Both online and offline gambling were both safe, but it depends on how we make use of the safety precautions with using them before we can know if we are actually safe or not, but as long as we keep gabling responsibly, we are going to make more upper hands at it, this is not what concerns physical or online gambling mode which we may take, but how we were being able to manage ourself through in everything we are doing while gambling.
You have a point about safety and it is peculiar to all casinos because no good establishment will not take that into account. They need to secure their own assets and also try to keep their customers safe. But at the same time, some people will go further into looking at the security of your funds in this context which could be through hacking (online) and privacy/robbery (offline) considerations, which is justifiable. We should always plan for the worst-case scenario as well no matter what we believe, we should not be too relaxed so that the unforeseen will not just happen to us easily. However, if we should think about your school of thought, well, the two have theirs covered already and there will not even be any reason to compare in the first place but for the gamblers to gamble well and be responsible in doing that. This is our sole responsibility and not that of the casino. But for the OP's context which has nothing to do with safety, I think it is all about the gambler. Some will not hold much cash but later sort it out to bet more, just as online gamblers may bet more, so your point is still very valid if we limit it here. |
|
|
|
It appears that the Tyson Fury has taken his training more serious for this fight against Usyk. Did I see that there was abdominal muscles in Fury's midsection? Did these abdominal muscles appear when Fury fought Francis Ngannou? I reckon Fury appears to be more slimmer for this fight vs. Usyk than the fight against Ngannou hehehe. I predict this fight against Usyk will be a similar performance Tyson Fury has done against Wladimir Klitschko.
Hahaha...abdominal muscles? Maybe he recently had an abdominal muscle surgery that is out of the media space...lol Frankly, your shape as a boxer doesn't determine your winning. Even the weight loss is relative in nature and not about the weight loss in all cases, it depends on the fight. It also depends on how you can use it to your advantage, especially to the disadvantage of your opponent if you can manage it well which should have been detected during training, it's a plus in this case. But I will not neglect the fact that he would have made many adjustments having studied the previous fight of Usyk and a suggestion of weight loss might have been made. Yet, this doesn't necessarily mean a plus because some boxers can still use your weight loss against you if they know how to do so. Regardless, the bout is finally today, many hours time though, another event that will take sleep off my eyes. It is a must-watch for me. |
|
|
|
The GOAT manager currently has no club. With the decline in his rating, more people are saying that his methods are outdated, and after a recent title-less season in England and Italy, can he still land a big job? Or will he be content with a mediocre team or even a less prestigious job such as in the Saudi league or a national team?
From the above data, it seems that people think Mou will go to Saudi Arabia, and surprisingly, the second choice is Fenerbahce. Is the Special One now a washed-up manager who can only get bad jobs? As a Mourinho believer, I still think he deserves to coach in the Premier League, preferably Newcastle. What do you think?
Jose Mourinho is a big name in the world of football, and truly his rating is declining, especially with what happened in Roma, but still, I do not rate him that way. Roma is a club that has a problem of its own, you will hardly see them winning so many tournaments unless there is good luck working for them at that time. I think Jose Mourinho tried his best, so for me, he is still doing fine and I do not think that a seasoned coach like that is not dynamic to the point that some uninformed people will believe his style is outdated. You should not be surprised, that's people for you, they celebrate the current success and find every reason to talk down on a mere challenging moment. owning to his antecedent, I do not believe that he will be without a club for long, many more would have been contacting him by now. Notwithstanding, I wouldn't want to rack my brain about Jose Mourinho's next club as it will eventually be done, so why be impatient? Well, much news linking him to clubs and contacts by the clubs are always surfacing on the internet with some believing that he will eventually go to the Saudi Pro League. For the money, this could be so tempting really, but there are others as well as Chelsea where he was spectacular, Bayern Munich, Newcastle etc, he could pick any of them with no serious coach yet. |
|
|
|
Lastly , gambling is not a career and I have never seen any portfolio that bears gambling as an occupation or a means for livelihood.
This sums it all up. Gambling isn’t a job. On occasion, one can win some some money here and there but as it doesn’t come regularly and at a certain time and no one literally employed you, it just cannot be said to be employment. And then talking about starting a career is out of the question. A job is supposed to pay you for your time or/and services rendered without you requiring you to part with your money. With gambling, you part with some money hoping to win and can still end up losing. Gambling simply isn’t a job. I've always said that gambling is an extra activity that should never be taken too seriously, not to mention believing that one can be making their life's earnings through it. No wonder some people will be so disappointed by gambling by believing that since it is an avenue to make money, they can now rely solely on it, that's just a rubbish thought. Gambling is risky and no one knows it all. It is not an activity that will be guaranteed in terms of earnings, so why waste your life on it? The best is to have a good job that is reliable and still gamble if you want, and if gambling earns you money in this sense, it is the best because you will never depend on it for your daily bread. If one could do otherwise, then the desperation would be high, and I can assure the person that the time he needs money desperately is the time gambling will fail him. What kind of life is that? It gets aggravated if the person is a family man or has a lot of dependence, can gambling help cater for all their needs? I am certain that it is not possible, not under such pressure. Fine, one may be lucky at times and hit that Jackpot in a big form, but such a situation is not common, and if such a person is not even careful enough, all the money won, or almost all of it could be wasted in subsequent gambling. But the wise one will invest most of the money even as he continues to gamble. Now, with the investment included, this still means that such a person cannot ever rely on gambling alone to be happy in life. By the way, that's an example of a lucky gambler, but most people are not lucky. If the lucky person also mismanages, that opportunity may never come ever again, so relying solely on gambling will never guarantee you a good living. |
|
|
|
....
When we play we always need to remember the importance of playing responsibly, we must always educate ourselves not to play every day, we must always test ourselves by saying to ourselves: tomorrow I won't play and when tomorrow comes I can keep that promise, we always need to have It's a time to rest the games, spend some time, for example, 1 month without playing to maintain self-control, when a person cannot stay for some time without playing, then that person is already dependent on the game and they need to seek medical help urgently before it's too late, in the case of this story in this article, this guy had the courage and sought medical help, but most people don't have the same courage to seek medical help
it's quite a sad story about how a person whose life was initially good turned out to be ruined because of his addiction to gambling. luckily he called gambling addiction help, otherwise he might have killed himself. but it is very true as you said that it is necessary for a gambler to control themselves when they play. don't let gambling control them, but they are the ones who control themselves when to gamble and when to restrain themselves. because when gambling controls us, the result is like the story, where lives are destroyed and other people are affected too. This is what you have to pay for being insensitive to what you don't know but did it all the same. These days, my eyes have opened wider enough to know that "it is not all what is glitter is gold," and even if I must try anything, I must first learn it and know all the rudiments about to ascertain whether it is what I can do or not. Even if it is what I can do, I must have drawn my managerial plans to make sure that the negative effect that can ever come from it is minimised. But if this is not possible, I better quit it as nothing is by force. However, this is not to blame people entirely but a cautious call next time, we should always know the pros and cons of what we want to invest our money into to avoid some nightmares even with our money, especially if they are risky on their own like trading and gambling and other risky activities that can earn so hugely for us or cause us to lose pretty fast. Most importantly, if such is not what we can control our psychology in, then it is not worth it as it could destroy indeed. |
|
|
|
This is not at all a benefit. I mean if the user has a disease which spreads upon contact, then definitely the person need to take care of that and have to avoid any type of meetings with other person. You just irrelevantly joining this with gambling mate. Yes he is gambling in order to pass his time or for recreational purpose. But this is not at all a health benefit, and I am sure on this.
You're not alone on this thought. No matter how many times I've read the post, but still I didn't get the idea why there is an element of health benefit while the person who had severe lung related disease is gambling at the comfort of his home. I mean, where is the health benefit there? Is there a remedy in gambling, does the person's condition became better and better as he gamble every day? Well, if that person is really into gambling, then online gambling would be best for him as the disease maybe contagious. That is not what we call benefit, it is prevention and that is better than cure. I agree with you, the benefit is more appropriate if the gambling winnings can be used to buy medicine until he recovers and can return to his normal activities. If you just want to avoid crowds because of your illness, but still want to engage in gambling activities, that's more of a choice. So the choice is between going to a physical casino or gambling online. In my opinion going to a physical casino has its advantages as well as disadvantages. It's okay to be entertained but there is no real guarantee of winning in gambling. If the person loses if he is sick it will be worse for his health. He will never recover physically if he worries too much after losing. In order to maintain his health he should keep himself occupied with activities other than gambling that will help him recover quickly. You made a clear and correct statement where you iterated that both disadvantages and advantages could be attributed to physical casinos, which is what I would like us to extend to online casinos as well. This further explains why we should take advantage of the pros in them whenever we feel like opting for them (our option) and not look towards the disadvantages side only. But the negative side of the physical casinos you mentioned here has no basis and peculiarity as it happens generally to all casinos. Whether it is online or offline, loss is so possible, and it is more possible than winnings, so it is not peculiar to the physical casinos. Also, if someone is sick and loses big in physical casinos, the same can also happen in online casinos, and if not managed well, it could truly worsen the health situation. This is why we should not gamble with the money we can't afford to lose, otherwise, it will make us lose more than the money itself, and this could be the cause of worsening health, which may cause depression and other things like that. For me as well, I seldom visit physical casinos, and if at all I visit, I will just go for the large one which is not in close proximity to my house, which makes me visit it only on purpose. The main reason why I visit such a place is to mainly entertain myself with some gambling extras that can't be found whatsoever in small physical casinos and online. This is reasonable enough and the outcome of my gambling can't be an issue because I've already known the money I would spend there and how to spend it as well. |
|
|
|
-snip-
In my case, I have to lose a lot of money to realize I have to gamble responsibly if I don't want to break my finances and experience depression, so now I control myself and monitor my expenses, and I'm doing good with it.
Something must make someone become responsible in gambling or at least try to become responsible, but mine is far different from yours. I didn't let the remark of learning by experience affect me, so I have been cautious of the losses in my thoughts, for this, I guarded against it from the beginning till date. As for the voting on this poll, I voted for the "I am a responsible person" because ever in my life, I am the kind of person who likes to be very careful, abhor what is not good and always move toward what is good. This prevented me from gambling when I was younger and even when I became an adult. I also got to the university before I started gambling and it was at the time that my course was about 85% completed before I started gambling. I can't remember the age again, but I was so mature them and smarter. This has helped further in making me a responsible gambler and I make sure that I take my gambling portfolio very seriously no matter what. Above all, gambling has been so positive on my path because I focus on the money-making on sports betting, if not, I would only have been gambling for fun and using a very low amount of money for it. With this, there is no way I will lose so much in it not to mention of being irresponsible about it because my intention will never be for the money anymore. |
|
|
|
Frankly speaking i didn't believe that gambling can make someone successful when i was growing up but at a certain stage in life i saw and heard testimonies of people who became rich and successful in gambling. If gambling can make someone filthy rich then it can certainly give us the right retirement we deserve. It all depends on luck and consistency. This idea can be kept in our mind but what people make mistake on is that they let the idea take the best of them thereby they put all their hope to get retirement through gambling. Anything gambling or risk taking should be a secondary plan to get retired or be so rich.
It is the same success stories you are hearing about gambling that I am hearing as well but I've never seen any of them in the physical to warrant me totally giving in to those stories. Although I have a friend who had once worked as a lotto company representative, and through him, I was able to witness some random winners, none of these people ever won that big to be called Jackpot. But the friend himself often tells me stories of those who won it big whenever he goes for winning claims back them. This is the nearest to the physical one I know but cases like that are not often common, and neither do we know if they have the responsibility or plans that will make it worthwhile to be deemed retiring money. The age of the person in question matters too, as those who won big would wager big as well. Now tell me, do you think it is so convenient for older people who are nearing their retirement age to be wagering so big just because they want to make retiring money through gambling? That may even be irresponsible, especially if their plans fail as gambling is not what we engage in desperation. So nothing is certain here as you make it look. |
|
|
|
The ETF was approved and the halving caused the price of bitcoin to rise drastically as it is today.
when the price of bitcoin hits $50k I am sure that this positive trend will continue. and it turns out to be true, even now bitcoin has reached a new ATH. calm down and hold because the halving will start soon and BTC will reach a much higher ATH.
It cannot be denied that the ETF effect has led Bitcoin to experience a very significant price increase until it reached a new ATH level, although after the Halving occurred, Bitcoin experienced a correction like now where Bitcoin experienced a decline after reaching a new ATH. But rest assured that this decline is only temporary, and I am optimistic that Bitcoin will bounce back to continue increasing until it prints a new ATH level again. If I were you guys, I would leave ETF out of this, do you know why? This is because the effect of the ETF has been well-priced by the market, there is noting more to expect of it, at least for now. You can see the turn of events before the ETF approval. I expect that so much because the market often reacts better to some new events like that, especially if it is just a rumour and expectation with no sure decision/happening. This was why I never expected much immediately after the ETF approval, and truly, Bitcoin tried to buy but sold later for it. Afterwards, it moved down to about $11,000 lower, which is a good action for correction but afterwards again launched a massive bullish movement that saw it hitting the current ATH of about $73,850. After then, Bitcoin has slipped into silence ever since which I would like everyone to respect for now. The talk now should be a post-halving effect as usual, even as the ETF progress has been so slow on its own, so why relating to it again? Going forward, though I am so sceptical about the future of Bitcoin, yet I know that it is still promising to move higher over time. If the post-halving effect is put into consideration, then I think that Bitcoin will rise even as it will protect the $50,000 psychological level no matter what happens now unless it slips back to another major phase of a bearish trend. |
|
|
|
A lot of mistakes people make a lot is going into bitcoin trading without any steady source of income. While it is true that bitcoin trading can change your life for good, you should also know know that it could also wreck you. First get enough knowledge, make sure you are working as this will help you fund your trading accounts. Only trade what you can afford to lose.
Well, if you do not risk much, you can't gain much, that's the rule of investment and whether we like it or not, we will always be seeing some aggressive investors and conservative ones, which will always be balancing the investment atmosphere. But you do not need to have a steady income before investing in Bitcoin, only for trading, you are right, but let's be clear. For investment, since you can buy low and hold it, you are good to go even as Bitcoin is easy to predict. But one must apply wisdom to it as well even if the person is gainfully employed. Such may be wasteful in this regard just because he has money to invest in Bitcoin. Cautious planning is strongly advised here. Do not also invest your life savings into bitcoin trading. this will hinder your trading capabilities as you will be trading with emotions and fear of losing your money. Trading is best done without emotions attached this will allow you make decisions better.
This is a good point, and the reason why the popular saying "Invest only the money you can afford to lose." This will ease the emotion and also allow the trader to focus, and be responsible aside from trading as planned. |
|
|
|
Banks do not look reliable because they are controlled by the state. But some part of the assets may be kept in the bank.
Keeping everything in cryptocurrency is quite dangerous. Assets need to be diversified.
Keeping money in banks is safe but there are many people who prefer investing in cryptos rather than banks. Although crypto is dangerous if you understand the correct position of the market and invest in the right currency like bitcoin it is never dangerous. The government has to pay tax to keep money in the bank there is no such hassle for crypto. I think this is both relative and subjective at the same time, so everyone should do what pleases them. Keeping the money in the bank is not so bad but have you also thought about the inflation that is plaguing almost all the nations of the world? This is the issue with people keeping their money in the bank where the bank will give them a peanut as the interest accrued even as the bank continues to make huge income from the money, which is the most painful part of it all. At the same time, cryptocurrency is a very good option, but what if the investment plans fail? This is not so impossible if you look at what happened in the last bull run. There are many investors that has not gained back 20% of the money they lose to various altcoins, not to talk of gaining back the whole 100% this year or next. In many cases, this may not be possible anymore since some altcoins may never hit their ATH again. This is a loss! So it is not so convenient in the cryptocurrency world as well. But what you never added is the fact that there are other investment opportunities. Instead of we keeping our money in bank and investing everything in cryptocurrencies, why not diversify it? If done properly in at least 5-10 differents sectors, I am sure that nothing adverse can take that way from the person. And this will be a smart move to avoid banks issues and still edge against inflation in a way and try to secure one's future better. |
|
|
|
First how does Bitcoin operate? Bitcoin it's a digital currency uses Blockchain technology to support transactions between users. If you know how Bitcoin operates then you will also know the consideration that comes with. And critics say Bitcoin doesn't work as a currency, Citing volatility use in illegal activity, but supporters argue that it's too early to make some of these claims, is already fixing many of those concerns. I know their are so many things to be consider with when it comes to anything investment. Mostly concerning the highest exchange in the world. So what are your opinion towards the people that are investing in Bitcoin?
The context of the OP is just not the same as the title therein, regardless, you should never take lightly all warnings about Bitcoin, but try to continue to use your Bitcoin safely and wisely where applicable. The person who talked about the high volatility of Bitcoin as a disadvantage of making it a currency/legal tender spoke sense in my opinion, or is that not true of it? You can hold your fiat currency for years before it has some value so much devalued from it through inflation, but Bitcoin may get devalued so much in just a year. So what is the reliability and the gain of the economy in that regard? And truly, Bitcoin is still young, so we should proceed with care so that we will not be a victim of what we do not really know of, even at its high price which is also a concern on its own even as some quarters are already talking about it. However, in investing my Bitcoin, I only consider two things, which are; 1. The prevailing price and 2. The trend/sentiment of the market. I buy at a low level and liquidate when my trading chart tells me to do so to avoid losing back much of my previous gains. Anything outside this must be to be using my Bitcoin for inflow and outflow purposes only. |
|
|
|
However, even though they have a strategy, it doesn't guarantee it completely, because in my opinion the strategy they have or believe in is still under luck. So if for example we don't have luck then the results will still be disappointing. I agree with you, maybe it's more about how luck guides you to win.
If a gambler is relying in their gambling strategy, they should also bear in mind that strategy for winning in gambling doesn't work all the time. I believe is the saying that gambling offers gamblers a 50% chance to win and also another 50% chance to lose. Even with good strategy, you can not win all the times unless if the gambler is using a cheat. You are talking generally which is why you are making many mistakes in what you wrote. Gambling on lucky bets is the one in which you will have to rely on a 50/50 chance (50%), though it is worse than that, except that people like to limit it to that understanding which is fair enough. I said that because you are playing against some algorithms in this regard, so how are you sure of the settings coded on it if it will favour the house 85% and you 15% or thereabout? That is why even the 50% remark is not without fault, but it's still acceptable since it is a popular saying and ideology. Regardless, one should know that this is all about the casino aspect of gambling, but it is not the only way that gambling can be done even as it allows the house to edge the winning for itself. Now, no one will tell me that gambling is 50/50 when it comes to sportsbooks, it all depends on you and your luck in this regard, so it could be less or more depending on your preparedness. Unlike in the casino branch where you will have to rely solely on your luck irrespective of what you know about the game you are playing. In sports betting, you will need to work more on yourself to polish your speculative skills and if you are so good at what you do, you may have more than a 75% possibility of winning. If this is not true, people will not be celebrating sports betting the way they do and I am one of the testifiers of this. Needless to say, the context on this topic is also about sports betting and not casinos. For this, as much as I know that no strategy will give 100% which the OP is not arguing as well, it is so possible that the strategy delivers consistent winning to the gambler, which is the motive here. Ha... Guy, I know I still stand to be corrected in what ever I say which is a bit off but I am not an expert in gambling. I only say what I feel I know and I think is also relevant to say. In I don't realize I am making mistakes in what I wrote but I know I share my idea based on my experience and that of others. Why is believed that to win in gambling is 50/50 is because if you place a bet between two club, you don't have a specific guarantee that your preferred club can win. You can be sure that your club is strong and has good players which is enough energy to defeat the other club but nothing is impossible. You club can miss goals and at the end lose the match. It can happen in sport and in casino games guy. I thought we'd even moved past that discussion because you are exonerated from any fault. What you said was what an average person would say, and truly, it is correct in a way because many gamblers will always tell you that it is either you lose or gain while your luck/fate does the rest. This means that every gambler has a 50/50 chance of winning/losing, so you are not in any way wrong about this and if it is the casinos' aspect of gambling, of course, you could be better being right if the person does not put into consideration the winning factor coded in the algorithms of the casinos they are playing. By the way, that is an advanced school of thought that many may not consider, so you are still on the right point above all. However, sports betting is a little bit different which was what I tried to point out. With the right knowledge and experience with the best possible skills, smartness and wisdom, gamblers will have a higher possibility of winning, which will surely shift it from the 50% that most people are templating on. |
|
|
|
We are all here for quick profit, whether you are really that dealing with casino tokens or not- We are really that aiming for short term or long term trades which will really vary on what are the things that you do have in mind because not all would really be thinking up the same in terms of this one because there are those individuals who would really be trying out to invest just because they do want or like to support a project.Its true that the only thing which is important is that you should invest on the amount that you can afford to lose or something that not makes you cry on the time that the price will be going down to the floor.  Specially basing up on what @Fatunad said above or elaborated or shown then we do able to see those 70-90% drops on which this could lead to panic if you have bought at the peak. I dont know if you are still holding or would be cutting your loses. I have a few casino tokens that I still keep after selling them at the last increase. I just hope that the casino token can rise again in the next altcoin season. That would be a medium and long term investment that I can wait for besides waiting for Bitcoin's bull run. This is too assumptious bro, what if the entire casino coins never performed well this time due to one reason or the other? It is so possible that despite the entire cryptocurrency space flourishing at a time, a certain sectional part of industry could have some disadvantageous views which could make people overlook them since they are not encouraging to invest in. While some may try to appreciate in value but with little or no noticeable effect. This could be so discouraging to say a few, which is why we have to be careful here and not believe in some general assumption. Lots of discouraging actions made by some of casino token creators and they didn't give much the importance of their community feedback that's why I decide to stay away with those casino tokens since I don't like to became a bag holders of those projects. That's why I decide to invest my money on top alts or for bitcoin only since its hard to wait for something unsure and we don't see any great things done by the project creators. Sometimes I believe that this tokens are created for short time pump and dump scheme and the token creators just want to have good sale for their project so they could add some huge funding's to operate their casino. But they don't have long term plan for their token since what usually they do is to wait for demand to come and if there's no coming then their project will remain at worst condition floating up in the market. The casinos are also competing with others for their tokens, it is very dangerous in the sense that they can turn their tokens back to the entire community, because it is money and everyone likes to invest and win but when it does not work and the community starts to give advice to improve and the casino does not listen to them because things can get ugly, the case of several casinos here in the forum is very particular, and when the casino takes a very radical position it is worse because it becomes complicated in every way and what they achieve is that the combdiad that was generated later leaves and this causes the casino to go down little by little. Correct me if I am wrong, but a serious casino that has tokenized itself will not do what will jeopardise the progress. They may seem not serious about it but indeed, they will always mean well for the project. Nonetheless, one thing that is certain is that the project can only thrive based on 3 main factors among many other factors, which are; 1. The progress of the casino itself. Is the casino finding it difficult to make headway in the industry? Are there too many complaints, legal and liquidity issues and all that? 2. The way the casinos can market the token, which goes a long way in helping them, especially in the areas of hype with influencers and ads just as they are marketing their companies. If this could be planned and done well, it would go a long way to help the casinos' tokens. 3. Lastly, the community that can be successfully built by the casinos. This is why it is good for casinos to have an email list and forums like this for extra interaction and benefits. This propagates information so virally. But contrary to your claim, I do not see the competition in this gaming token context among the casinos being a problem whatsoever. |
|
|
|
Those who are later looking for help and fighting gambling addiction are certainly at fault, it's from the beginning that they should have avoided that to avoid wasting themselves and their finances away. Many would not learn about gambling but just dabble into it, they never knew how it is being engaged wisely, the dos and don'ts of a good gambler and many more, but will just start because they believe they could try their luck since it is easily accessible, but instead, they start losing and exhibiting a very bad behaviour regarding it. Well, it is never too late for anyone and every gambler could be healed whether they want it or not, that is why they need more external help if they can't help themselves.
And yes, it will be nicer, easier and quicker if the gambler has the Willpower in them, it may even make them heal all by themselves, but when they cannot after trying many times, external help is the key. This may start with their friend, family and loved ones, before moving to the expert level if such close external help does not work. And if it's the experts in the field of psychological healing like psychologists, psychiatrists and therapists, they can unlock the Willpower that you guys think is impossible, so that the gambler can control his consciousness and fight within as well. That is the first goal of all experts even if the gambler or the addict seems uncooperative and unwilling to be cured.
I don't think anyone would willingly get themselves in trouble, so those who get into gambling don't realize that they are going to get addicted to it and then become reckless gamblers spending so much time and money on it. Most people just want to try their luck with gambling in the beginning with a small amount, but they don't stop right there when they lose that money, they keep trying so that they might win something at some point, and eventually get addicted to it. Then there comes a time when they don't gamble only for the gains but they do it because they can't be without it, though they also want to win some money but the addiction is barely for that because I have seen gambling addicts winning in gambling and not stopping but trying to win more after that. My experience in gambling made me write what I wrote and I know that people will not knowingly get themselves in trouble, nevertheless, we should not treat them with kids' gloves or not put them through in the right way. If they had done the right thing in the first place by first preparing for gambling to learn and know the dos and don't of it, and also doing them as it should be done, they wouldn't have been the victim of gambling addiction. This is why it is good to caution the new gamblers so that they can do the needful and not just dabble into gambling due to the money they want to make from it, it will be disastrous in this regard. The love of money will always blind gamblers, and the issue is not about addiction alone but the wastage of their resources. But if they are "before warned they would beforeknow and armed at the same time" to their benefit at large. Those who are either making it in gambling or enjoying their gambling activities (even if they are not making so much money) are the ones who fully understand gambling and engage it the right way, they will never be desperate about gambling and be responsible in doing it through moderate gambling way and others. There is nothing wrong with gamblers knowing this beforehand, and for those who had started on the wrong footing, it is not too late for them to retrace their steps for their own good. |
|
|
|
You are still moving around the same circle, but on one fault, and that is the fact that you do not accept Bitcoin for what it is, and neither do you agree/believe that there can be a digital asset. This is archaic!
Mind you, an asset is an asset whether you like it or not and in case you do not know, Bitcoin is being used as collateral these days, and maybe it will quench most of the questions you asked thus; "If I were to ask you what asset is held by the BTC unit what would you say? Debt? Equity of a company? A picture like Mona Lisa? A patent, copyright, software license? Wheat, silver, oil?" In as much as an entity can fulfil financial obligations, you do not call it empty anymore. Of course, unless you do not even know what you are talking about.
Fine, Bitcoin was created as an empty unit, which I so much agree with you, but the empty unit was later assigned /units/value, which makes it not empty again (digital or not). That value is the liquidity in Bitcoin which gives it the power to settle debts which you always buttress upon without showing concern that Bitcoin can clear debts as well. Just like a human being, you become dead when your spirit leaves you, but when the spirit enters you again, you are alive and have become a living creature that can function perfectly like any other human being.
All these fiat assets you called out are so (living as in my human example) because of people's relevance and liquidity, once that is withdrawn from them, they become irrelevant (dead as in my human example). The same is applicable to Bitcoin, people's liquidity makes an asset worthy, and the moment people withdraw their money, it becomes worthless. So why do you now want us to segregate Bitcoin even as it has the value of people's money and can fulfil financial obligations like fiat assets?
So basically, your argument is that an empty box that someone sold you for $70K is not actually empty. The trading act magically make a valuable product, an asset to appear in it? Yes, the moment the box was assigned value and liquidity makes it stopped being empty. When you open it in the blockchain now, you will know what you called empty is no longer empty anymore as block values are constantly being assigned. Bitcoin is a complete system that will do all that fiats can do (if allowed) with no exception. This is possible because it is an asset, a digital one for that matter. But this digital/virtual denotation is where you are missing it, or perhaps you just do not want to accept it. Whether you like it or not, there are classes of assets, and the digital asset is one of them, which will not do less of any asset if you operate it through the right channel. Bitcoin was empty, it is not empty anymore if that will suit you in the plain term and at this point I urge you not to rely on your understanding of this alone. For it to be digital/virtual doesn't make it less of an asset, it is indeed an asset, not until you see an asset physically before it can be valuable or be used for particular physical projects like what Gold, Diamond, Oil, etc are being used for. Once they can still purchase those physical assets (Gold, Diamond, Oil etc) that you mentioned, they are not less valuable regardless of the form they are. Although when you open it you see with your own eyes it is still empty. You know how this is called? Being naive, gullible and delusional.
Nothing is empty in Bitcoin anymore, values and purposes are being signed regularly, you should go and learn how the blockchain works even if we try to neglect the trading aspect that proves it valuable. And this is a reality, my friend, it is never delusional. |
|
|
|
Great advise here mate , sometimes it is the fee that keeps matter specially in small gamblers/rollers
like me that every cent is important , many gamblers are being frustrated when they wanted to withdraw
some bucks but needed to be cut by fees so looking at those site characteristics will add chance for them
to enjoy even having some penny to gambling because they can maximize every single cents they have in
The idea is that people take advantage of things, they must have categories accessible to all types of clients, I know that in casinos they prefer people with a lot of money much more, that is obvious, but a casino must adapt to all types of people , those who have little money, middle class and upper class and everyone should be treated with the same attention, and really the things that are with internal exchanges are very good, for example if I earn 0.01BTC that they give me the option to exchange it to USDT so that the fee decreases, obviously in an internal exchange since they establish the fee that the casino says, or else they pay the fee, but at least that option. In my opinion, of course, many, especially large and well-known casinos, are aimed primarily at players who can be called “whales in gambling,” or, as you say, belonging to the upper class of rich people. Here the bets are large and, accordingly, the casino wins are greater, and gaming operations are fewer. But with players with small bets, there are a lot of transactions with them, and the casino’s winnings according to all the parameters that ensure this business begin to decline. Perhaps whales do not pay attention to commissions when depositing and withdrawing cryptocurrencies, but this is only in the case when there are relatively few transactions. But if there are a lot of them, then the issue becomes important for whales. It should also be noted that for a number of countries with a low standard of living, transaction fees often simply do not allow players from this area to use such a casino at all, although they like it. You are right, well I have a friend who studied with me in university and went to the US, but he loves the casino and just plays and plays, when I recommended a couple of casinos to him he liked it and made a lot of emphasis on it. low rates are what attracts him the most, which is why he has always said that it is what he is looking for the most, but since he is in a country where most online casinos are prohibited, he cannot even access it, since his market is limited, so yes, tariff rates are very decisive for a player, and even if it is in a country that is not poor at all, because in the USA it is a very busy economy. . No one can underestimate the importance of low rates in casinos especially when one is depositing and withdrawing their money. But at times, if the gambler is the serious type, I mean the type that understands gambling ethics and knows how to play very well with good track records, I do not think that the rates should be an issue at all, this is unless it is extorting indeed as it could be insanely high at times. But still, gamblers should know that the work to be done is the main goal here even as the fees and charges could be burdensome at times, regardless, I do not look at it as so important since the casinos I work with have fairly low rates in all my transactions. The payment system we use matters as well as many people are the cause of their predicaments when it comes to the fee and charge structure, they opted for the bad options and I was a victim before I realised this. As for your friend, well, it is true that anyone residing in the US has few options about their choices in the international space when it comes to risky activities like gambling, trading and some others. This is the selfishness of the US itself because it was never like this before. But for the fear of capital flight, this was why they restricted their citizens and residents. Nevertheless, the US harbours a whole lot of good options and I am sure that it will be competitive in all ramifications as well. So I do not think your friend has any serious issues about choosing the right casinos that fit his trading wants/plans unless he has not searched well enough within. |
|
|
|
It should be possible to provide proof of audits same as proof of history of the gambler this is a requirement for licensing in some cases, although I don't know how profable it is to get such information in whole or just in time frame such as proof of audits in the last 90 days which comprises of the players history on the casinos.
The site could provide records on deposits, bet history and withdrawal history also among other things but the mentioned are the most data required for an individual account audits.
What purpose will that even serve? The proof of audit not received directly from an external firm can't be trusted, yes, it can't, not in this technological age. I advise all gamblers to only gamble where they can at least trust their overall service on an average scale, or above average scale, and when the casino does some suspective activity, it should be questioned to the point that a resolved neutral ground is maintained. This is the situation where the gambler will let go of something but I hope it shouldn't have to do with their direct money but ensuring fair play. In other words, asking any casino for an internal audit or proof is just a waste of time. As for the profiting remark, nothing is profitable here, because if the casino wants to pay some disparities, they would have accepted their fault in the first place, however, if they did not accept their fault and still furnished the person with proof, then know that it is either the proof is genuine where it will naturally and truthfully exonerate them from any faults and payment or it is the doctor where it will not prompt them to still pay the gambler still. So no profits in the proof whatsoever but a means of verification. Nonetheless, records like deposits and withdrawals are easily seen by both parties, but some extras like flaws and adjustments might only be known internally, which makes it still easy to cover it up if they want to. |
|
|
|
Base on my knowledge most of us are making use of a particular gambling platform because we appreciates the fact that they are all trusted and we have found the user interface to be more attractive for our stay with them, just as many believed, the interface is one of the first attractiveness to a gambler which make him develop interest in trying to use a gambling casino or to stay with such a platform as their preferred choice for gambling.
Honestly speaking, I am not so particular about the UI in casinos because, in my experience, I hardly see a casino with no good UI and overall gambling experience. And these days, casinos and sportsbooks are merely following themselves, so the competition on the UI is not so much as there are no many unique/new ones, except in rare cases where the casino did not go for the existing companies developing the software but another one or tried as much as possible to create its own or slightly modify on the existing ones, which will be very tasking and more expensive for them. For this, most casinos will like to do the lazy work since it has almost been completely done for them, theirs is to locate the right source and pay for the rent, service and maintenance, and that's it. There is no way the UI and the UX will not be the same here. Even if this view is disregarded, I do my due deligence before choosing my casinos and I must say that none of them has not been above average. And above-average means that they do not fail, and so much as they do not cheat me in additional, and they process my withdrawals as and when due, I am so satisfied with the rest. This is okay for me if I am tolerant enough and not always look for perfection. |
|
|
|
However, even though they have a strategy, it doesn't guarantee it completely, because in my opinion the strategy they have or believe in is still under luck. So if for example we don't have luck then the results will still be disappointing. I agree with you, maybe it's more about how luck guides you to win.
If a gambler is relying in their gambling strategy, they should also bear in mind that strategy for winning in gambling doesn't work all the time. I believe is the saying that gambling offers gamblers a 50% chance to win and also another 50% chance to lose. Even with good strategy, you can not win all the times unless if the gambler is using a cheat. You are talking generally which is why you are making many mistakes in what you wrote. Gambling on lucky bets is the one in which you will have to rely on a 50/50 chance (50%), though it is worse than that, except that people like to limit it to that understanding which is fair enough. I said that because you are playing against some algorithms in this regard, so how are you sure of the settings coded on it if it will favour the house 85% and you 15% or thereabout? That is why even the 50% remark is not without fault, but it's still acceptable since it is a popular saying and ideology. Regardless, one should know that this is all about the casino aspect of gambling, but it is not the only way that gambling can be done even as it allows the house to edge the winning for itself. Now, no one will tell me that gambling is 50/50 when it comes to sportsbooks, it all depends on you and your luck in this regard, so it could be less or more depending on your preparedness. Unlike in the casino branch where you will have to rely solely on your luck irrespective of what you know about the game you are playing. In sports betting, you will need to work more on yourself to polish your speculative skills and if you are so good at what you do, you may have more than a 75% possibility of winning. If this is not true, people will not be celebrating sports betting the way they do and I am one of the testifiers of this. Needless to say, the context on this topic is also about sports betting and not casinos. For this, as much as I know that no strategy will give 100% which the OP is not arguing as well, it is so possible that the strategy delivers consistent winning to the gambler, which is the motive here. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
