reliability of the casino is also very high. But the similarity you mentioned is not as easy as you seem. Fine, they are using the same or similar programs to build it and perhaps the same company is developing it as we see in many industries, but it is not all of the features and function that will be general/same, they may only look similar.

Still, I don't see this as a reason to annoy anyone, it is just a mindset, and as long as they are stable and not hanging, it is good. This is also as long as the casinos give money as and when due, even as they offer you the needed game option you required. It is all about the games and stability my friend. Many industries outside gambling also have similar software, they will just alter one or two things there. So far they deliver as needed, they are good in my opinion.

I align with you on this and I've known this during my initial trading days, they overrate the registering nad regulations but it doesn't matter, it doesn't have to be what to sue to know the best companies, it is tehri deeds that will speak of them, and not licencing. Even these days, you see many of them registering at an island, and they are rushing there for a reason, and that reason can only mena a weak regulautions, they just wnat to eb soemwhat free vene though they are bearing the sttaus of bieg lincens and regulated, but in prctiae, it is not so. Stil, registeration oir not, there are good nad bad caisnos all ariund you, let your thourough resercah choose cleverl for you and not the licnecing, that's what I am trying to say.

Alos, I think what @Ojima-ojo is trying to say is beyound what you replied to, Btcoin can't hide us, it can be decentralised but thsoe companies that are attrcting customers nad collecting tehri money for gmabling purpose are not decnetralised, so this calls for tehir regulations. It is now left to them how they manouvere their way to do other shaddy deals (that's if they do it at all), all that matters is that they obey the law of the land where they operate from, at least in the surfce eve if they are paying only a "eye service."

Downwards movements? That is not even an option anymore. But it had done the needed correction already, and for this, it should be buying for more than a year from now. The breach again of $40,243 and the stability above the level made me know that the market was rebounding, and also the breach again of $43,606 and holding above it was another indication that it is bullish. The two levels were and remain the determinants, and holding above them means a sure positive trend for Bitcoin.

As it is, I believe that Bitcoin could only make a correction, and this can't be a long one because the short and long-term trends are now bullish. If the asset will move lower at all, I do not see it moving beyond $45,000-$46,000 for now, which makes it a bullish market, and we should try to enjoy it while it lasts. The stability above $50,000 is also important at this point in time, and if that level is able to hold and more daily close are seen above it, then we can expect to see Bitcoin hitting the all-time high of about $69,000 sooner than people think.

Nothing is entirely the great idea or the worst, once the person has a good reason for it and such that he can constructively argue in favour, then it is cool. I wish this guy and other people trying this good luck. It is a welcome development but also a risk they are taking.

And yes, I am trying something similar to this, but in my own cases, I am twisting it. Also, such is not my only plan, I have other plans in case this one fails as I do not trust any investment 100%. What if something unforeseen happened? One has to be careful and that is why I think that such people like this are risking so much unless they have plan B. In my case, I can never invest in a single asset, I think that people should diversify their portfolios, that is the best. Though people can make huge money by luck due to some risks they take in a certain asset, yet we can't always remove the high risk they take from it.

The best in economics and business is to have your risk lowered as much as possible, it is not only about the money you are gaining but how protective and wise you are gaining it. The risk they say makes wealth but it has killed some people's hope too if not careful about it, which is why I love it when we diversify and are more protective of our assets.

Good luck to him once again.

You don't even have anything to say against Icopress even though you are cautious enough in your construction. I must also say that I love what he did, people are ugly in thoughts, and they need to be guided at times. You don't have to wait to be told what is wrong or right all the time as an adult and also as a sensitive person, so it is not all things that must be written by the campaign managers under a campaign before people know what is right and what is not right to do.

You don't just collect a company's money and nonchalantly praise another company that is a competitor. Who does that? That's not fair.

But people like to collect a company's money and do not even care about their success, that is what I see here, and it is bad. Once you are campaigning for a company, whether you like it or not, you are part of their team. So, why then act like you are not? I think the campaign managers feel the burden better than people who are just keen to collect the money and not the progress of the company. So I know how he feels.

You are curious about this simply because you might have not given it a better thought that trading is trading and not the only means to earn from the crypto world. This is just like every other facets of life, everybody cannot turn to a single line of work for the same earning purpose. For this, there are people distributed in every area of crypto where earning is possible. Even those you know who are trading might slowly be chasing airdrops, promos, bounties and other freebies in addition, it doesn't matter. It is until they tell you what they do that you know. People are doing everything possible to make this money in the crypto space, and you can be surprised that some will even combine all the possible means together just to make the money.

However, the traders that are making money are a few for obvious reasons, trading is risky, and these few are not consistent with the earnings too. So it is so discouraging. That is why they prefer where they can get free money or almost free money instead of combining their money to risky trading that can subtract their finances instead of adding to it.

Lol...As much as your opinion is highly appreciated, I think it is too short for it to hold water here. Well, I would love to read from you better on this, after all, we are all learning, I can learn from you as well. But with all my understanding of trading, we do not just call a price, we call important prices based on reasons, and if that price of yours is important, I like to know, and even why it is important. But for me, no matter what the market is doing, if it hits a certain level and has a significant correction or even a change of trend, that last level achieved becomes a significant price which becomes a valid support and resistance level.

And later, if the market is trying to move back towards the level, it has to move past that level in a comeback fashion and break also it before the continued action of that trend is possible. However, in the case of Bitcoin, the level was actually at $49,100+ (2024's AHT before yesterday's breach). That was the most significant level to call for the trend continuation from the overall reversal from about $15,500 after the years of bullish trend. That's how the market works, not just calling a random value, and even if your value is right based on your different analysis, it still does not stop the right principle of other people's market analysis that has been tested to be working for decades.

I'm waiting to read more from you about the $51,000 though...We learn daily and I'm always open to it.

For the question, yes, I can quit gambling for a friend, and quitting in such a circumstance they played is the easiest thing to do. If I want to gamble at all after that, I can quietly gamble on my own, after all, it would not be an issue to another person in this regard. Well, the friends of the addict are not to be blamed in all senses, only that he (the addict) was of a weak mind amongst them, which is why he could be the only one affected among many friends. As it is, I think that quitting was the best thing for all of them and mainly because of their friend, it is a better decision to make.

They can still play ordinary games and have fun, it mustn't have to be about money involvement (gambling), and there are a lot of other activities and engagements that are funfilled they can switch to, so I love the decision they have taken. We must know that it is not about what we want and believe in always, but the right thing for the common good of all. Albeit they've done that, I would still like it if they do not limit it to that only. They can continue by helping the friend to heal from that addiction. Telling him about his predicament and suggesting to him what to do alone are not the solution but to also be part of the healing process with proper monitoring and follow-up until he heals. That's what we call friendship.

What I can preach here is the right/proper management, and not fear as you make it look. With what you said, I see the iota of fear in it, it doesn't have to be like that, gambling should be taken as friendly as anything, and as we know, all we do in gambling is never by force, they are by choice, so it will be so lovely if we treat it that way but also be smart in our decisions, instead of being fearful to always be withdrawing our money from our gambling account simply because we win a bet.

That could only mean that the psychology of gambling of such a person is still not balanced, and even if he is successful in withdrawing money today, won't he continue to gamble later? And even if he withdrew not all the money and later lost the remaining in his account, won't he deposit afterwards to continue gambling? All these have to be put into consideration so that we do not believe in that temporary decision that seems to save our heads but the consistency of it. This is unless we do not want to ever gamble again. Are you getting this?

I do not see the fast withdrawal orchestrated by a single win as a thing that a true gambler would do. Gambling is beyond that, it has to be consistent even as the management alongside it be consistent as well. It is those who lack the right mental state of gambling and management that will panic about both losses and winnings. If you plan your gambling well, including the budget therein, your losses can't mean your account is ruined, and your winning can't be the last, so why hurry?

No perfect circumstance for gambling, and when you are gambling in the casinos, you are mostly at the mercy of luck. But at times, it might be more than what we see in the open, which is why it is good to be careful of the kind of casinos you are dealing with. Just use the reputable ones to save your head. It is good to play with the provably fair casinos, and by this, at least you will know that they are not working against you. Although I do not know the casino you are playing with, nevertheless, what I know that is certain is that the casino will always be playing due to the algorithms coded in it. Such like your observation could be coded in it as well, it is not impossible.

I believe they might have coded it so that when you play with a little money, you would win so that it can lure you to play a big amount and lose your money, nothing is impossible even though it is still a mere suspicion. So, choose your casino wisely to avoid issues that are too much in the advantage of the house. But for me, I've not noticed this, my casino winning and losing have been random, and I've cautioned myself to always manage my gambling portfolio rightly so that even if anything shady is happening, my management will always be there for me. Not that I will just be gambling senselessly simply because I am winning with a certain amount. I would rather maintain that win with such an amount without being greedy to increase it too much.

That's good, after all, you are mindful of what you do and are accountable as well. Even if it is something that makes you accountable, it is still worth it as no one will ever be gambling without the proper awareness of what is happening in their account that is fit to be called a good gambler regardless of whether they are making money through it or not.

But for me, I can say that it depends on the account we are talking about. I have my account for different purposes, and I tell you that the account I use to bet on sports is not the same as the one I use to bet on casinos. If it is about the casino account, I do not care about what happens there, but what I notice is the amount I deposit, the way I bet, and when the money is exhausted due to bad days or even weeks of betting, I will replenish it again. I also keep the wagering limit very low. Also, it could take time to replenish it though depending on my feelings towards casinos at that time, so I do not take it so seriously.

But for my sports betting account, yet, I take careful account of it, but still, it is not as much as that. What I do is to always be conversant with the money I have there, and I divide them into 10 equal parts to bet independently. Even at times, if the money therein is much and I do not want to withdraw, I divide it into more larger parts like 15 equal parts so that my risk would have been reduced. Nonetheless, I do not gamble for the purpose of increasing my status like you. All that matters to me in gambling are two; 1)More winning and 2) Increased account size.

You have a point there, but first, I still do not categorise the person earning barely $1,000 rich, but the way you relate that money with betting is quite fair and understood. If one is earning $1,000 and risks $10 out of it for gambling, that means the person is risking just 1% of his earnings. This can't in any way affect the person much. Unless such is risking it over and over again when losing, but if the 1% is the monthly budget for gambling, and such which the person adheres strictly to, then it will not in a way affect him and he will be gambling reasonably and not with emotion. As a matter of fact, the person who could be using 1% of his total earnings to gamble has already concluded in his mind that he is not making wealth out of gambling, if not, more money would have been committed to it than that, and I am talking of at least 10% of his monthly income.

But not doing that means that such is gambling with the amount of money he can afford to lose, and this also means that there is less hassle and desperation to gambling and making money through it, which is the best practice that can make gamblers stay responsible and also not get addicted to it. But for the poor who earn less and gamble more, it is an issue, there is no way such will not want to make money through gambling by all means (desperation), and that mindset alone is enough to kill the account of the gambler and make him reckless at the same time. Above all, since the rich will make more money than the poor and still have enough to fall back on when they lose, they will always have a better mindset towards gambling, and hence, better gamblers than the poor in my opinion.

It depends, and if it is in a normal show/program, that is the irresponsibility of the advertising regulation agency of your country, they should even be fined or their boss resign. But in your case, nothing is bad about it. You know what, a lot of things are happening that people are only turning a blind eye to, but later, it will be an issue. I hope they do not make that mistake in important programs that children can also watch. Gambling is an adult activity and inasmuch as the law doesn't want the underage to participate in it, they should not tempt them as well. It is highly irresponsible of them to be advertising such unless there is a disclaimer in the entire program where they warn of 18+. If not, parents can even sue them if they want, only that people do not think towards that angle.

Now, for clarity's sake, it is not taboo to advertise gambling companies on TV, but programs matter. For example, in football programs and others, such can be done. Still, in most cases that I've witnessed, they will just have the banner hanging around a section of the screen, and not saying anything relating to gambling directly. By this, adults will fully understand what they mean.

My answer is plain, No, at least for now, but in the next decades, I can't say. ADA is still way farther from Ethereum when it comes to replacement, I will not even think of such. However, the cryptocurrency that is increasingly becoming true to challenge Ethereum is Solana. We all know the project behind the coin and how they've improved so much in it to the extent that it is now a viable competitor to Ethereum, and also has a better fee which is a plus as far as I am concerned.

Needless to say, it performed so well last year and Ethereum could not ever be compared to its performance. This is because people appreciate it and in this next bull run, I suspect that it could hit $1000, and if it can achieve that, then it will remain a little to meet Ethereum because, after then, it would be moving faster than before. I expect that it will be moving in its hundreds just like Ethereum is doing now when the time is ripe.