Yeah, I think I'm going to bite the bullet, and take up the odds being offered for a Oliveria win. Worth putting in a bet for a submission I think considering he has the most in the UFC. Poirier being decent on the ground might mitigate that a little bit, but he definitely has taken out decorated wrestlers before. I think most of the fan base is expecting a Poirier win, but I actually think this is due to the fan base following Poirier's career more than Oliveria's. I have a few friends which casually watch the bigger fight nights, and they said they hadn't even seen Oliveria fight, and are doubling down on a Poirier win. Crazy really considering his skill set.

I think it all comes down to Oliveria not being a massive personality in the UFC, and the lack of speaking English hurts him in terms of a following. Luckily, you don't need a following to win belts.

This isn't talked about enough, that's a knockdown. He's clearly being held up by the ropes, the annoying part is Woodley didn't capitalise on this after hurting Jake. Something which us MMA fans have gotten used to, and has earned his nickname "the frozen one".

I honestly think Tyron can put away Jake Paul in round one if he would just let his hands go. Unfortunately, I'm expecting this to go similar to how it did in the first fight. I just wish Tyron would open up a little more, and have a little bit of fun in there on the night. Jake clearly isn't that good, alright he's probably better than you would expect from a Youtuber coming into boxing, but he certainly isn't usual pro boxing standards.

This is one of the reasons I try to refrain from bashing on cards without the names, a lot of the times you get a lot of competitive fights due to the skill gap not being so large, obviously only sometimes, but you get some damn good fights. What you tend to get with the bigger fights is either both are on point, and its a war, but only one of them needs to be off that night, and its like a landslide. Look at Max Holloway, and Kattar, Holland vs Brunson, and I'm sure there's a bunch of other examples in recent memory. I'm refraining from the Poirier vs Conor example since I'm still pissed off I stayed up to watch him get his ankle snapped in the first round.

Despite me wanting to see Jake Paul actually fight a boxer, I'm more interested in this rematch than I am with the fight against Tommy. I don't really know why, I just couldn't see Tommy beating Jake. At least now, I think there's a slight chance. Especially, since Tyron shouldn't be too worried about getting rematch money or at least if he wins, it opens up the potential for a rematch. I just want to see the Woodley that lets his hands go instead of just freezing up when he has an opponent hurt.

Honestly, I thought Tommy would've fought with a broken rib, and a chest infection just to get the money, since its probably a lot of money riding on this fight. Probably the biggest payday of his career so I don't think he pulled out willing fully, probably was by doctors orders.

I think Tommy made an announcement its due to a broken rib, and a bacterial chest infection. The chest infection could have been caused by the broken rib, odd that he specifically says bacterial infection though since that's usually implied.

Not sure how I feel about this, at least your probably going to get a better fight with Woodley, and Woodley gets his pay day, so he shouldn't care too much about getting a rematch. In fact, if Tyrone wins then you'd think there could be a potential for a rematch, and therefore more money for Woodley. I say we see a better fight from him this time, although he'll always be known as the "frozen one" to me, and demonstrated that when he had Paul hurt on the ropes.

I always advise users that if they suspect they're compromised, but can't actually verify it themselves, i.e would have to rely on others opinion on the severity to take the approach of nuking everything, and starting again. Although, it's likely that the malicious links aren't very sophisticated, and won't evade most security sweeps, I'd still recommend a complete reinstall of your operating system, changing of passwords, potentially reinstalling bios if you think its warranted.

When you are your own bank, there shouldn't be any compromises when it comes to securing your Bitcoin. Take every precaution you can, secure your system, and be a little more careful next time.

As stated above, hundreds of accounts per month get nuked to oblivion spreading this, however it's a concentrated attack, and therefore can't always be caught before someone downloads it unfortunately.

Don't rely on Windows Security. It's just as reliable as other anti viruses i.e more bloatware than usefulness for the security conscious. 

The big event is this weekend! I'm really looking forward to this fight night. Ryan Hall, Poirier vs Oliveria, and to be honest a stacked card right down to the preliminary fights. I don't think I'll be placing a bet on the main event though, unless I go for the odds on Oliveria as I do believe its much closer than a lot of people think.

Personally, I think Guida's win is the most impressive win of the night. I know Aldo absolutely outclassed Font in the main event, but I was definitely more impressed with Guida getting the win. I can't say I would have put money on him winning that fight. Impressive stuff.

A good wrestler usually does get the advantage, however Adesanya proves that a good takedown defense is good enough, you don't necessarily need good wrestling skills to avoid being taken down. As we know, generally when you have a pure striker versus' a wrestler the wrestler usually not only out performs them on the ground, but also out performs them in the stand up because the pure striker is a little hesitant, and wary of the take down, and therefore stops throwing.  

However, what I'm trying to put an emphasis on is being well rounded, since not many fighters can say they're both exception at one thing, but also good enough to avoid most issues presented in the other thing. For example, Justin is great because he can do both, Khabib was exceptional because he could do both, Khamzat Chimaev hasn't really had the chance to demonstrate this at the moment, at least I haven't seen too much of his stand up. Admittedly, I haven't watched all of his fights as I missed some of his earlier ones. Though, I don't think he's been tested by a well enough rounded fighter to be getting behind the hype. I actually think the UFC are desperate for someone who can replace Khabib, and they would love it to be Khamzat since he actually does a bit of calling out, and a bit of talk.

Chimaev is very likelly the future star of the UFC, all I'm asking is he gets tested by a well rounded fighter before he gets a title shot. I think someone like Justin or someone with similar skillset would be a brilliant test before giving him a title shot. Though, I'll be honest there isn't too many fighters in Welterweight that would have the skill set or at least the all roundness of Justin. I guess putting him up against a pure wrestler like Brady, but I don't think Brady is good enough for one, and his gas tan is suspect. Maybe, I'm being unfair, and asking for a real test when it doesn't really exist in the division, and really only Usman has that all roundingness to him.

Wrestling isn't dominant, however it is definitely something that can give the advantage in a fight. I do believe Khabib was an anomaly, not many people have done what he has done. He's gone undefeated in one of the most competitive, and dangerous divisions in the UFC. There are plenty examples of wrestlers which haven't got as many fights or anywhere near a undefeated record. This is usually because they aren't well rounded. They might be fantastic wrestlers, but lack elsewhere.

Look at Adesanya as an example. Undefeated until he went up against Jan in a higher division. However, his wrestling skills are nearly not existent. However, due to the way he's built, and some smarts on his behalf he's absolutely brilliant at preventing takedowns. However, against Jan I thought it was pretty clear that the weight difference made...well a difference.

I actually think some of the Dagestan fighters are a great example of being well rounded. They are particularly good at wrestling, but in fact they actually have decent stand up. Justin as another example is pretty decent on the ground, but is well rounded. Oliveria, very good on the ground, but can also stand his own on the feet. This is MMA, and it's vitally important that a fighter is good in all disciplines.

In fact, one of my favourite fighters is a brilliant example for this. Ryan Hall, one of the most technically gifted submission artists in the UFC. However, he isn't good on the feet which means its much easier to avoid the takedown, and many fighters aren't even concerned about him throwing hands. He knows this; he doesn't hardly ever attempt to land anything with his fists, he usually goes for the roll, and looking for a submission.

Now, Ryan doesn't exactly have the best grappling skills, he doesn't come off as particularly powerful, but just has superb technique. I think if Ryan could develop his skills a little in grappling, and on the feet he would be a real problem for everyone in the division, however its unlikely to happen, and he'll probably never make it anywhere near the top in the division (obviously ignoring his age as hes getting on a bit now).

Makhachev for example; brilliant wrestler, however he knows how to throw fists too. I was quite impressed with his jab in previous fights, and hes pretty quick too. Khabib was also fantastic on the feet, hes given Justin, and Conor trouble on the feet. Obviously, the threat of the takedown definitely plays a part into these fighters being a little more cautious, but he definitely is one of the most well rounded fighters I've ever seen.

Not everyone wants to be responsible for their money. Fiat actually has built in protection for users because of its reversibility, however the drawbacks for having that ability is much more of a con, than it's a pro for me. So, basically banks will always exist for these types of people.

I'll give a stereotypical example, though this isn't, and shouldn't be taken as representative of the population. Imagine, a person of the older generation who isn't very technical when it comes to computers, in fact they struggle to use modern computers, and these types of people are unlikely to understand Bitcoin. Bitcoin while the usability, as well as the accessibility has definitely improved over the years, since includes technical terms. This type of person I'm trying to give an example of isn't likely to understand mining, and isn't likely going to understand security on digital devices. Thus, a third party which manages their money will be beneficial to them, since it has added in fraud protection, security, as well as ease of use. This isn't going to happen with Bitcoin since the key element to it is you have complete control of your money, which results in you being completely responsible for your money.

Bitcoin, despite the wallet software being much more user friendly, is still difficult to use. For example, checking an address to make sure its accurate, checking fees so you aren't grossly overpaying, since most wallet software overestimate, and assuring you follow security protocols so you don't risk your funds, this isn't something which is easy to do for the typical non technical user.

Unless, Bitcoin becomes much more user friendly, and provides a idiot proof system of sending, and receiving Bitcoin its unlikely to suit everyone. Although, I believe banks will always have a place in the world, they'll only be used by certain people with certain goals, the vast majority will likely see the benefit to having complete control over their wealth. However, what's clear is banks will need to adapt to this, they'll definitely be losing business in the future, and they'll likely need to adapt the way they work to fit this certain demographic that will require their services.

Not really accurate. Bitcoin certainly isn't untraceable, in fact Bitcoin is more traceable than cash. The public ledger makes it possible to see every transaction ever made with Bitcoin. I think what your getting confused about is; Bitcoin is pseudonymous, and therefore it isn't obvious who made that transaction i.e the identity of that person. So, while there are more privacy oriented cryptocurrencies than Bitcoin, cash is fairly good for anonymity itself. This isn't the major selling point to Bitcoin, far from it.

I'll be honest I saw like a two minute clip of John Fury shouting at the screen, and just repeating himself as everyone else tried to talk, and switched it off. I find John Fury absolutely horrible to listen to some times, its a shame because he occasionally has some decent insight into fighting. Occasionally.

I only think they don't actually believe in him because this is probably the most interest they've shown towards his career. As far as I know, they've shown up, but you've never seen John Fury shouting down a TV screen like that to other fighters that Tommy has fought, and while Tommy's resume might not be the best I'd say hes fought more proven fighters than Jake Paul. So, it comes off as a show for me instead of being said with any kind of substance. Tyson seemed quiet in the video I saw, though that might be because his old man is on one.

He's a real fighter, though you only need to look at his resume to see he hasn't really been tested, and even against supposedly weaker fighters he hasn't exactly set the world on fire. The thing is with steroids, it doesn't make the hulk over the night, you still have to put work in. Although, I'm not using that as a way to say its acceptable in professional sports. I'm not really sure on how accurate the steroid accusations are, I would expect Jake would probably test positive for other more recreational drugs than steroids. As far as I can see he hasn't really put a whole lot of weight on, or muscle mass not at an alarming rate anyway.

My question is; how can a professional boxer (because that's what he is...right?) refuse a drugs test, when surely a drug test is required by the commissioning bodies to sign the fight off? I know MMA fighters get tested even when they haven't fought for a while, since they're still under contract. Alright, I'm not going to pretend there aren't people cheating the system, because there has clearly been instances in the past, but I just can't fathom how a commissioning body would allow a fighter to just outright refuse. Surely, it has something to do with building the fight, and it'll come out that Jake actually has had a test?

Obviously, taxation with cryptocurrency isn't always clear, and I'd say in many cases a lot of people don't actually know that you have to declare your earnings. I know its confused me in the past. This is probably due to the varying rules, and regulations around it in different countries. However, I'm not sure claiming ignorance is the best solution.

The UK government at least now have it pretty clearly written on the government website what you need to declare. Though, even then there's some things which aren't spelled out for you. Hence, my recommendation for an accountant.

Honestly, I find it difficult to wrap my head around, since you have to get the amount that Bitcoin was worth at the time of the transaction, and then you have to work out how much its appreciated. I personally just like to hand that off to the accountant otherwise if I were to do it mistakes would be inevitable since math certainly isn't my strongest point. Yeah, this means relying on an accountant, but at least you know its being done correctly then. I receive payments in Bitcoin quite regularly, however I don't always take that out immediately. I guess if you were to take the amount out immediately it would make life a bit easier since there's little appreciate of value then.  

I couldn't with a good conscious recommend anyone not to declare their taxes. As the saying goes, some things in life are guaranteed, death, and taxes. Although, I bet its quite common that someone didn't realise they needed to declare cryptocurrency when they haven't converted it to fiat, and then those people realise they need too, and will have to back date a couple of years, and pay fines if deemed appropriate.

Though, I suspect that the majority of users here on the forum aren't declaring their signature payments, and regular income via Bitcoin. Whether that's ignorance or actively looking to avoid tax. Like I said, I would absolutely always recommend everyone to declare everything even if its as you say; unlikely unless audited. I find honesty is the best policy.

He gained a little respect from me for the Woodley fight. Although, I find myself disappointed in Woodley more than impressed with Jake. I know there was several allegations after the fight about terms being inserted into the contract to favour Jake, however to be honest the more I think about it the more likely this is MMA fans trying to save face. Woodley has always been a frustrating fighter to watch, since he has talent that much is clear, but he just freezes sometimes, and doesn't empty the gas tank when he needs too. Though, hes obviously had a decently successful career.

I think what fed those allegations or rumours whatever you want to call them, is the fact that Woodley actually did knock down Jake, however it wasn't a clear knock down. Jake fell into the ropes, however as far as I know that should count as a knock down according to the boxing rules. He looked like the ropes stopped him from falling rather than just resting on them after a decent punch taken.

I don't think even Tommy's father or half brother is convinced Tommy can do it. This is a massive money earner for Tommy, and to be honest if Tommy wins this its probably the most exposure he'll ever have. I might be wrong in this, I just think Tommy hasn't got his heart set on boxing like Tyson. Tyson seems to live, and breathe boxing, and when hes not training it plays into his mental health issues, whereas Tommy appears on various dating shows, and kind of just uses the boxing as something hes alright at. I think its the name pushing his boxing career rather than his ability.

Yeah, the hype naturally dies down when Joshua doesn't revenge his loss. I felt like Joshua lost a lot of momentum when he lost against Ruiz, but he gained a little bit of it back in the rematch. However, I'm not convinced that was Joshua's doing, instead I think it was Ruiz coming in unprepared after the fame he had after the win. He definitely looked a lot slower, and was half arsing things instead of chasing the fight like the first fight.

Personally, I'm always going to be interested in Fury vs Joshua. Its still some of the best heavyweights, and while I do think Fury puts on a masterclass against Joshua, and actually exposes a lot more of Joshua's weaknesses than we've seen. However, what makes that fight exciting isn't the boxing ability of Joshua per say, its his power. He needs to clear the cobwebs out of his skull, and go back to the Joshua who bites down on his mouth guard, and looks to knock his opponent out. He definitely didn't do that against Usyk, and he paid the price for it.

Justin Gaethje likely to be the next title challenger? Exciting times ahead as I know Justin is a decorated high school wrestler, however we haven't really seen too much of it in the UFC so far. There was glimpses of it in the recent fight against Chandler, but not enough to really gauge where he is at. He'll either get chewed up by Oliveria, and Poirier on the ground or potentially be able to beat Oliveria on the feet. Poirier vs Justin I'm not quite sure who wins, I think I'd favour Poirer. Although, I'm not entirely convinced Poirer can beat Oliveria yet. One thing is for sure; this division is stacked from top to bottom, and even after this event which is absolutely stacked we should have some decent fights in the next 6 months.

He's 32 years old? There's still time in my opinion, but I guess it depends on his career goals. He has already done much of what he wanted to do I imagine.

Yeah, I believe its only broadcast in English, and Spanish. Though, there might be some other languages broadcast, I just know about the Spanish one since I was potentially going to tune into that instead to see if I can combine MMA, as a learning tool for Spanish .

Like I said above its varies depending on the country. However, investing compared to income tax to my knowledge is usually treated the same everywhere with one being income tax, and any investment you make is usually the purchase price deducted from your profit. That's usually how countries do it. Though, I'm definitely not up to date with every country out there.

As for your specific case of it being illegal, yeah I'm really not sure how that would work, I doubt they'll be able to claim tax from something that's illegal to use. I guess it depends on the extent it's illegal in your country. Could potentially need legal advice rather than an accountant in this instance or both.

Without knowing your setup we can only really speculate. Though, it might be due to differences in versions, Tor Browser has regular updates, and if you've updated recently the letterboxing might work or behave a little differently on your device from the last update.

Alternatively, you probably just haven't noticed or it might behave differently depending on the size you resize the Tor Browser window since reducing or increasing it might impact how noticeable it is.

Income tax. It might vary from country to country, but I usually send it to an accountant, and he sorts it out for me. I usually get the amount of Bitcoin earned, value in GBP at the time of the transaction, and then put all of that into a spreadsheet, send it off, and then usually get a email back stating how much tax I'll need to pay that year.

Signature earnings are usually easier since you don't have to deduct how much you initially paid for the Bitcoin, since you aren't buying it. I believe, the way they do the purchasing is subtracting your initial purchase price from the total amount.  Then work out your profit, and tax accordingly.

In the UK its usually a self assessment, but depends on your situation. This might also vary from country to country. Honestly though, I always recommend getting in contact with an accountant, tax can be somewhat complex at the best of times, and that's increasingly so when dealing with cryptocurrencies. Pay a yearly fee to an accountant, declare everything, and be somewhat worry free while letting them do the hard work.

There's a few open source tools out there available via Github, that automatically reads an address, and generates a report based on the date of receiving the Bitcoin, and extracts the price at the time of transaction from various exchanges. This can be used in conjunction to an accountant, so you can generate the initial report, and then send that over to them for checking. They'll likely ask a few questions, especially if you've bought Bitcoin during this time, since they'll need to determine your intentions i.e long term holding or short term.

Partly true, but not in all instances. Some websites for example allow you to have a wallet, retrieve the private key, and therefore you have the private key to that address. However, you can't guarantee that they also haven't stored that private key in their databases, which is a risk. Its much better to generate the private key yourself, and not rely on someone else doing it for you.

I think this is a point often missed when recommending what wallet to go for. Usually, we recommend anything which allows you to have access to the private key, but really we should be recommending only keys that you've generated yourself.

When it comes to security or even privacy to some extent, third parties are generally not a great idea. There are a few exceptions, but not for your personal wealth.

Takes away from the immediate impact of witty remarks though doesn't it . Nah, I don't try mean insulting back, and forth. To be honest, I'm not a massive fan of that, unless it was Conor in his prime. He was very good at it, lately though he's drifted into just boring insults rather than countering with wit.

I mean just being able to communicate to the vast majority of the fans would be an advantage. I'm actually surprised this isn't part of their training. I would think that Dana would be interested in offering incentive for learning English, because it allows the fighters to build their brand more. I know the UFC or MMA for that matter isn't all about English speakers, I just think its another tool to the tool belt.

Yeah, I'm not trying to insinuate the conspiracies surrounding the vaccines. Like I said, this has definitely happened in stadiums before, I've personally seen someone collapse on a game day inside the stadium, though that was acted upon quickly by the stewards, and was quite far away from me so not quite sure what the cause was.

Anyway, I don't normally get too excited about Liverpool's chances at Christmas time due to the amount of times we've been there, and slipped up. However, I feel like this team is showing us similar energy to when we won it. We're looking incredible in attack, and only a little bit shaky in defense. I'm normally always fairly confident about our chances, but usually quite quiet about it. This year I just feel like its our.....year.

I think Manchester City aren't on the same level currently as us, and Chelsea, and Chelsea have definitely shown fragility as of recent games.