There's still a bright light when they won games, but it's against not a tougher opponents. Now they were tested by the Nuggets without their best players, and guess what the result it, they have lost the game. For sure this is going to hurt them more.
It's really hard to have committed players that's why they should consider not always trading their players nowadays because they may end up like this and with their current state, there will be no doubt that they cannot get to the NBA playoffs with this kind of performance. The Clippers should consider fixing their plays and strengthening their chemistry because it is such a shame that they can't even win a game from a team that resting their star players, Trade is a gamble, but there's a reason for the trade, and that is the hope to improve the team. On paper, the Clippers, with four superstars on the team, already look unbeatable. However, right now, we haven't seen that expectation fulfilled, as the Clippers, while not a bad team since they have won some games, are just inconsistent. However, this is an ongoing experiment, and the season is still too early. There are many things that could change, so I don't blame the Clippers for deciding to trade multiple players just to acquire Harden, as they hope to secure their first championship. what more if they meet up in the Playoffs in the first round? Judging by the outcome of this game, the Clippers seem to have no chance. However, as I stated, it's still too early. There's still time to polish their lineup, and they could achieve the consistency they are looking for.
|
|
|
There are gamblers who are high risk-takers (not the typical one), finding excitement and satisfaction in the simple principle of risking big to win big. I actually find them more realistic than those who play it safe. These individuals have a real chance of becoming successful in gambling as they are driven by the desire to pursue their goals, following a "win or go home" principle.
|
|
|
Learning does not happen in an instant. Some may even take years before they can say that they are well-knowledgeable on the forum. There's always a process and always know that this process is never easy but certainly hard and tough but you can always learn to enjoy the process while its giving you handful of information and is making you on top of others, even though competition is not encourage in the forum.
The only reason I think why people rush their learning in the forum is because of their greed to make quick and early profits. But once they get there, all they experience is frequent losing that they're even advised to get back to the basic and learn patiently.
|
|
|
Op might wonder why there are too many untouched Bitcoins on different old addresses, it's given an earlier post answer, it could be the real owner can't access it or is stuck there because they are dead. I don't think there's a real long-term holder now, it might be a few of them, but the majority will sell Bitcoin in a short period of time when they see a small profit. -snip-
It's like a kind of Bitcoin graveyard on an address that can't be accessed anymore. The Bitcoin is motionless and cannot be opened by anyone. The initial holder must have sold his holdings and if any of them are able to withstand until now, of course he is very great and not tempted by the millions of dollars he can make. Like Davinci Jeremie, a software developer from Chile who was an early Bitcoin holder who bought Bitcoin in 2011-2013 and still cost $1 at that time. He can make $10m in just 10 years holding Bitcoin. But some people also can't hold back too long and sell it at a very cheap price. Hodling bitcoin for 5 to 10 years is not easy as it is. Those who have succeeded hodling this long might have very deep faith on bitcoin, and luckily their fiat funds are stable and sufficient enough that they won't even think and get tempted to sell even a portion of bitcoin. While others have still faith on bitcoin but due to emergency events that rise all of sudden, no matter how much they want to prolong hodling, they have no choice but to forcely sell their coins early. Bitcoin gets even more valuable and highly expensive every year. That's why some have chose to hold for their future retirement, while some bitcoin have no trace of transactions probably because the owner has forgotten it or has definitely lost his seed phrase while its still worthless at the time he first purchased it.
|
|
|
KYC is sensitive data, and we don't know how the casino manages that information and how strong is the security on it, and the big risk about KYC is when hackers get access to those databases. No one wants their sensitive information like Mail, real name, phone number and address to be in the wrong hands.
For me this is my personal point of view and why i don't like the KYC process unless i really trust the site.
Would you truly consider playing on a site you don't trust? If your answer is no, then it follows that you might willingly comply with KYC requirements if the site deems it necessary. While there is always a risk, especially in the event of a hack, reputable sites operating within regulatory frameworks are obligated to adhere to standards ensuring the protection of our information from malicious attempts. In short, it's recommended to engage in gambling only on reputable sites that have earned your trust, should you choose to share your KYC details and documents with them.
|
|
|
And I think the style of Benavidez might give Canelo some problems early, as David is a pressure fighter.
Actually, this is what Canelo loves as well. Andrade doesn't possess the speed and power of Canelo, so I believe Benavidez might face challenges with his recklessness in the fight. If he still thinks he can knock out Canelo and becomes overly aggressive, he could put himself at risk of getting knocked out. I'm excited about this fight because it's long overdue, but I still see that Canelo has the edge due to his experience and ability to handle powerful punches without deteriorating in the fight.
|
|
|
Alternatively, for those seeking more action, considering Ginebra -6.5 in the 3rd quarter alone could be an interesting option.
The spread doesn't seem enticing to me. If Ginebra is to win this game, -2.5 is more likely to be covered than -6.5 within just one quarter. If we really believe they'll dominate in the 3rd, then -6.5 might be a reasonable choice, but personally, I find it to be a substantial risk. The third quarter is about to start, so it's advisable to place a bet now or risk missing the opportunity. Currently, the local players aren't contributing as usual, but let's observe how they perform in the second half.
|
|
|
Sixers won against the OKC, and Joel just bully himself against the young Chet in the paint in the very first possession of the game and it shows that they are going to capitalized on it and that's what they did. But the kid can't be deny, he is really playing very good basketball and so him and Wemby are going to fight it hard for the ROY award.
Currently I consider Chet Holmgren as the Rookie of the Year. The hype around Wemby is just that hype. Chet is consistently performing well and significantly contributing to the Thunder. When comparing the performance of their respective teams the Thunder with Chet Holmgrem is outperforming Wembenyama's team. The stats speak for themselves; at this moment Chet Holmgren is far different to Wembenyama. Chet's big contribution to the team's success has clearly reflected in their current standing, which positions them in the playoff spot if they stay consistent. On the other hand, the Spurs have been struggling and are currently on a losing streak. Wemby, perhaps overhyped, seems unable to alter their fate, with the team now enduring an 11-game losing streak. Regrettably, it appears that Wemby's chances of winning the ROY this season are diminishing, as Chet has evidently taken the lead in the competition. Looking back at the initial odds, Wemby was the heavy favorite, as if bookies were already certain he would win. https://www.vegasinsider.com/nba/odds/rookie-of-the-year/
|
|
|
I am consistently reassessing and reevaluating my investment strategy as the halving could have a significant impact on the price of Bitcoin and other altcoins. The halving could also lead to a surge in interest in altcoins. As such, I am on the lookout for alternative investment opportunities. And, of course, dollar-cost averaging (DCA) is a consistent investment I make. That's my plan, at least. What are your plans for the upcoming halving?
I'll go with DCA as well as I have been doing that for most of my life. My goal is to secure a good amount of bitcoin in my portfolio before bitcoin halving comes so doing DCA will definitely help me to achieve that. And while looking into some potential altcoins is also a good idea, but for me I'm more optimistic about bitcoin so I'll just focus on it and do diversifying probably after I have gained decent profits from bitcoin. However, if you have bigger amount of hard-earned money, then its not bad actually to consider altcoins in your portfolio but only trust ethereum the most because it has no signs that it will fall the hardest way.
|
|
|
As we navigate the ever-evolving landscape of finance, the role of cryptocurrency in payments is gaining traction. 🚀 I'm curious to know your take on the future: Do you believe crypto payments are on the verge of becoming mainstream in the near future?
The crypto space has seen remarkable growth and innovation, but challenges and skepticism persist. Are we on the brink of a significant shift in how we conduct transactions, or do traditional payment methods still hold the fort?
Share your insights! What factors contribute to the potential mainstream adoption of crypto payments, or do you see any obstacles that might slow down the process? Let's explore the possibilities and challenges together.
Crypto payments are now starting to be seen in some stores or shops that accept crypto, so I guess this is already a good start for crypto payments to become mainstream soon. Although crypto adoption might not be that too high, but I believe that there is a huge increase on the number of people that have acknowledged crypto and utilize it according to its purpose. While its adoption is still in the process, but I'm optimistic of the positive result it will show later on. However, there's no doubt that using crypto as a payment has faced a lot of interrogations and even negative accusations. But we'll just leave it to the people on how far they have perceived and understand on the reality usage of crypto, most especially bitcoin.
|
|
|
Satoshi Nakamoto had seen the need for the people to have a course to make a discussion about bitcoin from its official and a reliable website before he come up with bitcointalk, it's also a thing of joy that this lovely community is serving it purpose beyond the scope it was been oversighted as you can see how large the community is and everything being under moderations, this platform is indeed a blessing to every bitcoiners because they have found it as a home to where they belong in discussing about bitcoin with other users across the world.
This forum connects all the bitcoin enthusiasts all over the world, and when an interactive discussion is present, obviously this forum turns into a home that all bitcoin lovers have find their space to express everything they know about bitcoin that could help and motivate other members as well. While reliable solutions have been offered in the discussion to address the different problems, still there are problems that you need to find your own solutions to save yourself. That is why never limit your learnings only in the forum, but explore other legit sources as well. However, I still agree to the idea that bitcointalk forum is a home of solution. Otherwise, many have chose to leave the forum instead since its not being helpful and productive in the first place.
|
|
|
James Harden in 37 mins: 8 points on 2-9 shooting
Russell Westbrook in 14 mins: 3 points on 1-8 shooting
So poor shooting from those two stars, specially from Harden playing that big minutes but not producing enough.
With Westbrook, that's understandable because he isn't really a good shooter. However, for Harden, what happened to his game? He isn't shooting much. With 37 minutes of playing time and only 9 attempts, there's something wrong with that. It's not his usual game, as he loves to attack and draw fouls when he drives the ball. They lost this game, but that's okay. At least they were on a 3-win streak before this loss. It's important that they bounce back by winning their next game which they'll be back at home hosting the Dallas.
|
|
|
You should change this to waste of time and money "for you"....
This game was invented to entertain people, and if, in general, it were a waste of money, it wouldn't exist. Your experience doesn't necessarily make this game a waste of time. Slots are a form of entertainment; you win if you're lucky, you lose if you're not. That's just the way you should think about it. Let's stop criticizing games that bring enjoyment to the majority of gamblers playing them.
|
|
|
Definitely, when they have Manny as their champion they were very happy as Pacquiao is the cash cow then and so he was bringing a lot of money to them and to all people around. So it will make sense that if they want to continue, they will ride on the hype of the likes of Garcia or Tank Davis and maybe invent a new belt just for this guys to be on the WBC organization.
Absolutely true!!!!! The increasing prominence of greed is glaringly evident. The era of captivating boxing events appears to have waned since Pacman's retirement. If only all champions were less hesitant to face each other, fans could enjoy more satisfying bouts. The current issue lies in fighters being overly fixated on maintaining their undefeated records. They seem willing to take on unpopular opponents solely to pad their win streaks. This trend continues for boxers who are good at cherry-picking opponents, hyping up fights, but failed to deliver an entertaining performances. Regrettably, if this trend persists, I'm concerned that boxing as a whole may slowly lose its appeal, with fans reluctant to be disappointed every time they tune in for a match.
|
|
|
So, time to time, I see some people saying they will never sell BTC. And I am thinking why is that? (I mean I understand that you can't say never, there will be a time you will have to use your BTC). Anyway, is there any calculations, reasoning behind this? Or it is just pure maximalism?
If there are reasons I would like to discuss them.
I understand these kind of people as I was also like them when I was still a beginner in the market. But as you continue buying and hodling bitcoin, you will realize that bitcoin will be highly utilized if you take part in selling some of your coins. You will come to enjoy and offer some rewards for yourself if you sell a portion of your bitcoin when there are impressive profits you see in the market. There's no sense if you chose to keep your bitcoin forever. Bitcoin is intended to sell or use as a payment system, not actually that you will keep it forever because even yourself you can't assure to yourself that you are still going to enjoy when that forever comes.
|
|
|
Something came out in my mind recently: How would the price of Bitcoin change if there were no other cryptocurrency than Bitcoin? Would Bitcoin develop faster without a competition?
Many people believe that if there is no alternative cryptocurrency, the price of Bitcoin will rise because it has no competition.
But, in my opinion, the price of Bitcoin is lower if it does not have a competition. Why? Because if there is no competition, the buyer's thinking is "should I buy this or not?" however if there is competition, the buyer's mind is "should I buy Bitcoin or these alts?"
As a result, not just Bitcoin but other altcoins will benefit. So, rather than being upset or sad because there is a competition, we can look at it in a positive way.
Bitcoin will perform better in the market if there is an existing competition, without any, the people might find bitcoin boring and less valuable in the future. If there won't be altcoins, the market can never offer varieties of coins anymore that will make the competition more healthy. With regards to its price, most likely we will only see less growth in the market which will eventually push the investors to find others investments that will consistently grow and has no options of falling into zero value. Bitcoin is a profitable and a highly trusted investment, but without competition, the performance is not that solid and it won't be suitable enough to become a long term investment.
|
|
|
But saying that gambling can be relied on as a means of income is where I don't agree, because it is based on luck to win.
If you believe that gambling is solely based on luck, you have no reason to believe that one could consistently profit from it. Many people think that winning in gambling is purely a matter of luck. However, this is not the correct perspective for those who take gambling seriously. If we approach gambling with this mindset, it should come as no surprise if we end up losing more money than we win, as the advantage is not in our favor. There are various forms of gambling, and when it comes to skill-based types, we have poker, blackjack, and sports betting, which is perhaps the most popular now. I believe we are familiar with individuals who have excelled in these areas.
|
|
|
It's just a matter of success and failure; once it fails, you won't finance again. But if the person is winning, that would help you earn consistent profit, provided he sticks with the same setup.
That's how a gambler should think. It shouldn't complicate things. We're all in this to expect two possible outcomes: either we lose or we win. Similarly, when trusting a person, it's akin to a gamble with agreed-upon terms. If they succeed, we win; if they fail, we lose. It's that simple, right? Absolutely, agree with you on that, as gamblers, we often don't focus on the concept of 'safety.' We're drawn to the thrill of taking risks and pursuing huge rewards. Consequently, we're willing to do whatever it takes to enhance our chances of winning, even if it means placing trust in someone else to do the winning for us. While financing a gambler may sound like a dubious idea to many, and perhaps to most gamblers, the fact that it exists (as shared by the OP) suggests it's happening everywhere. Consider it a norm in the gambling realm.
|
|
|
What are your thoughts about this ? GINEBRA BISHOP GAGAWIN RESIDENT IMPORT | PBA BLOCKBUSTER TRADE MIKEY SMC BOLICK SA MVPjust saw this video on youtube, and I'm quite curious if Bolick and Williams would be able to play in the PBA. The uploader was talking about trade, I thought Williams contract with the TNT has already expired and Bolick is not anymore in contract with any teams in the PBA. So I'm a bit confuse about it? Can somebody shed some light on this matter?
|
|
|
If there is a improvement, I think it will be more on Wemby as it's obvious that he is a work in progress and being experiment by the great coach Pop. And if I'm not mistaken, in the first 5-6 games he was just used sparingly, maybe trying to avoid the kid from getting injured.
And although he is great, he is still raw as you watch him play. That's one advantage of him though, he can and will developed in the next couple of years and he will really be look scary. Both Chet and Wemby has a lot of potential but it will be a very close race for the ROY.
I disagree with that. In my opinion, Coach Pop isn't the kind of coach to put all the team's focus on one player leading the charge. No doubt, Wemby's got talent, but this squad should stick to the old-school Spurs style – solid defense and lots of players getting in the mix. The Spurs hit their peak, at least from what I recall, during the Duncan, Parker, and Manu era. When Leonard joined, things got even better. Not sure if we'll witness the Spurs in that prime situation again.
|
|
|
|