I think Arsenal will soon turn things around and win because their dominance is very strong in this match. It's just that their execution was too slow and it's true, Wets Ham was really able to take advantage of opportunities that, even though they were small, could be really effective. Arsenal are already 0-2 behind West Ham and it is now the 82nd minute. So, it will be quite difficult for Arsenal to take over. unless their trainer can make something happen unexpectedly. but this seems quite difficult.
It's safe to say the game is already lost. Only a few minutes left and they're still down by 2 goals. They have a massive advantage in terms of possession, but this means nothing if they can't convert that into opportunities. They can't be losing home games like this if they want to aim for the championship. Probably will be overtaken by Man City when they beat Sheffield. |
|
|
|
Pereira almost fighter of the year. But Strickland grabbed it. There may be some of us who wouldn't agree with being Strickland as the fighter of the year.
I think it's deserved. He fought 3 times in 2023 and won all of those fights including the championship fight. It was a great year for him as he managed to elevate himself to one of the most recognised fighters. I didn't know they would do that, but this approach makes sense. If she won by cheating, then the bonus was not earned fairly and should be returned. I am so sorry to say to all Covington fans that Colby Covington doesn't seem to have a bright future anymore after that incident with fighting Leon Edwards he was full of talk and no actions, and even Donald Trump has had enough of his non-sense,
Yup, Colby is becoming an inconvenient supporter to Trump, who probably doesn't want to be associated with him anymore. It was also weak how Colby was calling out Stephen Thompson, who is 40, just lost a fight and is ranked below Colby. This shows he has low confidence in himself and is looking for an easy fight. But to be fair, it might be the best option for both of them and I wouldn't be surprised if that fight actually happened. |
|
|
|
There are other ways to address the security in a small set-up as we have a lot of digital equipment/apps in place already.
Before, having cctv for example is big deal. But in today's situation, it is like a common gadget for every shop.
This is why there's no need to deploy heavy security in a local bet shop. Maybe just regular security guard is more than enough.
CCTV is somewhat a good way to deter any possible criminals but is a bit overrated as a security feature. It won't protect you from a mentally unstable, aggressive customer who just lost all his money and blames everyone other than himself. Also, with covid masks still being a thing, it's easy to hide your face from CCTV. Hiring a security guy full-time is a quite high cost for a single shop, you'd need at least 2, if not 3 of them, for when one is off on holidays, or sick etc. I'd imagine the most cost-effective solution would be using some sort of security service, where threatened shop staff could press an alarm button and a mobile security unit would show up immediately. But if such shops operate without any special security, then maybe there's no need for such at all. I'd imagine a large portion of their customer base are older people, who do not feel comfortable with gambling online, or just want some pass time watching live events etc. |
|
|
|
My heart was always pumping when manchester city was struggling in the first half caused by city was not having good chemistry during the first half. Manchester city keeps repeating the same scenario anytime.
I haven't seen the full game (only the highlights) but, looking at the stats, City seemed very dominant with 73% possession and 4 times more shots on target than Everton. At the end of the day, it's the result that matters and they delivered. Their next game is a home game against Sheffield, the last place in the table. Should be much easier for them, but you never know. City is always having trouble to deal with EPL club. The performance is kinda different when it was dealing with the UCL teams.
No surprise, currently the Premier League is the strongest league in the world. |
|
|
|
As I said, trash talk without a win will only make a fighter's reputation very bad and belittled.
Exactly. Covington is a great example. He went overboard with his trash-talk but didn't deliver in the octagon, now he's looking pretty pathetic and, I'm guessing, he has lost a lot of fans. Since Conor has joked about running for 2025 president, then he has lost one of his weapons - trashtalk. If he has real intention to stand for election, then he should carefully watch what he talks about. One careless statement and his political career will end before it begins. Even if he just wants to get a position of minister of sports. People who would be willing to vote for him won't expect him to act the same way "normal" politicians do. He would have to show he's capable of acting responsibly, but he would be excused from any occasional trashtalk-like episodes. Take Javier Milei, for example. He made a lot of radical statements and harsh language and acted unhinged, but that didn't stop people from voting him in as the president of Argentina. What McGregor is lacking is a clear political ideology. The "current politicians are bad" is not good enough, people need to know what they are voting for. He'd also need political structures, he can't do it alone. I take his tweet as more of a trolling though. |
|
|
|
OP what if the said gambler continuing winning in that 1 hour he or she spends their, is it also advisable for such gambler to retire for day, let's say that it is advisable, will such gambler accept to go for the day when he or she knows that everyday is not a lucky day for a gambler, setting an amount for the day as a gambler is very excellent, this can only happen when a gambler is not always winning because as gambler if you make fortunes, you will like to target high unless you are this kind of person that is contented with what you have gotten so far, but with what I know is only few gamblers that are disciplined, avoiding too much expenses can only be done by a gambler who is not an addict, he or she will have to develop a habit of self control to maintain this decorum.
You imply that there is such a thing as luck, but that's a sphere of superstition. If you set yourself a 1 hour limit, then stick to the limit and enjoy your profits. Making assumptions that you would keep winning after that 1 hour just because you feel it's your "lucky day" is based on nothing more than wishful thinking. Stay disciplined. That's assuming that hypothetical winning streak is not due to some glitch that shifts the edge to your side, in such case it would be a whole different story. |
|
|
|
From what I understand, there are several reasons for creating additional casinos when there's already a profitable one in operation:
Firstly: it helps diversify their business. This reduces risk as they aren't overly dependent on a specific income source.
Secondly: there might be specialization or targeting of different market goals. One casino could focus on a specific style or player demographic, while another targets a broader audience.
Thirdly: creating more casinos can be a strategy to compete with others in the industry and attract new players.
Fourthly: companies may want to experiment with new ideas or technologies in a new casino before implementing them in their existing one.
Lastly: each new casino is seen as an opportunity to reach and advertise to a new player base.
In summary, the creation of additional casinos serves to diversify business, focus on different market segments, compete effectively, experiment with innovations, and tap into new player demographics.
This is a great and comprehensive answer to OP's question. Not much to add, maybe for the fact that operational costs do not have to be much higher than for running all operations as one, big casino. It's not like staff has to be hired by each casino separately. In fact, it could be one company running different brands of casinos, but even if they are all set as different legal entities, they could still share employees (e.g. customer service, accountants etc) and many of other administrative costs. |
|
|
|
Over the time, I’ve seen several post, by users here who, claim that gambling is strictly for fun, even when one is making losses and I’ve paused to ask this question “Is there actually any fun in gambling especially when the losses are more than the winnings?”
Let’s be frank, there are several other things one can do for fun aside gambling and I understand that life it’s own is a risk but seeing claims that people see gambling as fun even when making losses is weird and I think it’s worth discussion as to know if truly people gamble strictly for fun without minding if they’re losing or winning
Gambling is a broad term and having fun could also mean different things. i.e. if you play poker with good friends with small stakes, you're almost guaranteed to have a good time due to the social element and bonding, disregarding whether you win or lose. Similar to making a small-stake bet on a sports combination bet with a super-high payout rate and almost making it, it's probably more of a positive than a negative feeling. But I agree that is not a healthy thing to be addicted to a dopamine rash from flashy games like slots and alike. A cold-headed approach is always advised. |
|
|
|
Merry Christmas from Paulo and secret juice to everyone  Maybe this is just mine vision of Costa, but he looks unreliable for me. There is always an excuse for cancelled fight. Ok, I can accept that there is a serious reason to cancel the fight, but why he cancels the fights weeks or days before it? With that elbow injury for example. He had surgery month before fight, but announce that week before fight, and days before fight he was talking that he is ready, but pulled out 1 or 2 days before fight might really happen. Totally set up UFC match makers. Or all those cases when he asked for a bigger payment. He gave some interview before the fight got cancelled, saying that doctors told him he should be able to recover before the fight, but things didn't go as planned. If he was to pull out of fear, there was no reason to wait for the last moment, he could've notified UFC as soon as he knew that surgery was required. Waiting that long indicated that he really wanted to fight. But maybe I give him too much credit. I have no doubts Khamzat would run him over easily. The reason Conor McGregor become successful is that he was winning fights after his trash talks. He was trash talking but was backing up his words every time, that attracts lots of attention. By the way, trash talk was helping him. I remember, Dustin Poirier said in one interview that it was easy to fight Conor when he wasn't trash talking and was calm. By trash talking, Conor goes into their head and makes them nervous, pressures more on them, it's a huge psychological advantage, that's why he won against Jose Aldo.
I know Conor believes that. You could tell that from how he changed his approach by 180 degrees between his 2nd and 3rd fight with Poirier. But it didn't look like reverting to the trash talk helped him too much. If anything it made him look weak, as if he was mimicking his past self hoping this would magically turn back the time and put him back into the good-old Conor mode. He wanted to fight Dustin Poirier again but Dustin doesn't give a shit about Conor.
Oh, I'm sure Dustin would not refuse to fight him for the 4th time if the UFC made him an offer (but they won't). Much easier rival than anyone from the top 10 plus a massive payout - a dream fight. ^ That pic really him or is it just a meme or something? If that's really him, he looks like he's not been letting go and has been keeping is weight n check. Probably edited, but I don't suspect Costa has any Photoshop skills himself. Likely he has someone to help him with promoting himself on social media, and they've been doing a pretty good job so far. |
|
|
|
Imagine a situation where you own a house and a piece of land it's built on. You estimated the value of the whole thing to be $500k. One day someone knocks on your door and offers you $2m all of a sudden. Will you sell or suspect they know more than you? Maybe there's an oil deposit underneath your house? Maybe there's geothermal energy source? Maybe an international company has plans to build a facility nearby and will need your land for whatever price?
A nice thought experiment. Assuming the property has no significant sentimental value and you don't have to make the decision immediately - I'd spend some time researching, and if I couldn't find any indication of it being worth more than $2 mils, I'd sell it, buy a similar one and enjoy the difference. I'm asking this because if the funds get approved all at once there will be a large pressure on bitcoin's price and supply is, as we all know, limited.
Nobody buys bitcoin to sell it cheaper, so if they offer you $100k, they think it will go higher. If they offer $1m it's again going to go higher according to them.
Will you simply give it away once someone hands you $100k, or decide that it's cheap and they know more than they're willing to share?
This is not at all similar to the first part of your post though. If they offer to pay you above the market price, just sell it to them and buy back cheaper immediately. No dilemma here. |
|
|
|
I don’t know how accurate that list is. I am from Canada and we got that Purpose BTC ETF which is actually a spot etf. Currently it has 35K bitcoins which is around $1.5B but the chart says it’s only 650M which is not accurate.
I don’t have time to check all the other etfs. It’s easy to check, usually the AUM is listed as soon as you google the etf name so it’s not hard to track.
Yup, Purpose ETF (BTCC) is showing to have assets of 2bn: https://ycharts.com/companies/BTCC.B.TO/total_assets_under_management, assuming this is presented in CAD, that would be around 1.5bn in real dollars. I've checked a few random ones, some of them seem correct but few of them were quite far off from what's stated in the table. So either bitmex researcher(s) didn't do a great job, or there's something I'm missing. |
|
|
|
From the statement you made, I think it's better to choose to spend less time and money, both must be balanced because as you said that it was very valuable and could not be purchased and I thought the perspective of money was the same, even though it could be sought But still, if you already have it, it is better to use it wisely, it's better. I think not a little or even most gamblers are too focused on the victory of money so they ignore the amount of time they sacrifice only for something that is completely uncertain about the final outcome of gambling.
It's not always as simple as "the less time you spend on something, the better". The time spent should be adequate to the potential winning. Example: if you spend say 4 hours analysing statistics to place a sports bet, but the expected profit is only $20, then you'd be effectively working for $5/hour, which, in developed countries, is not something most people would consider worthwhile. But if the expected profit was $200, then spending 4 hours is probably justified. |
|
|
|
Fresh hit from CNBC on the still hot subject of Bitcoin spot ETFs: Spot bitcoin ETF approval may be coming in January, experts say. Here’s what it means for investorshttps://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/26/spot-bitcoin-etf-approval-may-be-coming-in-january-2024.htmlThe price of bitcoin has surged in 2023 as investors await approval for the first U.S. spot bitcoin exchange-traded fund, which would be a milestone for cryptocurrency investors, experts say.
In early December, the digital currency topped $44,000 for the first time since April 2022, and year-to-date gains were above 160%, as of Dec. 21, mostly fueled by optimism for a spot bitcoin ETF.
Meanwhile, discussions between the Securities and Exchange Commission and asset managers hoping to list bitcoin ETFs have advanced to technical details, signaling to some experts that an approval could be imminent.
More than a dozen firms — including BlackRock, WisdomTree, Valkyrie and others — are waiting for the green light from the SEC, which could come in early January.
(...)
“For ETF investors, this would be the best product on the market,” said Bryan Armour, director of passive strategies research for North America at Morningstar. “All the other options right now have flaws to varying degrees.” Some nice takes there, but mostly nothing that hasn't been discussed previously, although I find this particular stat as a positive sign: Some 72% of financial advisors said they would be more likely to invest in crypto if spot ETFs were approved in the U.S., according to a 2022 Nasdaq survey of 500 advisors. |
|
|
|
Nope I disagree with this, the amount of time doesn't really affect it, for me it is the amount that counts.
You could spend less time but play with a higher amount, or you could spend more hours but spend less if you just want to enjoy.
It sounds like a superstition, for me it isn't really the amount of time but the amount of money that you spend which could lead or be the reason why they would call you a gambling addict.
You should be considering both, time and money. There's a reason they say that time is your most precious asset, as it's something you can't buy. Many people fall into the trap of focusing on money only and end up spending long hours on something that brings them very little profit (if any), not noticing that they're effectively earning peanuts per hour. If you consider gambling to be entertainment and therefore don't mind spending your time on it, then I guess it's fine (although not necessarily healthy). |
|
|
|
For those persons who prefer gambling in local bet shops instead of gambling online. I know that most times some persons carry huge sums of money to come to gamble and I understand that if it was a local casino there would be securities. Now, in the local bet shop, why are there no securities? I know a local bet shop close to where I reside. There are no securities there and there are people who act strange and mentally unstable there. They could cause fights, noise, and cheat. So for other persons to feel safe betting there I think securities should be employed there.
The likelihood of someone showing up with a huge pile of money is rather small and doesn't justify spending money on hiring security staff. I'd imagine most of the transactions are cashless anyway. You're probably right in terms of people losing it and getting aggressive after losing a bet. It's not uncommon to see broken windows in local bet shops, often caused by someone snapping and losing control, but even in such cases, they would not lash out at the staff and rather vent out on inanimate objects. With online gambling, I think brick-and-mortar shops will slowly become a thing of the past, and the tendency will be to cut the running costs rather than hire more staff (i.e. security). |
|
|
|
That's just the problem with Manchester united their inconsistency is affecting the team, I know the strength of Manchester united the team players are strong let's forget what's happening this season, the Manchester united we know will score more than 3goals I don't know what going on.
I could not believed my eyes when man utd won this match, excellent performance from Garnacho and the rest of the players, if man utd keeps getting better every match day it will be good for Ten Hang, the fans, no one is even bragging about the game the fans are just happy cause they have never experience such joy for a long time and the fact remains Man utd won Villa with a powerful comeback so am happy for the team if only they can maintain same energy throughout this season.
This game surely will be a great morale boost for the whole team and the fans. If you are to lose 2 goals, it's best when it happens early on, Villa relaxed a little bit too soon and Man U probably had their spirit damaged for a bit (the first goal denied as an offside didn't help either), but with plenty of time to recover, they managed to turn things around. Let's see how they will perform against Nottingham Forrest on Saturday, and if they manage to keep high motivation against an "easy" opponent. |
|
|
|
Big muscled did not help Costa in a fight against Izzy or Vettori. Btw this is the second time Costa and Whittaker are going to fight. First fight was cancelled due to Costa. Costa has also cancelled fights against Chimaev, Aliskerov, Cannonier and if not mistaken, first fight with Rockhold was also cancelled. Does not look like he is a man who UFC could rely on. And if I am not confusing something, he cancels his fight quite late, week or two before the fight. People laugh and say that this is the way he saves his record.
Some sources claim that Costa had two previous fights with Whittaker cancelled, not one, but not sure if that's true. Some of the pullouts you've mentioned were justified, e.g. Aliskerov, where UFC wanted Costa to fight Chimaev instead. Some other ones were, allegedly, cancelled due to contract disagreements, in such case, it's entirely UFC's fault to announce a fight before a contract is signed. The last one was due to injury, he posted photos, so I don't think he made it up. The risk of Costa pulling out again is minimal. He needs to fight to stay relevant. I give Whittaker more chances, but it could be an even fight. Anyhow, Merry Christmas from Paolo Costa:  https://twitter.com/BorrachinhaMMA/status/1739366911652004275 |
|
|
|
|
julerz & coinomize - just an FYI - I got a spot in another campaign so leaving this one.
Massive thanks for all that time and and managing the campaign and payments smoothly. It's been an absolute pleasure to be part of it.
Take care and see you on the other forum!
|
|
|
|
Accepted Legendary Please wear signature and avatar and write your post count here. Please check spreadsheet and make sure your address is correct. Thanks! Post count (incl. this one): 6153 |
|
|
|
(...)
but for most legit sites, they should display the RTP or the HE of each game. most are not visible for the players to see, usually, you have to press the question markt (?) button or the info button (!) on each side of the game
Thanks. It's been a very long while since I played slots or similar games. If the "info" button is now the standard, that's great to hear. I think every reputable site should have such information displayed. I have the impression people just don't care about house edge these days anymore (...)
I think the subject of HE was mostly (or only) discussed in the dice-type game threads. Those games would do pretty well in terms of transparency. Even if the HE was not explicitly stated, you could easily calculate it from the odds, that were always disclosed. It's an absurd! Do you remember which casino was that?
I think I know, but not 100% sure, as that was years ago, so prefer not to say as I could be wrong and give the site an undeserved bad publicity. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
