With all the signings in EPL this season, why is everyone skipping the outstanding performance of James Maddison who's absolutely brilliant in every game he features for his new club. Tottenham Hotspur signed James Maddison from relegating side, Leicester city and he's making tremendous positive impact on the club. Spurs are actually satisfied with his performance and they will continue to present good results in League games. The whole idea is Heung-Min Son and Richardlison at their peak with James Maddison, a smashed combo it is.
Since joining Tottenham, I believe Maddison's performance has substantially improved. Perhaps it is the new environment or the calibre of the players surrounding him, but there is a distinct difference. I've observed that he's been more involved in contests, and his three goals and five assists in nine games are difficult to ignore. And lets face it, who wouldnt flourish when paired with Son and Richardlison? However, I cant help but ponder if this is merely a passing phase or if Maddison will maintain this behaviour consistently. Time alone will tell. Until then, lets savour Madison's enchantment |
|
|
|
`
Even with the best players in the Bundesliga in Bayern Munich, still, they couldn't be in the first place on the table because just having players and the best coach is not the only thing they need. Bayern Munich had some changes recently and we know whenever a team makes many changes they need some time to have an integrated team. In fact, Leverkusen can have good performances they have a coach like Xabi Alonso and unlike many other teams, they were stable during this season. It truly irritates me when clubs, particularly one as dominant as Bayern Munich, introduce multiple changes quickly and then struggle. I recognise Bayern's abilities, but continuity is underrated! Under Xabi Alonso, Leverkusen demonstrates that consistent leadership can pave the path to success. I am convinced that cohesiveness is as important as individual brilliance. Bayern may possess stars, but without cohesion, their aptitude is wasted. Leverkusen under Xabi has found its cadence, as evidenced by their performance against Munich. They have become genuine contenders, confronting the status quo in the Bundesliga. And while I appreciate Bayern's decade of dominance, the time has come for a transition! I sincerely hope that other clubs will learn from Leverkusen. |
|
|
|
Haaland is still the player with the most goals earlier this season. 9 matches scored 9 goals. Followed by Moh Salah with 7 goals. I think Haaland will still be the favourite to be the top scorer this season. Here's a provisional list of the 5 names of EPL top scorers 1. Erling Haaland 9 goals 2. Mohamed Salah 7 goals 3. Son Heu Ming 7 goals 4. Alexander Isak 6 goals 5. Jarrod Bowen, 6 goals Source: https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/premier-league/top-scorersHaaland continues very well this year. This kid is a goal machine. 9 goals in 9 matches is a great statistic. We see that he scores 1 goal in every match on average. Still, I don't think it will reach a rate like Guirassy, this year's big surprise. This year is his year in the Bundesliga. While we thought that Haaland would be the player who would score the most goals in all leagues, his most serious rival came from Stuttgart. I never thought about this possibility at the beginning of the season. it is to too early to to say haaland will be the favorite this season after just 9 games in the EPL some of the key players who contributed to his success last season are no long with the club or faced one form of injury the likes of gundogan who is on a free transfer to Barcelona who contributed so much to his successful outing last season no longer there and also k.De bruyne the engine house currently injured has actually affected the haaland a little bit Gundogan and De Bruyne were among Manchester City's best players last season. And with the help of these two players, Manchester City scored a lot last season. Haaland was also in top form. With the midfield strong, City's attacking players also did very well. Gundogan is not with the squad this season. Also De Bruyne is out of the squad due to injury. So naturally, Manchester City's performance is a bit slow this season. Haaland scored 9 goals in 9 matches this season. However, City's midfield is still weak. City can play well because of Guardiola's excellent match strategy. Guardiola is rumored to be interested in adding Toni Kroos to his squad. If Kross joins the City squad then I think Manches City will be strong again. Clearly, the absence of Gundogan and De Bruyne's injury are impacting City's performance. Although Haaland's flawless form is commendable, I believe that a solid midfield is essential for consistent performance. Regarding Kroos, I am dubious. Even if Guardiola desires Kroos, I dont see him leaving Real Madrid in the near future. Its a difficult call, but I believe City should seek elsewhere. |
|
|
|
Probably the censorship of Tether or Circle is not great so far and they froze not many addresses. By the way, I haven't seen any freezing of accounts with small amounts. But probably as soon as CBDC appears, Tether and other stablecoins will have a serious reason to introduce serious censorship.
They are hunting down illegal activity in the timebeing. But be aware these stablecoins can go too far if governments pressure them to do so. You could easily get your funds frozen even if you weren't doing anything wrong. Just like how banks are doing today. I'd never trust a centralized stablecoin because of this. Tether, USDC, and the likes are all subject to the single point of failure. Crypto is all about decentralization and censorship-resistance. We should do everything possible to adopt solutions which follow crypto/Blockchain tech's original vision. Not all the other way around. Wasn't Bitcoin created as an alternative to Fiat currencies (which are empowered by banks)? Then why bother bringing banks into the game by adopting centralized stablecoins? Just my opinion  Decentralisation is one of the most important ideas behind cryptocurrency. Thats what makes it powerful and different from other banking systems. It looks like stablecoins, especially centralised ones, are going against this big picture. Why would you use the flawed centralised banking system in a field that is proud of being decentralised? I completely concur with your doubt. Thats exactly what the crypto community wanted to avoid: a single point of failure. If Tether, USDC, or any other centralised stablecoin gets value, arent we just getting a new gatekeeper? Sometimes it seems like we've forgotten why Bitcoin was made in the first place. The dream is a digital world without any one person or group controlling it. We need to keep pushing for solutions that stick to this concept and dont water it down. |
|
|
|
A new projects is good to invest on it when you make your findings in the project, some people invest in a new projects when they have already make their research and find out the quality of the project before they invest, so may people invest without making a research and that is while some of them end up losing their money in the investment.
For me before I venture into any investment I make I have verified carefully for the project before I can as well invest, a new projects is like a project that have no reputation, any project that have no reputation is not worthy to be invest because you don't know what the project will yield tomorrow.
Sometimes a new projects doesn't last for one year before it dies in tye market, but some new projects too do last and also gives profit but it depends on the project and the sponsors.
There are a lot of risks that come with investing in new projects, especially ones that deal with cryptocurrencies. You made a good point about how important research is, but its important to remember that not all research leads to useful ideas. A sharp, critical eye is very important. How many times have we seen study that was skewed or didnt have all the facts? New projects dont have a reputation yet, but thats a big problem: reputation is a changing idea. Does a good image mean you'll succeed? Not all the time. It can give you some peace of mind, but can it guarantee profits? Not often. Every move and choice in this unpredictable dance of finances is a risk. Many projects fail and die, but some beat the odds and become huge successes. The hard part is telling the difference between likely winners and likely losers. And what about that difference? Its an art, like chemistry, that gets better with practise and time. |
|
|
|
As title says, for example Solana dropped 10x, will it easily 10x again during next bull cycle in late 2025? Last time round I bet on BCH to 10x having dropped 10x.... IT DID SWEET FA. What say you?  It is much easier for altcoins to fall in price than to rise. If something has fallen in price 10 times, it does not mean that the price will soon return to its previous values. There are plenty of altcoins that once cheapened, never managed to repeat their former success. So I'm not sure that Solana will be worth as much in the future as it was worth in 2021. It could be the same story with XRP, where the price of the coin will never reach ATH for many years. I totally agree with this, and this is the reason why they are altcoins and aren't anywhere near Bitcoin when it comes to price recovery Bitcoin can drop significantly for sure but it has the ability to rise back unlike many altcoins that can't gain substantially value after dropping heavily after a bull run. There are a lot of such tokens and coins that die off during a bear market because they can't recover their price after dropping significantly since their investors migrate to other cryptocurrencies. That's why, it's not really good to make investments based on the fact that a cryptocurrency has fallen a certain percentage and it will gain the same or more value during the bull run because if it fails, you will lose all your money, so it's better to invest in coins that are attracting more investors in recent times. Its indisputable that Bitcoin has consistently showcased resilience, especially when we compare its recovery rate post-significant drops to that of most altcoins. Its as if Bitcoin is the proven standard-bearer, whereas many altcoins cant even find their footing after a fall. And its disheartening, truly, to witness so many altcoins with potential get swallowed up in the bear market, becoming obsolete due to their inability to reclaim lost value. How many times have we seen investors flee, moving their stakes elsewhere? Too many to count, really. Now, for your point on investment strategies, it hits home. Investing merely based on past dips, hoping for a proportionate rise, is naively optimistic. In our business, we havent integrated crypto payments because of stifling governmental laws, though we can store them. Their volatility is a significant reason. This space is a minefield, and without a discerning eye, losses can mount. Its paramount to focus on tokens attracting genuine traction, rather than ones with transient hype. |
|
|
|
|
Cryptocurrency has decentralised control, low transaction fees, and unsurpassed security, right? However, crypto market volatility and unpredictability can damage cash flows and business profitability. My experience? Unfortunately, strict government rules prevent us from accepting bitcoin payments, despite its many benefits. We can store crypto, but use it in business? No, not now.
For entrepreneurs considering crypto, you must study your jurisdiction's ever-changing legal complexities. Beyond a craze, cryptocurrencies constitute a financial paradigm change. Be careful. Always consider the advantages and downsides, grasp the rules, and prepare for probable issues. The game is complicated and every move counts.
|
|
|
|
I prefer Litecoin rather than Dogecoin, because Dogecoin was originally created just for meme coin, so that's what makes me not interested to investing in Dogecoin and prefer Litecoin, because I think meme coin is an investment that has a big risk, but if I could choose an old coin that I like to invest in, then I would definitely still choose Ethereum, because Ethereum is a worthy investment for the long term.
Dogecoin is backed by Elon Musk as we all know and currently, Elon is the richest man in the world. Don't you think he will have a plan to double his investment in Dogecoin. For me dogecoin is best as the future for dogecoin is very bright and in future we will see many millionaires who will become millionaire by dogecoin. The idea that "dogecoin is backed by Elon Musk" is the most wrongful thing that I have ever seen on this forum and that is saying a lot. It's not a coin that is backed by Elon Musk, the idea of "being backed" isn't what you think it is, just tweeted about it a few times years ago is not meaning that he backs it, or even owns it, he may have sold every single one of them at this point. Litecoin is good because it's a decent project that keeps trying to be better all the time, and it keeps improving its code and features as well, doge coin was used because Elon tweeted about it. Tell me which one sounds like a good reason to buy a coin? I mean if you say you rather buy and hold something until Elon tweets about it, good luck to you. Many people who arent very knowledgeable about cryptocurrencies think that "Elon Musk supports Dogecoin." Not everything that a famous person says or supports is actually valuable. Despite how powerful Elon's tweets are, they dont change the basic ideas behind cryptocurrencies. Tech, teamwork, and usefulness are what its all about, right? We are now talking about Litecoin, a coin that is always trying to get better and fit new situations. Continuous code changes and feature improvements show that it is committed and dedicated. In sharp contrast, this is how Dogecoin became famous for a short time thanks to a few tweets. using short-term endorsements as a basis for business decisions instead of solid technological advances? Playing that game is risky. Any way someone decides, though, is their own business. As the saying goes, everyone's financial journey is different. |
|
|
|
...Now, I'm on a new adventure with the $Opium meme token. It's the latest coin I added to my crypto collection, and it's looking like it could be the next big thing in the world of meme coins. Just like with $PEPE, $CAL, and $SAFERUM, I see potential in $Opium that goes beyond just being a joke...
How can you be so sure that the meme coin you have chosen for investment will be as successful as PEPE? Tell us about your previous investment experience and how successful it turned out to be. Or maybe your registration on the forum was made solely for the sake of shilling $Opium? lol no i my intentions are not to shill opium but i have done research the projects now a days are trending are the meme projects or i have checked many launchpads and found meme coins there so just sharing my thoughts The reason why meme coins are trending is because some of them actually managed to gain substantial value in the past and their investors manage to earn significant profit from them, now based on human nature, when we see that there is profit somewhere, we start chasing that with all our strength because we don't want to miss out on it and if we miss out on the first one, someone will bring another one from the same category to lure in those who missed the previous one and we naively start running behind that. So, there is nothing really special in meme coins, they are all just useless crap providing no utility or anything, but it's just us who are hyping them up every single time just with the hope that if it gets famous and gains value, we will get great profits from it even if millions of others lose money due to it. The appeal of meme coins is deeply rooted in the way people are. In the past, people made quick and big gains, which led to this never-ending chase. Isnt it the same old story? People feel very afraid when they see someone or a group making huge gains. This is called FOMO. Its not surprising that more and more meme coins keep showing up, even when 99% of they dont have any real value or use. This FOMO and the unstable nature of cryptocurrencies make this happen. I totally agree with what you said about the work. The value that people think these joke shit have is really just a house of cards that was built mostly on hype. Its us, the people who trade, who keep this loop going. In a strange way, most people end up losing, even though many want to be one of the few who do well. This game is very dangerous, and it makes you wonder if its even worth it, since the risks are so high. |
|
|
|
So there's every need to buy now and prepare for the bull run if you are that profits conscious or concerned much about making profit but for long time hold it's better buy and hold to experience at least two times halving if only you can endure holding for long periods.
Happy to read this from you mate! I have had my doubts but I think you can clarify me here about my opinions and/or assumptions compared with yours. In your post, you advised that if anyone can hold very tight and experience 2 consecutive bull run, that they will be on good profits. My question is that considering the current price of BTC being high as compared to like 5yrs ago, will that your ideology still work? Take for instance someone bought before 2021 bull run at about 20k and the bull run took us to about 69k, assuming the person took profit at 60 range and wait to re-enter the market this year at 15k, don't you think the person will be on profit more than the person that bought 20k, allowed it to fall back to 15k because they wanted 2 times bull run. What you must know is that we always experienced new ATH after halving, so if Bitcoin hit an ATH of 67k per say doesn't mean we won't see another ATH as I believe that any year we experienced halving we also witnessed a new price range. That was why I said if you are that profits conscious you may sell whenever you think your profit range is much comfortable with you than holding for more two halving, I am not against anyone who decides to sell or hold the thing is that how can you be able to manage your decision because I have encountered someone who said of holding for few years immediately he successfully gaining about 15x of his investment he sold thinking he did that at right time. Before he knew we gained another ATH of 69k plus which he was left in between regret. So the decision is yours and most especially we don't know what the future may holds and all talks about bitcoin can be totally subjected to speculation, we don't give accurate information rather a guessing words which means it may likely happened or not. Every halving event has shown its impact on Bitcoin's price, pushing it to new ATHs. People make the mistake of thinking they've maximized their gains, but the market, especially Bitcoin, doesnt operate on predictable patterns or historical events alone. Now, I get it, taking 15x on an investment seems like the golden ticket, but in the crypto realm, it can be the prelude to regret, as you mentioned. The reality is, no one truly knows where Bitcoin or any cryptocurrency is headed. Anyone telling you otherwise is playing the guessing game. This isnt stock trading; its a wild west out here. Speculation, rumor, and sheer market momentum often drive decisions. Its crucial to be informed, stay grounded, and accept that every choice, whether to sell or hold, carries its own set of consequences |
|
|
|
|
The argument between CEX and DEX is more complicated than many people make it out to be after reading your in-depth explanation. For example, Binance has been able to keep its image even though it has had some problems. Why? Strong security steps and trust from users. On the other hand, what happened with Bitget should be taken as a warning. Ripples arent always caused by the system; sometimes they're caused by people.
When it comes to DEX, you're fully right. Decentralisation is good, but it doesnt make problems go away. This is about getting these details right and not letting big ideas cloud your judgement. When private wallets are brought up, they add another layer to the conversation. Can we ever make security that cant be broken? Most likely not. But the chase? Thats what matters. What we do, what we decide, and how aware we are are what you've called the fulcrum. Whether its CEX, DEX, or private wallets, the board is very big, and we need to be careful with our moves. There are no black or whites in the crypto world; instead, there is a range of greys that needs to be carefully navigated.
|
|
|
|
|
TruefreedomCoins? Wow, really? People are wanting to pay with a coin that sounds a lot like a shitcoin. TFC is a name Im not familiar with even though I've been working with cryptocurrencies for a while. Your desire to please your customers is understandable, but its important to make sure you're not getting lost. Whats the point of going down a road with a coin that is probably not even on trustworthy exchanges?
If you're really looking for a way to get TFC to pay out, you should first find out which markets list this coin, if any. Truthfully, you could be falling down a rabbit hole. You could also take mainstream coins if you really want to. We all know them because they're popular. A new coin doesnt have to change your mind. Make sure you stay alert and think carefully about every move you make in this unstable area.
|
|
|
|
|
A big part of the crypto is figuring out the problem you're having. Buying low and selling high is something that everyone talks about, but when dealing, emotions and thoughts often get in the way of making smart choices. When the market is going up but you dont want to buy, its usually because you're afraid of following the trend too late or thinking that it will go down again.
Now, ask yourself: Do you make choices based on fear or on facts? If you see steady growth, strong principles, and have done your research, then you may not be acting because you are overthinking it or having doubts about your research. Do something about your doubts. Why not make a purchase? Is it based on market signs or on your gut? Looking closely at your reasoning will either help you see that your worries are true or show you that you need to change how you're doing things.
|
|
|
|
I agree with you, straight KYC after registration is sure far better and easier than having to go through KYC after one have won a significant amount of money and wants to withdraw, but the casino insist that the customer must pass kyc verification before his or her withdrawal will be processed.
I think thats valid to some point. Going through the KYC (Know Your Customer) process during registration can save you the hassle of doing it later when you win at a casino. The verification process may be smoother at this moment compared to a future scenario where you're forced to complete KYC. Even though it's a good idea to get verified early, you should be cautious about sharing your personal information during registration. Not all online casinos can be trusted. That's why it's crucial to choose reputable casinos and not just any you come across on the internet. If I'm a small-scale gambler who uses a small amount of money to gamble every now and then and barely manage to win anything significant, I wouldn't like to do that. The reason for that is that maybe they don't ask me for KYC verification at all since I'm not making any large deposits or withdrawals, and most of the platforms don't always ask for KYC verification for relatively low deposits and withdrawals and KYC is only triggered if the amount is high. So, as long as there isn't a need for it, it's better to keep it simply and stay private while you can. However, if I know that I'm going to be spending a lot of money, and I know that the platform is trusted, I wouldn't mind going through it first just to make sure that I won't have any troubles in the future. There seems to be some laxity in the rules because many sites dont require KYC for small deposits or withdrawals. This is about more than just that, though. KYC isn't just a bothersome process; its a way to protect both users and the site. Some small-time players may want to remain anonymous, which is fine. How much private is too much, though, in the huge world of online gambling? How can we make sure everyone is safe and still keep things private? When you do any kind of financial activity online, you trust these sites without even realizing it. Protecting your own interests and believing the system are like two steps in a dance. Even though I understand your point of view, its important to look further and think about how these choices will affect things in the bigger picture. |
|
|
|
`
On just simply looking at the odds then you could really be able to tell that its not really that something that you could be able to hit up even if you do have that long lifespan and continously betting on everyday.  This is why it would really be that always a best approach on dealing up with lotteries or sweepstakes that you should not really be that anticipating or really that being too positive on winning the lottery would really be just that making you that betting even more on which it isnt really that recommended in doing so. If you do have just some spare amount of money then it wont really be that bad to throw up some bucks into lottery. Just make it sure that you arent really that spending that much when it comes to lottery tickets because if you do then it would really be that still significant when the time comes. This is why you should really be mindful and careful when it comes your spending. Ticket purchases are cheap but since you would really be making bets on everyday then there time come then it would be something that you would really be that significant. Just dont make yourself that desperate then you should really be just fine and if you do really that make yourself that enjoying on betting on lotteries then go ahead. Just dont make yourself that messed up. Its pretty clear that the odds are against us in lotteries and games. Still, a lot of people keep putting money into them because they want that mysterious big win. It is important for people to know that, based on statistics, winning is very unlikely. Spending money isnt the only problem here; the psychic loop that forms is also a problem. It might not seem like a big deal to bet a little every day, but the amount adds up and, more importantly, the habit forms. You're right; its not as big of a deal if you're only using extra change. But lets deal with the problem at hand: the idea that "small amounts wont matter." They do matter in the long run. Yes, they do. Its not just about money; its also about how much we value hope and how naturally we tend to believe lies. If you enjoy the thrill, thats great, but keep your mind on yourself. Do not let the game control you. Look deeply into why you are doing what you are doing. Think about your reasons for doing things. Also, please do not become desperate. |
|
|
|
`
"Cockfighting" it only involves chicken, and based on this post legalonlinegambling Philippines set up a law which is HB 8910 gives the GAB the ability to completely oversee e-sabong gambling regulation and governance. This will bring the act of online cockfighting out of the back alleys and illegal betting operations and into the limelight of legal gambling in the Philippines. It means even cockfighting is illegal in the past, now they set up a law which will make cockfighting legal just they should follow a certain rules and law. And cockfighting doesn't mean that an animal or the chicken will die, its like a boxing, there are certain grounds that could determine who is the winner. I understand your concern but we can't control this stuff, just like horse racing or such, don't be a hypocrite, you eat meat everyday. Yes, the new regulation helps legalize the act in the Philippines. Some may see this as progress, while others naturally see it as perpetuating a problematic sport. Comparing it to boxing is risky. Both feature fights and particular criteria for winners, although one involves animals and the other people. While many consume meat, cockfighting isnt about nourishment. Entertainment. So, the parallel may not apply to everyone. Even if one disagrees, one must recognize the cultural and historical relevance of such events in specific locations. |
|
|
|
You're absolutely right. In the past, there were casinos that accepted investments, but they were mostly dice casinos. It was easy to invest – you could deposit and withdraw your funds at any time. One that comes to mind is SafeDice, but it seems that this site has also ceased operating. It's possible that such platforms faced issues and scam gamblers, resulting in the unavailability of funds for withdrawal.
Today, casinos tend to have private investors because they require a substantial capital that needs to be committed for an extended period. It's a far cry from the past when anyone could invest and divest at any time, which might not have been helpful for the casinos.
However, this topic is slightly different since we're discussing casino junket operators, as explained already in the post above.
Those investment options are no longer available at most casinos as the nature of casinos has changed significantly since those days, back then it was not rare for a single person to try to release their own casino, and even if they had the technical aspect completely dominated at some point they needed to get money for their own bankroll. This is how investing on the bankroll of a casino became possible and it became popular for a time, but since then casinos have become operations that are too big for a single person to handle, so a massive amount of money is now needed to run a casino and the owners behind it do not have to rely on getting users interested to invest on their bankroll anymore. Unquestionably, casinos have changed over time. When casinos first opened, they were run by individuals who wanted to make their own place in the gaming world. To think about the part people played in keeping casinos going, it wasnt just about money; it was also about trust and relationships. So what about now? In the world of casinos, entrepreneurship by individuals is overshadowed by big businesses. Looking more closely, we need to ask: Is it really about the size of the business, or is it more about the culture of business monopolization? Admittedly, individual efforts have been stifled. However, these huge businesses are supported by a web of donors, complex plans, and a different way of trusting. Concerning users putting in bankrolls, that idea is pretty much extinct, having been buried under huge corporate strategies and capital structures. Unquestionably, there has been a change, but is it for the better? |
|
|
|
`
When it comes to security then im really that mindful when it comes to this thing on which if ever i have noticed that my mobile or pc is really that having some malware then i do really find ways for it to be cleared up or would really be cleared.We do have different ways on making some security measures on trying out to clean up something if you do notice that there's some malware. This is why that if you dont like for you to lose money then you should really be that careful on clicking up links or downloading random online which its never been wise or not really that ideal on doing so because you are really that prone to getting infected. Once your device is infected then you would really be having that chance on getting hacked which it isnt really that limited on gambling accounts but also in other accounts as well neither bank accounts or some accounts you do have in other platform or any wallet which it is really that imposing such risks. Security is not something to be taken lightly. When it comes to devices, theres an urgent need to be critically cautious and vigilant. Many individuals underestimate the profound implications of a compromised device. How often have we heard of folks brushing off security alerts or updating their malware protection? Too often, if you ask me. And heres the crux: its not just about your personal device's health. The consequences extend far beyond. A single infected device can jeopardize bank accounts, other platforms, wallets - the list goes on. Its an interconnected web, and one vulnerability can expose the entire network. Awareness and action are paramount. A proactive approach, rather than a reactive one, is the need of the hour, dont you think |
|
|
|
`
If you are really that finding for leisure then it isnt really that necessary for it to be attached with gambling because there are really things or entertainment which doesnt involved money or simply means that it wont really be that necessary for you to deal with gambling just because you are really that looking for leisure or something that you could really enjoy with. We do have different physical sports and activities on which we could really engage without needing to spend money on which means that you arent really just dealing with gambling but also in other entertainment as well if you are really that seeking for entertainment. Tips on staying on responsible on which you would really be just simply needing to be sensible on what you are doing. If you do find that it is really that making some effects on you then why would really be needing to continue and engaging? You wont really be that so dumb on not to determine on whats wrong and whats right. As long you do really make good decisions and right decisions then it should be just fine. Leisure, entertainment, joy, fun – these are terms broader than the confines of gambling. Why are people so narrow-minded that they believe leisure equates to gambling? True, real entertainment can come from the simplest of activities, many of which dont necessitate spending money. Physical sports, arts, nature - the list goes on. They offer genuine pleasure without any financial strings attached. Now, your stance on recognizing the ill effects of certain engagements and then questioning the rationale behind continuing them is genuinely commendable. Seriously, how many times does one need to be told? If something's having a negative impact, why keep at it? It isnt rocket science. Making good decisions and determining right from wrong isn't just a sign of maturity, but also plain common sense. Be responsible, be sensible, and above all, be smart about your choices. |
|
|
|
`
yeah, I agree with the both of you, Limit setting comes in different forms, and the two type or ways a gambler can limit themselves is what you have already mentioned, setting gambling limits either way will always seem appealing in the mind of a gambler, but in reality, just like Klidex said, is something that is really hard to adhere, the only Saviour would be if the gambler is a very disciplined person. Imagine setting a limit that you would not lose more $50 to gambling in a week, and in just one or two days, you have lost that amount of money already, and there is a sports game coming up by the weekend which also involves your favorite team playing, you fight so hard to resist the urge to want to risk some extra funds to put up some bets, and to even make it more tempting, you are very sure the you would win because the team your favorite team is playing against is a weak team. So yeah, it is actually very easy to set limits, but it's pretty hard to follow it, as following the limits will require a great deal of discipline, without it, it is absolutely impossible. While setting limits may sound easy in theory, it can be very hard to do in real life, especially when you're gaming. People often romanticize the idea of self-discipline, but when real pressures come up, these lines become less clear. Not only is making a limit important, but sticking to that limit is even more important. What did you say about the sports game and the favorite team? That really hurts. Its almost like the world plans to test our resolve when we least expect it. For many, the thought of a "sure-win" is the best bait there is. You say its pretty tough to stick to the limit, but I think thats not quite true. Its a Herculean job, especially when people are angry or upset. Yes, discipline is important, but how many people really have it? The answer to this real-life problem looks simple, but its actually very hard to find. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
