I think the majority of your questions have been answered fairly well, however I'm going to try, and answer the above question in a way that you might understand.

Basically, a private key if stolen can be recovered. However, I don't think your understanding exactly what "recovered" means. Basically, if your private key is lost or stolen then it can still be recovered if you later stumble upon it or remember it. However, the funds that might have existed in the address that the private key belonged too, might have already been cleared out.

Think of a private key as your password or entry point to your funds. If its lost, then the only way your getting to those funds is if you find it. in this sense, you could be recoverable depending on what you mean by "lost", and to what degree its been "lost". However, if the private key has been stolen, or exposed to someone other than yourself the addresses that the private key belonged too, are essentially breached for life. Basically, even if you your funds are not moved yet, but the private key has definitely been exposed to someone else, they are vulnerable to be taken at any point, which means that your funds might be recoverable at the moment, but in 7 days the malicious attacker might well take them out, because they have a permanent access point (the private key) to that address.

Therefore, if your private key has been exposed to someone else, you should move your coins out as soon as possible to another address that you own, and have the associated private key which has not been exposed to someone else. There's a common saying, if you don't own the private key, you don't own the Bitcoin. The same saying is applicable if your private key has been stolen, basically its vulnerable at that point, and that address will never be considered safe again.

I'm not aware of a site that is specifically tailored to your needs, but I find it hard to believe that it doesn't exist. Like I said previously, it wouldn't be too difficult if you can retrieve the entire history of Bitcoin's price, either through the Blockchain or through the various charts scattered about online.
I understand where you coming from, but its basically just semantics. The majority of people use "value" as a way of saying the current conversion rate. The conversion rate would be far more accurate, but its less convenient to say. Its probably safe to assume in the majority of cases that when someone says "value", they mean conversion rate, unless they are specifically clear that's not what they are implying.

I'm not a big fan of jargon. Preferably, it would be better to steer clear of any non technical terms when it comes to talking about Bitcoin since ultimately we want others to adopt Bitcoin, and therefore by simplifying our jargon to more readable terms it becomes easier for those that are new to the technology.

Generally, its only advisable to use jargon when everyone is capable of understanding it, but really I'm a big fan of getting rid of any jargon that isn't a technical term. For example, hashrate would be a technical term (despite being somewhat self explanatory), but HODL is definitely not something I'd use to someone new. Of course, its part of the history, and therefore somewhat valuable to learn about I guess, but definitely isn't something which should be used when concerning beginners.

I also don't particularly like abbreviations, unless its been explained previously. For example, if I was to say the All Time High (ATM) was on x date, and then continued to use ATM then that would be fine. Although, if I did the opposite where I just stated ATM, then that's not clear at all, and even for someone who's familiar with Bitcoin it quickly becomes confusing. This is a particularly good example, as "ATM" is common "text" speak for "At the moment" .

Are you 100% confident in the security of your banking system? Theoretically, the principles are the same. Bitcoin is in active development, and is open source meaning that if a vulnerability is detected, then it should hopefully be patched quickly. Bitcoin has in the past had several vulnerabilities of various degrees, all of which it has recovered from. There was basically a vulnerability in the early days which allowed creating new coins,


To a degree, yes. There's various vulnerabilities found in all operating systems somewhat regularly, just like any other piece of software. Your phone has been vulnerable , and so has the software you are using on this very forum. The point is, and this is an extension to your first question; there is no avoiding vulnerabilities in software, and therefore not only is Bitcoin under threat from that, but also the operating system you use to login to all your accounts, including your banking account if you use online banking. Also, even if you don't use online banking personally, your bank likely uses the same operating systems that we can get our hands on, probably some distribution of Linux. Even if its a custom coded operating system, it can likely be attacked the very same way as any operating system available to consumers.

its also worth mentioning that, you can actually make a Bitcoin wallet via various different methods, some of which don't require being online which significantly reduces the chances of malicious attacks, unless the attacker has physical access to your device.

Depends on binaries you are specifically talking about. However, generally if the code is open source then you can verify it, or get someone else to verify it for you.

Yes, this is including, but not limited to the operating system I use.

No, it guarantees nothing, Although, the chances of a malicious program being open source, is significantly less so than it being closed source. Basically, the code can be verified, but lets be honest not all of us understand that specific language or we don't have the time since programs can literally be hundreds of thousands lines of code, and therefore to an extent you are relying on a collective effort to verify that the code is clean, and safe. Generally, you can vet the code in specific areas, for example what happens when you enter the private key, is it logged anywhere or sent to someone's email address etc.

Not to mention, there are dedicated organizations out there in verifying open source content. Yeah, you are again relying on another third party, but without actually having the time, and knowledge yourself you are pretty much limited to giving some sort of trust to the collective. However, banks don't have this option, and you must entirely put your trust in them to manage your money, invest your money, and to keep patching any vulnerabilities that they find.

There is one exception to this, and that is generally the more developed countries tend to have a protection limit, that if the bank goes bust for example, they will reimburse a set amount. I think in the UK its 85k. You of course, don't have this in Bitcoin, but other than that in every other sense, traditional currencies are just as susceptible to attacks than Bitcoin. You could even argue more so, since there's physical location that can be attacked not just a digital one.

This is literally true for everything.  The majority of the people in the world are already using a system which relies on computers, and are therefore have the same concerns. The majority of people now use online banking, not only that they are using it on phones, that they install apps on which have access to varying amounts of information, and they browse on that same phone, they do everything on that phone. When you own Bitcoin, you are basically removing the third party element, so you are more inclined to protect your assets. Therefore, you generally aren't going to be storing your main wallet, on a live machine. At least, it isn't recommended.

I had a terrible night last time out prediction wise. I tried a different approach, and went for the underdogs, even though I was favoring others, and well the night went totally unpredictably in a lot of ways. The amount of DQ's, and illegal blows we've had in the last 2/3 weeks is getting silly. I wish I could bet on a DQ next card

Just heard the news about Whitaker, and Costa being called off which I'm gutted about. I really want to see how Costa performs after his loss to Adensanya, especially since he was making excuses of being drunk? If I recall correctly. I've lost a little bit of respect for Costa, and I'm favouring Whitaker in that match up. Hopefully, it gets made again in the near future.

In regards to Adensanya, what do we think is next for him? After losing to Jan, is he going to fight someone else in that division, or return back down? Personally, I'd like to see Adensanya maybe drop back down, but in the future better prepare for moving up a division. It wasn't like he was out of his league, but he should have learned a lot from it, and hoping that serves him well in the future.

I'll get this week's predictions out probably around Friday.

Your advice is good advice if not a little bit extreme. The majority of people would probably just benefit from putting an address in their profile specifically for this forum, rather than changing it every time they receive Bitcoin. Maybe, if the amount begins to stack up, and its more money than your comfortable showing to the world, then you could change it.

Basically, my advice would be to never post your addresses where you store a significant amount of Bitcoin in, unless you are aware of the risks of publicly showing what you hold, because as soon as you do you'll likely be a bigger priority for malicious attacks. Of course, you could make sure that your Bitcoin is stored on a offline computer or something equivalent, but you would still be a target in other ways. Attackers might want to steal your Bitcointalk account if you value it, and try to ransom it.

Other than bragging rights, there's no real reason to publicly post your "main" addresses. There are a few exceptions maybe, when its a requirement to prove you own said funds before purchasing something.
 

I want to go into a bit more depth on what it means to be your own anti virus. However, before I go onto that I want to explain how a anti virus program works; Basically, any anti virus software which exists on the market today is nothing more than a glorified database which checks against their stored database any time you scan your machine or download something new to your computer. They use various techniques including simple naming conventions, if the program is registered to a "company" for example, from time to time you might see that Windows executable might have "from x company", i.e Firefox.exe came from Mozilla. Anti virus software also sometimes looks at he libraries which the executable is trying to download, and identifies which ones might be problematic. This is what sometimes results in a false positive. -

Also, a subject which isn't talked about nearly enough is the fact that owning a anti virus introduces complacency, since you expect the anti virus to be able to catch anything that you miss. This ultimately leaves the user to sort of rely on it, which is never a good idea. There's also the issue of anti viruses only being able to detect something which exists in their database, or at least shows similarities to what's in their database.

There's a few other techniques which are used, but nothing really you can't do by yourself. Basically, everything that a anti virus can do, you can do without clogging down your system as anti viruses usually come with their own bloatware (browser extensions) or require scanning at various different intervals of the day which can sometimes impact the way you are using your computer, especially if you are using a lot of the computers processing power anyway.

So, to be your own anti virus you need to follow these rough guidelines;

1. Do not download anything that might even hint that it might be malicious.
2. Do not download anything from untrusted sources
3. Do not connect, or allow anyone to use your computer
4. Do not visit websites that might be malicious
5. Keep your operating system, and components up to date.
6. Stay informed with the software, and hardware which you are using. Note down every piece of software that you use, and make sure that you keep up to date in the announcements regarding security. Many programs have multiple vulnerabilities every year, which often goes unnoticed by the general users.
7. Consider disabling any scripts inside your browser (this can make browsing somewhat tedious, but can be configured for sites that you trust).
8. Passwords. I know that the majority of people reading this have reused a password. This is a terrible practice, and ideally you should be using a password which is entirely unique. If you use a wide range of different types of characters, numbers, special characters then you don't actually need a very long password for it to be considered safe, and therefore its not too hard to even remember complete gibberish passwords.

If you are particularly concerned about security, and don't mind hindering usability for it then consider using virtualization software to download anything which you are uncertain about. This could mean digitally separating your computer, by using a VirtualBox. However, that's not a completely fool resistant approach, and you should consider either going to the extreme of physically isolating your machine, or next best consider using a operating system like QubesOS which uses a much better compartmentalization system than virtual machines do.  

I personally like to use different machines for different purposes which physically isolates my data. However, I've been an advocate for Qubes OS in the past, as its much more practical, and serves its purpose. For instance, you can isolate your network within Qubes OS, or you could simply have a downloading "instance" which you only use for downloading, and it that was compromised then it wouldn't be able to easily transfer to your other instances. This ultimately allows you terminate that instance, without compromising your whole system.

Now, when it comes to storing Bitcoin I personally recommend a hardware wallet when you need to access your coins on a regular interval. Then, make use of a offline machine to store Bitcoin that you intend on keeping there for a long time. So, if you are a trader then a hardware wallet protects you from some of the pitfalls that you might run into, if you are accessing it regularly, and a offline computer which generated the private key, and isn't used for any other purpose pretty much protects you against almost all forms of attacks, and therefore assuring that the Bitcoin that you are holding remains safe, and isn't exposed to the risks that a normal online computer would be exposed too.

Its worth noting that if you do go the offline computer route, then you should only generate the private key on a computer which you are sure hasn't been compromised. They might mean; flashing the bios, wiping the hard drives, or installing new ones, and installing a operating system from a signed source (i.e verifying that Ubuntu came from Ubuntu's servers, and the checksum hasn't changed). Then, its not recommend to use that computer for anything else, unless you intend on storing the private key physically as opposed to using a wallet file on that computer. Then, you should have really encrypted the wallet even if it was generated offline, but if you didn't, or you simply don't want that wallet.dat to exist its probably best that you either destroy that hard drive, or at the very least write 0's to it multiple times, to assure that it can't be recovered.

That's concerning being your own anti virus, but that's really not the biggest pitfall that everyone falls into. Generally, money is lost by trusting other people to keep your credentials, and your coins safe. This is something which everyone needs to cut out. I understand, the need to want or even need to rely on third party services. For example, if you need to buy Bitcoin you are going to have to store that Bitcoin on some of the exchanges. However, you need to be able to move that coin out of their system, and into your own wallet that you own the private key to as soon as possible, whether that's your "hot" hardware wallet or directly into your cold storage. You should not be using an exchange to store Bitcoin for any longer than you need to purchase or sell it. Personally, I think anything over 24 hours is poor practice. My recommended time would be, as soon as you receive it, ship it to your wallet. As soon as the exchange has accepted your deposit, purchase the amount you need. Far too many people have been stung by exchanges that have been hacked or ceased to exist. By, using the above recommendations you are reducing your chances of being stung.

Technically, it only takes a digital form. However, Bitcoin has many "forms" since its been created both physically, and digitally. For example, you can get a Bitcoin debit card, and you can also get physical collectible items which store Bitcoin on. Although, despite being in all these "forms", Bitcoin simply exists digitally even if its supplied as a physical note or coin. Basically, these notes or coins usually have the private key on them, that you can use to access the digitally stored Bitcoin.

Basically, Bitcoin is derived from code which effects how it works, right from how many coins are generated, when they are distributed, and how transactions between users work. Think of it like your bank account if you will, that's be designed to allow you to send transactions easily, however your bank isn't physically moving around dollar bills every time you send a transaction. The money in your bank account is simply a number which exists on the computer, the bank has reserves which they "own". Bitcoin, is similar in that when you send Bitcoin to another person then you aren't actually moving a physical thing to another person. What you are doing is broadcasting to the Bitcoin network that you have sent x amount to x person. This then syncs with the entire network, and everyone will be able to see, and verify that transaction. In fact, the transaction goes through many "confirmations" which basically confirms that the transaction has been recognized as existing, and confirming that its actually been sent on the network.

Bitcoin can be stored in any way that you want. You can store in physically if you wish, just bear in mind that there's additional security concerns that you have to consider if you do this, also bear in mind that because you are storing it physically does not mean, that it doesn't exist digitally. Every Bitcoin ever created exists digitally, and can only exist digitally. Think of storing it physically as a way of backing it up, in a physical way. Your private key is effectively your password, or better yet your access point to your digitally stored Bitcoin. The private key can exist digitally, physically or if you wish, and you have a particularly good memory could neither exist physically or digitally, and only be memorized by you. Technically, the private key still "exists" digitally since to access your wallet, the network has to reconise the private key as valid, and tie it to a particular address. However, the way you store it, doesn't have to be digitally, e.g storing your private key within a notepad (which is a very bad security practice). So, it entirely depends on you where you store your Bitcoin. For someone new, its highly recommended to install either Bitcoin Core, or Electrum depending on your needs. Most need users would proably be more inclined to use Electrum for its lightweight capabilities (you don't need to sync the entire blockchain, which requires hard disk space).

That really depends on your capabilities. If you have capital to invest you can check out an exchange. For example, Coinbase is a popular exchange which you can buy, and sell Bitcoin with fiat currencies. However, if you don't have any starting capital to invest you can simply offer your services, and skills just like you would in the "normal" world.

Its quite surprising how far, and wide the ATMs have reached around the world. I've some some in foreign countries, as well as being in my home country. I'm never really seen the need to use one, over other more traditional ways, especially if you were to consider tampering, which occasionally can occur with non cryptocurrency ATMs. Personally, I prefer to purchase from an exchange, but I'm curious in this day, and age what would be the benefit for a cryptocurrency ATM other than being a gimmick?

The ATM would themselves add a markup, very much like traditional exchanges, these days everyone offering a service usually requires KYC, and therefore that eliminates the privacy aspect that these provided once upon a time, and by using a ATM you are publicly advertising that you are into Bitcoin, and with the recent surges in Bitcoin, one might become a higher priority target than traditional ATM users.

There's also the fact that these ATMs are usually situated in cities, and therefore require traveling to get to for a lot of people which either adds to the costs, or simply as it was in your case; adds some muscle. I would be particularly interested in seeing the statistics of how often these devices are used, since I simply can't see them being viable for most users, or at least not very convenient.

This weekend hasn't really got any big names, but I'm still excited to watch some of these fights. I think there's some upsets on the cards again, and my betting will be reflected by this.

Jason Witt Vs Matthew Semelberger

This is either going to be a banger, with a knockout by either of these men or its going to be a long sluggish battle. I'm fancying Witt by decision, simply because it extends the odds a little bit. This is a very even match up on paper, and I believe Semelsberger is the favorite for this one, even if its just slightly so.

Winner: Witt via decision.

Jinh Yu Frey Vs Gloria de Paula

This should be a decent match up, but I can't overlook De Paula here. I think she ultimately takes the win. Now, I'm undecided on whether it'll be submission or points. I don't tend to like betting for a submission, but I think Paula might have her in her.

Winner: De Paula via decision

Misha VS Ryan Spann

You just expect this fight to be capped off with a finish from either of these guys. I'm personally leading to Misha, and I'm somewhat expecting him to surprise a few people with a knockout. I don't have his numbers in front of me right now, but I don't think he's particularly known for his knockout power, but I feel Spann sometimes leaves himself vunerable which I think a man like cirkunov might just exploit.

Winner: Cirkunov (TKO)

Leon Edwards VS Belal Muhammad

For me, I don't see this going any other way than a Leon Edwards win. He's simply too good for the opposition in my opinion. I don't see this fight being finished from either side, and will be betting for a decision.

Winner: Edwards (decision

Otherwise, here's the rest of my picks:

Aldrich (decision)
Rafa Garcia
Rani Yahya
Jourdain
Yoder
Darren Stewart
Davey Grant
Dan Ige

I don't think there's a need to have "Bitcoiner", "enthusiast", and "regular". Since, I'd like to think if you are a regular, you're enthusiastic about Bitcoin, which by every definition probably means you are considered a "Bitcoiner" by everyone outside the industry, and visa versa for all of these.

Personally, I think if you're on this forum you are very much a all of the above. Since, this forum software is rather dated compared to more conventional modern means i.e Reddit is usually the go to place for social media revolving around a project or technology. This forum, usually brings better discussion or at the very least more in depth thought out responses because of the nature, since Reddit is very much catered to short typed out replies.

The demographics I'd be interested in seeing would be;. how many of those that are employed by a Bitcoin project, what percentage of those are paid in Bitcoin, and how many project owners are seeking to employ people with the primary pay being in Bitcoin.

I'm not aware of a website that provides everything that you want, if I'm understanding correctly, however various Blockchain explorers display the dollar value, and the Bitcoin amount at the time that it was sent. You could potentially, look at the ledger at the specific days you want to know how much it varied.

I imagine there is a website out there, though. I'm not just not aware of it. There's various chart websites out there which shows the entire history of Bitcoin value, and you could potentially use a USD history website to compare the two. As for one, that's a all in one place solution, that's not something I'm aware of. Unless, you count looking at exchanges price histories? As they usually have USD history, and Bitcoin history.

I do believe your looking for a all in one solution which does it all automatically though. such as:

1. Input Bitcoin amount
2. Input date
3. Returns dollar equivalent of that date
4. Compare previous output to a newly specified day

i.e
1. 1 BTC
2. 01.01.2050
3. $10,000
4. 02.01.2050
5. $20,000 (e.g +10,000 )

If the above is what your looking for, I can't imagine this not existing, since its a pretty simple implementation.

I would recommend not getting to complacent with sending Bitcoin, whether its small or large. Remember, that there's no conventional "safety nets", that exist in fiat based systems, and therefore by design you cannot reverse the transaction if you do mess up.

I personally, even after handling Bitcoin for years triple check my transactions before sending them, since the only real safety net you have is the confirmation window that your wallet software usually spits out, asking you to confirm you want to send x amount to x address. Getting complacent here could mean you misplace a decimal point, which is much easier than with fiat, because you are usually dealing with decimal points more regularly, due to prices not being tied to values such as $9.99. Instead, its something like 0.00057 which can be easily mistaken.

Also, whenever you are dealing with someone person to person, and you don't actually know them, or have enough trust of them , you need to be seeking out alternative ways to protect both parties from loss of coins. Basically, always use some sort of escrow, and by that I mean a trusted escrow, or even better a multi sig system.
From my observations, this isn't used nearly as much as it should be. I honestly, thought this would have become a standard within the industry by now, and I do understand it has its caveats, especially on time sensitive matters, but its by far one of the better ways of dealing with an escrow. I don't like that some P2P exchanges, still insist on using that site as an escrow, basically eliminating the very purpose of using a P2P exchange.

Even if it was objectively better, which I share the opinion of the posters above, that is isn't. I don't like the idea of forcing something, which would actually weaken the Bitcoin network. Let me just elaborate on this; We ideally want as many users running nodes as possible, right? So, by restricting nodes to only Tor would reduce the amount of people that run nodes, effectively weakening the network. Besides, Tor is optional, and works well with running a node. If a user has a specific reason why they want to use Tor, they can.

Even if, running a node on the Tor network was objectively better, which I think is probably up for debate by those in favour of it, I don't like the idea of forcing users to use a specific platform which isn't bulletproof in the first place. Tor is as anonymous as the end user makes it, and despite it being a pretty good out of the box solution it itself is susceptible to attacks, and if we are relying on what effectively is a third party program to run a Bitcoin node, any outages or vulnerabilities would have the chance of knocking out all Bitcoin nodes for a period of time, which is definitely not great for Bitcoin in general.

That's without addressing the issues of a slow tor connection, which could prevent people from running a full node, out of sheer impatience which again isn't a good idea for the overall health of the network. There's just so many reasons, some of which I haven't touched upon why forcing full nodes to run through Tor is a bad idea.

Plus, in most countries these days your suppose to declare your earnings, and investments. Although, most countries don't actually require you to be specific about declaring its actually crypto currencies, if you continue trading on a P2P exchange, and build up a pattern its very likely that they'll be able to make a educated guess you are dealing in cryptocurrencies, especially when it comes to the tax man, and you need to take away the investment, and work out how much you profited.

Its good from a banking sense initially, but even banks monitor their customers behaviours, and like I said after a pattern has been created, it would be fairly easy for them to put two, and two together.

I see where your coming from, generally Jan isn't that heavy in the wrestling department, but that's usually because hes against opponents which have similar mobility, and striking capability. I generally believe that Adesanya walking into this fight is easily the hardest opponent Jan will face in terms of striking, so surely you would expect Jan to test Adesanya by simply imposing his frame onto him. Adesanya has great takedown defense, and I believe that's what this fight boils down too. Either Jan absolutely man handles Izzy on the mat, or Adesanya out strikes him all night long.

Recent interview with Adensanya suggests hes looking to come into the fight at less than 205 pounds. Whats your thoughts on this? I know some people have suggested he will struggle with Jans frame, and power and by not coming in heavier than suggested, and I think that could definitely be a contributing factor in the fight. However, I don't agree with the argument completely. Since, Izzy's style doesn't rely on his strength per say, it relies on his speed, and agility. The power is a factor, because of his speed. By putting on too much weight he would be risking that, due to not being conditioned in the octagon with the newly added weight. So, no matter how much he puts on, he will probably feel the difference. So, by not coming in heavier than 205 pounds, he is reducing the risk of not being conditioned with the added weight, and can hopefully adapt his style, without losing his speed.

Besides, the strength vs speed trade off isn't worth in my opinion, because even if he were to put on more weight, he's unlikely to get to Jan's level of strength. So, Izzy needs his speed, and agility to prevent this fight from hitting the ground. If it hits the ground Izzy is going to struggle regardless of weight. So, as previously suggested Izzy needs to keep his distance, and pick his shots while mitigating that risk of a takedown. Jan has heavy hands, and that's always going to be a risk, and is pretty fast for his size, but Izzy should be able to avoid the heavy punches since he's definitely faced much quicker opponents in the past.

Tonights card is going to be a lot of fun no doubt! Expecting some very entertaining fights. Here's my predictions:

Max Grishin (Tko)
Ronnie Lawrence (Points)
Sabina Mazo (Points)
Thiago Moises (Points)
Alex Caceres (Points)
Jimmie RIvera
Mayra Bueno Silva (Sub or Points)
MAgomed Ankalaev (TKO)
Ciryl Gane (TKO)

As for the discussion on Jan being Amateur, I couldn't disagree more. Hes a seasoned fighter, and clearly knows how to have a war with his opponent. The only doubts are if he'll be able to impose his frame against Izzy, and be able to hopefully take him down. I don't see Jan winning this fight on the feet unless he just catches Izzy. I'm routing for Izzy, but I can't ignore that Jan could just catch Izzy with a big punch, and finish the night. Izzy is usually just so slick, and if he doesn't come into this fight complacent, which I'm sure he won't, then I do see him emerging victorious. Although, I do think Jan will stick around until the championship rounds, and if Izzy is to win it'll be via decision.

I really like Blaydes, so I'm gutted for him. Hopefully, he's recovering well after a pretty nasty looking knockout. It seems  the UFC was pushing the narrative that Curtis is the nice guy too, and it was just a shame it went down like that. Lewis deserves the praise though, and even though I'm not a fan of him personally I can respect what he does.

That take down attempt though was so unneeded....that's the annoying part about it. He was conformable on the feet I thought, maybe a few counters to close for comfort, but he was undoubtedly winning up until that point.

I've had a few terrible weeks of predictions. I expected a few knockouts, and I still decided to bet against that. It was a very entertaining card honestly, and I don't think there was one boring night. Who got the fight of the night bonus?

Shame about Curtis, I really like him, and he was definitely in control. He was actually winning the stand up, and he didn't actually need to use his wrestling. Lewis was looking to catch up whenever he tried to level change, which meant he was cagey in the stand up which is what gave Curtis the edge. He should of kept going as he was, and I think he might have put Lewis down or force Lewis to stop thinking about catching him, and start trading more which would of naturally opened it up for a takedown.

2 more weeks for the big Adesanya card which is going to be a absolute banger of a card. Maybe, not the best card for us bettors, but a brilliant card for entertainment.