Honestly, there should be clauses put into the contract that if you miss weight, then you have to pay an amount agreed prior to the fight if it means you have to pull out. UFC basically does it in a way where the fighter gives up a rather large portion of their purse, and that at the very least discourages missing weight.

Basically, Jake had two fights lined up, which both were cancelled because of something he can't control. That's not on him, and I'm not sure why some of the media is bashing on Jake. He's done what he has been asked to do, and that's match up with two professional boxers, or real boxers.

Really looking forward to kicking off the season, almost lost without it. Luckily the UFC has been keeping me busy, but I like having sport weekends, especially when Liverpool are playing on the Saturday, and then it goes straight into UFC in the evening.

VAR should be implemented like TMO is in rugby. We as fans watching on the TV get to listen to the ref, and the VAR officials discuss what they're looking at, and why. That puts emphasis on them being a little more fair, as there's been some truly mind boggling decisions since it has been implemented. That's not to say rugby gets it right every time, but it's better to hear their rationale about the decision at least.

In that case, I'll be happy with a top 55 finish .

I believe it would fit into the existing sections quite well, and has done for years. Plenty of users here routinely post their analytical observations over in the economy/speculation sections. That's pretty much what those sections are dominated by, especially the speculation section. Alright, there's also just predictions with a little bit of reason, and not too much actual analysis, but it definitely fits those sections depending on the way the original poster goes about it.

Altcoin section could potentially do with more specific sections in general anyway.

Been extremely busy the last few days, but hopefully I'm back now, and will be able to catch the UFC this weekend. However, the last two main events have been a let down. I thought Curtis looked good, despite there only being 15 seconds for footage. I do believe he gets underestimated a lot. Anyway, I know that's old news now, so I'll get my predictions out either tomorrow or Friday depending on my work load. I haven't taken a proper look at the card, and odds yet.

I'm seeing O'Malley, and Yan has been confirmed now, for me Yan takes that easily, and due to the hype behind O'Malley it might be decent odds too.

To my surprise my Bellator bets all won. So, I'm currently up five fights on my accumulator. Still got a bloody lot to go with the UFC though, and I'm sure they'll be one that messes it up. Next on my accumulator I have:

Jai Herbert
Muhammad Mokaev
Marc Diakiese
Nathaniel Wood
Mason Jones
Paddy the baddy

Then, I've also chucked further events on it like Amanda Nunes, Magomed Anklaev, Christian Tapia, and Guido Vinaello. I know they have a chance to get cancelled, but I'm making the most of a offer on my fiat bookie. You'll notice there's some boxing in it too. Its a 16 fold accumulator .

Here's my bet slip for tomorrow. Remember, early start time so don't miss it, which also means I'll be staying up for the Bellator, as I can have a early ish night tomorrow.

Anyway,  my predictions:

Dalby
Jai Herbert
Mokaev
Nathaniel Wood
Marc Diakiese
Mason Jones
Paul Craig
Molly McCann
Paddy the baddy
Jack Hermansson
Curtis Blaydes

I've purposely left a few out, since it could go either way, and I'm not confident in making any bets on them. Some of the above on the other hand I've got in a betslip, which has a few bellator's in it too, so I imagine I'll lose that betslip tonight .

Yeah. Although, I was more referring to his style of fighting, than the opponents he picked. He didn't avoid fights that's for sure. However, his fighting style does mitigate a lot of the dangers that most fighters present, especially when you're the best wrestler in every single fight. I've always said it, if you're the better wrestler you get to dictate the fight however you want. You can take them down or you can try, and beat them on the feet.

I just wish Khabib stayed fighting for a little bit longer, I didn't catch many of his earlier fights, since I discovered the UFC somewhat late compared to some of you here.

Ricky Simon is a special type of fighter, and I knew of his danger, but had to back my man. Unfortunately it wasn't Shore's day, but for the time he was in there I thought he looked decent. Ricky did what he usually does, except he wasn't overwhelming Shore like his past opponents. I'll definitely be betting on Ricky in the future, and hopefully the bookies haven't caught on to how good he is.

As for Khamzat, if he learns from that Burns fight he could become absolute insane to match up against. If he doesn't take what he learned on the night, he could be one of those fighters that could've been great, but constantly underestimated their opponents. I think it'll be the former though, he has the right people around him to teach him to learn from his mistakes. He got cocky coming into that fight, with not getting hit, and he definitely got hit a whole lot on the night, and Burns isn't the quickest of throwers. Khamzat didn't just get hit though, he got hit hard, multiple times looked wobbled, and I'm sure one of the times he might have actually been out for a split second, as I mentioned his legs gave way, and he just kind of face planted the floor.

I'd say that extends beyond just tech companies too. Most of the world right now is struggling with the aftermath of the Covid pandemic, and the fact that ongoing war has meant things like fuel, and food rising in cost, and obviously the yearly inflation we're subject too.

I imagine we'll see a lot of cuts in the future, and these offloads by Coinbase might have just been that, trying to cut their losses, and maximise their profits. Especially, since Bitcoin will likely not be as popular as it was a few months ago for a while, meaning the need for additional staff decreases.

I've never got why so many people jumped on Conor for that Mayweather fight. I'm also one of the few it seems that thought he did well. I mean he gassed out in typical Conor fashion, but he was going toe to toe with Mayweather, who is regarded as one of the best boxers, and for a few the best boxer. I can't say I agree he's the best ever, but he's definitely one of the best. So, for Conor to move to a sport he doesn't train in, and doesn't do, and put on that sort of performance I thought was good.

He gassed for sure, and quite frankly I thought the stoppage was very early. Conor fights better when he gets hurt, as do so many other fighters. He was just incredibly tired, you could see it.


The kid is a mastermind. Dissing Dana, Conor everyone that'll basically get him that massive fight, with a massive pay check, and he's doing it while building his career. I'll be honest I was initially very critical with Jake, but I know when to admit when I'm wrong. He's shown he has a love for boxing, he's shown dedication, and he has put on some decent fights. Everyone criticising him for fighting nobodies needs to take a step back, and see everyone fights nobodies at the start of their career, as you rightly point out.

In fact, Jake has a lot more notable names on his record, this soon in his career compared to Joshua, Fury, Mayweather even like I don't get why we're being so hyper critical just because he came from a background, which traditionally wasn't aligned with boxing. I think it's people being protective of their sport, rather than being fair to the individuals.

It doesn't get deactivated per say. It goes into a archived state which basically means that if it's logged into after a certain period, it'll show in the security log, and on the persons trust page. However, deactivated no. I'm assuming unless an account is known to be compromised, it'll forever lie in that dormant archived state.

The way to get an account deactivated, and by that I mean banned would be to talk to the admins/global moderators about it. That's if you want to assure that the account isn't logged into, but setting a very strong password should be enough for the conceivable future.

Right, now I understand a bit more. Fair enough then, if Coinbase acted upon this themselves, i.e started the investigation themselves, it at least shows a bit of integrity, especially since they've released it to the press also. Could've easily brush it under the rug to save face (which is what I thought might have happened with the mass firings).

Unless more investigations take place, and they find more. I doubt they'll fall any time soon. Obviously, hinted above that they could be at a lower profit than they were before. However, unless they've really messed up, they should be fine I'd expect. Probably one of the most successful exchanges, especially at getting their name out there.

He's fairly young in his UFC career though, and I'm not saying he's bad for that. I mean, I've got to respect it. There was probably a much easier path to victory, but he chose not too. The few times that he got Burns on his back, he threatened with some ground, and pound. I'm not saying he would've guaranteed the win going for the ground game more, since Burns is obviously very good, and champion level on the ground. I just think it was the path with the least obstacles.

I'm not convinced he won on the night, it was a very close fight. Burns absolutely looks dangerous, and I said before he rocked Usman before Usman started releasing that jab. If Burns can sort out avoiding fighters with that jab, i.e move his head more, I think he can become champion. He'll just have to work fast for it.

Right, but not that many users. Plus, they don't need the account for that, unless it's a business account. It's quite well known that branded forum accounts that represent a business are shared logins anyhow. Technically, it's seen as a company asset rather than personal asset then. Obviously, the forum owns it, but you get what I mean. However, even if the account in question represents a smaller business, they could announce ahead of time, that x is also related to the business, and if any any even which means the primary account can't run the business, it'll be passed on.

Personal accounts should ideally be kept as that. Business accounts can be opened at any one time, and alt accounts while for some reason frowned upon by the many, would make absolute sense here. Its the perfect example of when a alternate account makes sense.

You could say the newly registered account wouldn't have as much trust or authority, which is what we're trying to achieve here. However, being directly endorsed by the primary account, they do inherit some sort of trust level. Since, you'd probably expect someone who is trustworthy wouldn't want to be business partners with someone that isn't.

If you have a dedicated/branded business account, fair enough. However, if you have a personal account, which happens to do business from time to time, a passing of the torch sort of scenario could be put in place. I know with unexpected deaths it can complicate things, but ideally if you're doing regular business, and you have clients relying on you, you should have a contingency in place for unexpected events anyhow, and getting your partner or whoever you wish to take over in that event, to create a new account before hand, makes the most sense to me.

Yeah, it was more of a off the cuff statement.  I didn't genuinely believe it was a competitor, but the amount of news recently we've seen, and it being negative I just found it funny. Like I said, better to have this negative news coming out, now there's less eyes on Bitcoin news.

I know you said they looked at the pumping, and dumping, and that's what triggered it. However, surely that happens a lot? I don't watch particular tokens enough to actually be aware, but I suspect they get a lot of pumping, and dumping?

I'm wondering what the circumstances of this was, since I bet there's a lot of insiders doing this sort of thing, it's been documented in other industries quite often, so why hasn't it triggered a more in depth investigation?

Yeah, although could that potentially get them in hot water, since now that this investigation has took place, surely that'll warrant further investigations, and if Coinbase hasn't reported this sort of thing for dismissal, wouldn't they get in trouble for that?

As with any trading, the more you invest the more you earn if you actually do profit. However, the more risk. If you're trading such low amounts, even if Bitcoin x10, you might be talking $100, but the risk involved in that provably isn't even worth the reward. It's up to you, but trading requires a lot of luck, I don't care about others say. You need luck, and you need a little bit of wit about you. If you can separate your emotions, great. If not, trading isn't for you.

Personally, if you haven't traded before, and are new to Bitcoin, I wouldn't recommend Bitcoin trading at all. Bitcoin is much more volatile than most trading, which means greater risk when you're trading frequently.

The Pharmacist was absolutely spot on though. Only Bitcointalk could have such a conversation, and you've got to look into why. Probably, because most users thinking of this are thinking about the earning opportunity that the forum brings, which I kind of get you want the best for your family once you've passed on. However, you've also got to respect the community, and all the questions something like this brings up. Much better, to encourage your partner or family to get involved now, and build their own account up. That's the solution, that's your contingency if you want your family to be able to earn if you aren't around any more.

In most instances, the most respectable thing to do is let the account go dormant, and preserve that memory. Potentially getting it banned via request to an admin if you're worried about the account potentially getting compromised.

Look, I don't want to get too excited, but I'm pretty sure we have the best player in the world in Nunes. After watching him play yesterday, I've since changed my score predictions of every Liverpool game to at least five goals scored. Obviously, I'm kidding. Nice to see him open his goals count with us though, even if it's just a friendly.
To be fair, they do have unlimited money, and they just pour into the team every season. I think it's only Foden who has actualy been developed. Obviously, they have some of the best facilities around, so you would expect them to have more youth coming through, but Foden is really the only noteworthy one.

I actually find Guardiola quite baffling at times. It seems like he's always tinkering his team, even when he shouldn't be. Putting them in weird positions, and changing the game up when they were beating Real Madrid. I don't know, there's times, and places to change up your tactics, but he just seems to do it whatever the occasion is.

What's interesting is I don't seem to see a website or company name on the billboard? They've just given this message, and that's it? That's kind of interesting, I thought they'd at least chuck their company name on it. I know there's a bit of text underneath that I can't quite make out, not sure if that's the local language, but even if they did put their company name there, you'd expect their branding to be just as big as the actual message, right?

I relate to the message though, I've had numerous conversations with several people who have been talking about buying Bitcoin for the last six/seven years, and they still haven't to this day, but bring it up at least once a year.

Yeah, I was thinking the same. Almost like a competitor is going after them. Although, I guess if you're Coinbase it's best to get all the negative news out of the system while not many people are buying, and there's been a decrease in user base. News is often forgotten about, although it's hard to believe this is the first time it has happened, and weird how they've basically singled out one person, as there was likely many in their investigations.