fun88 คาสิโน
Nevada Casinos Coronavirus Restrictions Eased
By admin | | 0 Comments |

 February 15, 2021 If at first you don’t succeed, try again in a few months! That seems to be where we are with Nevada casinos coronavirus precautions, as the Governor has started to ease some of the casino restrictions in place for a second time. As of today, the occupancy maximum for casinos in the state will grow from 25% to 35%. This will also apply to restaurants and bars. However, not all “Sin City” attractions are being treated equally. Adult entertainment venues, such as nightclubs and brothels, will remain not be allowed to open until May 1st at the earliest as they are considered high-risk businesses. Governor Sisolak has been in a delicate situation for a while now, balancing the state’s tourist driven economy with public safety. “As we ease restrictions, we must follow the science and studies, which states clearly and repeatedly that closures to certain settings are more impactful in reducing disease transmission,” he said. The state has documented over 285,000 cases of COVID-19 with more than 4,600 deaths. You can read more about the current Nevada casinos coronavirus situation at Yogo Net.     Related Tagged Coronavirus, COVID, Nevada casinos, Nevada casinos coronavirus, Sisolak
คาสิโน โบนัส 100% คาสิโน โบนัส100% เฮงๆ 666 คาสิโน หวยออนไลน์ แทงบอล
When Relationships Fall Victim to Problem Gambling
By admin | | 0 Comments |

Many celebrate love, romance, and relationships during February and on Valentine’s Day. While no relationship is perfect, some endure significant hardship due to the presence of addiction, and gambling addiction is no exception. Did you know that relationship problems have been the top reported reason for seeking help by contacts to the 888-ADMIT-IT HelpLine for more than a decade? Contrary to social stigmas, individuals who struggle with problem gambling are not able to simply stop. Gambling addiction rewires the brain much in the same way as substance abuse, yet the symptoms are unseen, leaving loved ones unaware until the gambler hits “rock bottom.” Feelings like shame, guilt, and stress also flood these individuals and leave them hiding the consequences of problem gambling, exacerbating relationship difficulties and preventing them from seeking needed supports. Family members and other loved ones often do not know the extent of the gambler’s behaviors or debt. Over the past year, 76% of 888-ADMIT-IT HelpLine contacts reported the presence of family conflict, and 52% indicated family neglect as a result of problem gambling, with some also experiencing domestic violence and abuse [1]. It is imperative to understand that for every case of problem gambling, an average of 8-10 additional people are affected — often those closest to the gambler.  Research published in the Asian Journal of Gambling Issues and Public Health found that the negative effects of their partner’s gambling problems centered on four key areas — financial loss, emotional distress, impairment of mental and physical health, and erosion of their relationship [2]. Complicating matters further, the COVID-19 pandemic is causing heightened levels of emotional distress and mental health impacts across the population, leaving those suffering from this hidden addiction even more vulnerable. HelpLine data shows that a large percentage of problem gamblers are experiencing significant anxiety (68%) and depression (67%), with more than one in five admitting to suicidal thoughts (22%) and an appreciable number (13%) reporting neurological disorders. These mental health issues understandably extend to family members and loved ones.  The good news is that help and hope can be found through the 24/7, Confidential, and Multilingual 888-ADMIT-IT HelpLine for anyone in need, including loved ones. The HelpLine can also be reached by texting 321-978-0555, starting a live chat at gamblinghelp.org, emailing fccg@gamblinghelp.org, and messaging the FCCG on social media. Get connected to the resources that make a difference, including referrals to certified treatment providers! March is Problem Gambling Awareness Month March is Problem Gambling Awareness Month (PGAM), a grassroots effort to raise awareness about gambling disorder, classified by the American Psychiatric Association as a behavioral addiction, that impacts millions of Floridians who struggle directly with gambling related difficulties or are adversely affected by a loved one’s gambling problem. This year, our campaign theme is Shine the Light on Problem Gambling: Changing the Game. During this past year, the world has been forced to grapple with crippling impacts caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic. Many Florida residents, like many Americans, are struggling given the unforeseen consequences resulting from the pandemic. For disordered gamblers and their families, the effects of the virus can exacerbate already serious financial, psychological, legal, and other problems caused by gambling. Click here to learn more about PGAM and join the movement in raising awareness about the issue of problem gambling and the help and hope available through the 24/7, Confidential, and Multilingual Problem Gambling HelpLine! [1]  24-Hour Problem Gambling HelpLine Annual Report., 2020 ed., The Florida Council on Compulsive Gambling, Inc., 2020, 24-Hour Problem Gambling HelpLine Annual Report. [2] Abbott, M., DA. Abbott, S., Boyatzis, R., V. Braun, V., EM. Chan, A., Charmaz, K., . . . Volberg, R. (1970, January 01). Impacts of gambling problems on partners: Partners’ interpretations. Retrieved February 11, 2021, from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/2195-3007-3-11
เกมส์ยิ่งปลา คาสิโน ฟรีเครดิต ฟรีเครดิตทดลองเล่น คาสิโน เกมส์ คาสิโน ออนไลน์ บ่อนออนไลน์ คาสิโน ออนไลน์ได้เงินจริง
Warriors Teammate Praises Steph Curry and Draymond Green’s Hall of Fame IQ
By admin | | 0 Comments |

After a bumpy start to the 2020-21 NBA season, the Golden State Warriors are getting back in form. They made several changes to their roster in the offseason and it took some time for the players to settle in. But with the All-Star break almost here, the Dubs are looking consistent. The credit for their newfound success goes to none other than their veteran duo of Steph Curry and Draymond Green. Recently, the two stars flaunted their skills against the Cavaliers in a comfortable 129-98 victory. Curry continued his hot scoring streak with 36 points against the Cavs. On the other hand, Green handled the facilitating duties for the team as he finished the game with 16 assists. The two stars have shouldered the burden for the team in the absence of Klay Thompson. But can the Warriors go all the way and win another championship? We will find out in the coming months. Steph Curry and Draymond Green: The two pillars for the Golden State Warriors Golden State Warriors forward Kent Bazemore (26) and forward Juan Toscano-Anderson (95) and guard Stephen Curry (30) and forward Draymond Green (23) during the game between the Dallas Mavericks and the Golden State Warriors at the American Airlines Center. Mandatory Credit: Jerome Miron-USA TODAY SportsFollowing this sensational victory, Juan Toscano-Anderson gave an interesting post-game interview. He said: “I am a beneficiary of these guys, their hall of fame IQ. You know Draymond [Green] had 16 assists today and that’s amazing from our starting center. Last five games, he’s in double digits assists. … Either Steph [Curry] is open or Imma be open. “I’m aware that the defense ain’t gonna leave him so I just find those gaps and get those easy buckets. I know Draymond sees everything. Sometimes he sees it a little too quick before any of us see it, but it’s great to play with a guy like that.” Draymond Green has always been an amazing playmaker for the Dubs. Even during their stretch of dominance in the mid 2010s, he took on the role of a facilitator for their championship teams. This season, he is elevating his game further in that department. READ MORE | Steph Curry and LeBron James Ready to Move On From Intense Rivalry But is this enough for the Warriors to win another championship? Feel free to share your thoughts. Get notified about breaking news and watch highlights on the go; join the Arena on NBA Hoops
บ่อน คาสิโน สล็อต คาสิโน ออนไลน์ เกมรอยัล คาสิโน คาสิโน ฟรีเครดิต 2020 เกม คาสิโน ปอยเปต
Tom Brady: The Ultimate Villain Turned Babyface
By admin | | 0 Comments |

I have a confession to make. I like Tom Brady.10 years ago, I would have punched myself in the face for making a statement like that. Even two years ago, I would never admit my admiration for the seven-time Super Bowl championAs a Giants fan, I’m arguably one of two fanbases (the other being the Eagles) that have no reason to hate Brady for his success on the field. The Giants defeated Brady twice on the biggest stage. Big Blue stopped Brady and the 2007 Patriots from immortality, ruining the undefeated season. You’re welcome, Miami Dolphins.I hated Brady not for his play, but for the uniform he wore. The New England Patriots were the bad guys of the 2000s. The Patriots were the Galactic Empire, Bill Belichick was Darth Vader, and Gillette Stadium was the Death Star. From all the “gate” scandals to cheating implications, New England kept winning. To make matters worse, Patriots’ fans became insufferable. How many times did I have to hear “Our season starts in the AFC Championship” from New England fans? As much as I hated them, the fans were right.I may have disliked Brady, but I always respected TB12. He is the GOAT. That was never up for debate. The stats that support Brady’s GOAT case are unfathomable. Brady’s postseason numbers are “Gretzkyesque” and will take a monumental effort from a generational player to eclipse his stats.All-time playoff wins leaders 1) Tom Brady — 34 2) Tom Brady, only in conference championship games and Super Bowls combined — 17 T-3) Joe Montana, Tom Brady since turning 37 years old — 16— Tom Brady Facts (@TB_Facts) February 8, 2021As I watched Tom Brady hoist the Lombardi trophy for the seventh time, I said to myself, “This effing guy. Again?” The 43-year-old vet bested the 25-year-old phenom who wants to be the GOAT himself one day. It’s still possible Mahomes can become the GOAT, but the gap between Brady or Mahomes feels insurmountable.Then, I watched the parade. Brady was laughing hard and partying harder. I couldn’t help but smile at all the videos of Brady celebrating on his boat.He threw the Lomnbardi trophy to another boat in what could go down as the greatest pass of his career.TB12 skipped the diet today and pounded a few too many drinks. It was the most relatable clip from Brady I’ve ever seen.When Brady gets an assist out of the party, it’s fine, but when I get escorted out of the bar, it’s a problem. Life ain’t fair! https://t.co/bWyV2YtJ0e— Dan Girolamo (@Danny_Giro) February 10, 2021Over the past few years, Brady demonstrated his sense of humor with his social media posts after wins. From the TB Times to “W” videos, Brady knows how to assert himself as a winner. He’s also pretty funny and self-aware, evidenced by his avocado tequila tweet.How can you watch those videos with a straight face? TB12 is turning babyface right before our eyes. For the non-wrestling fans, that means he’s becoming a likable good guy. Most football fans hated Brady in New England because he was the perfect villain. Society loves to root for stars, but it also enjoys watching the villain fall.The more I laugh at Brady’s antics, the more I realize how much New England hindered his personality. Rob Gronkowski said he likes the “freedom of being yourself” in Tampa Bay, which was a clear shot at the disciplinarian system run by Belichick. That doesn’t make New England’s system wrong. The Patriots won six Super Bowls over the course of two decades. However, it’s tough to get a sense of a player’s true personality when Darth Vader is breathing down your neck.It’s Brady’s world and we’re all living in it. Right now, I like what I see from the GOAT.Do you like Tom Brady? Leave your thoughts in the comments below or tweet us, @unafraidshow.
คาสิโน ออนไลน์888 ทางเข้า คาสิโน คาสิโน 1688 คาสิโน 1988 คาสิโน ทรูวอลเล็ต
Build a Beautiful Site in the WordPress Mobile Apps with Predesigned Page Layouts
By admin | | 0 Comments |

Build a Beautiful Site in the WordPress Mobile Apps with Predesigned Page Layouts We think you’ll love the new Starter Page Layouts feature. Thomas Bishop Your WordPress mobile app is a convenient way to create and manage your WordPress site. Now, you can design a new page right from your phone or tablet — and build the site of your dreams — with predesigned page layouts. Introducing starter page layouts Not all of us are designers, and building a page on your site with the layout in your mind can be intimidating and time-consuming — but it doesn’t have to be that way! Now when you create a new page on WordPress for iOS or Android, you can choose from premade layouts. You can also customize them to fit your needs, right from the block editor. Choosing a layout When you create a new page in the app, you’ll see a list of premade page layouts, including about pages, contact pages, team pages, services pages, and more. Whether you’re the owner of an online shop of sustainably made clothing, the founder of a newly formed digital magazine, or a financial strategist who’s just launched a consulting business, you can use these premade layouts to build the most essential pages on your website. Once you find a layout that you’d like to try, tap it to select it. After you’ve selected a layout, you can either preview it or create a new page with the chosen layout. Ready to try these new Starter Page Layouts? Be sure to update your WordPress app to the latest version. If you don’t have the app yet, download it for free, on both Android and iOS. We’d love to hear your feedback on these new layouts. Reach out to us from within the app by going to My Site, tapping your photo on the top right, tapping Help & Support,  and then selecting Contact Support. Like this:Like Loading... Related Previous PostShowcase Your Figma Designs on WordPress P2
ปอยเปต คาสิโน ออนไลน์ dgคาสิโน ปอยเปต คาสิโน ออนไลน์ คาสิโนsa คาสิโน sa
My Confession: Male, Age 21 (AUSTRALIA)
By admin | | 0 Comments |

Let me give you some valuable background info first: I live at home with my Dad & my girlfriend (she’s between houses). They’re both my best friends. I am currently going through a chronic pain type disorder that appeared in both wrists & forearms since July 2020. In & out of appointments/checks every fortnight. I am unable to do much in my day, it hurts to do normal things in my day - so I am unable to work or study anymore. Painkillers are not helping. Thursday was the day, the day I basically lost my entire life savings. Since then, I’ve been using every single dollar I can get my hands on to recover this loss & I’m sure you know where I’m at now. $8 in debt & unemployed with no income. But how did I get here? I got caught gambling when I was 17/18, lost all my money then too but it was less than $1000 (my Dad was the only one who knew). Since then, I vowed to never gamble again & I didn’t until 2 weeks ago. My Dad & I were watching the cricket & he placed a $100 multi (he rarely gambles) & won $450. We both thought this was great so I put in $50 myself for the next game. I ended up losing $25 & won it back in the darts later on. I then decided to move on & not do any more as my girlfriend of 2 years (the one I’ll marry) did not approve of me gambling again. So I stopped - until my Dad persuaded me to lie & just gamble anyway behind her back. It was innocent losses, $5-$10 here & there for the next 2 weeks. It wasn’t until last week, the day after my girlfriend’s birthday, that everything went downhill. She had to work Wed & Thu which left me to be alone for 2 days. I was very down in the dumps & just felt like I had all this money & didn’t use it (which is the stupidest thing ever, I know). So I started gambling on the races. With high $1000 bets & spent hours & hours, got up $10k then back down to $5k before I bet my whole bank to get back where I started at $15k. I stopped, went in my room & realised what I did, I almost lost my ENTIRE bank. Did I stop there? Nope, you guessed it. Eventually, one thing led to another & now I’m $15k down & $9 in debt. I confessed everything to my girlfriend & Dad on Thursday. Which they were both very supportive. I had $2000 in my bank then & said I’d stop. But I didn’t, Iost $1500 yesterday & $500 today. So yes in $9 debt. Although I do not have an addiction (oddly enough I studied psychology for 2 years before this chronic pain stopped me), I have definitely fallen into the trap of gambling once again & I only risked losing my last $2000 to not win the money back, but rather I looked at it as an outlet to make money so I can provide my girlfriend & I with a future. But this was such a bad mindset to approach everything. $9 in debt. I am stopping here. I vow to, right here, right now. I have not told my girlfriend or Dad about the last $2000, but I think I will hang onto this one for now as I can make that back in selling some of my collectables that have been collecting profit over the years. So thank god for that at least. Additionally, I may receive a pension for my condition so if that’s approved, must lock my money away. I had to get all this out & it has put me in an awful lot of PHYSICAL pain to even write this due to my chronic pain condition. I don’t expect anyone to read this all as this is rather for me. Thank you. C. submitted by /u/codesfrost [comments]
เกมส์ยิ่งปลา คาสิโน ฟรีเครดิต ฟรีเครดิตทดลองเล่น คาสิโน เกมส์ คาสิโน ออนไลน์ บ่อนออนไลน์ คาสิโน ออนไลน์ได้เงินจริง
Serena Williams shows off her unreal defense on this point
By admin | | 0 Comments |

ReplyshareReportSave*display:inline-block;vertical-align:middle.t9oUK2WY0d28lhLAh3N5qmargin-top:-23px._2KqgQ5WzoQRJqjjoznu22odisplay:inline-block;-ms-flex-negative:0;flex-shrink:0;position:relative._2D7eYuDY6cYGtybECmsxvE-ms-flex:1 1 auto;flex:1 1 auto;overflow:hidden;text-overflow:ellipsis._2D7eYuDY6cYGtybECmsxvE:hovertext-decoration:underline._19bCWnxeTjqzBElWZfIlJbfont-size:16px;font-weight:500;line-height:20px;display:inline-block._2TC7AdkcuxFIFKRO_VWis8margin-left:10px;margin-top:30px._2TC7AdkcuxFIFKRO_VWis8._35WVFxUni5zeFkPk7O4iiBmargin-top:35px._7kAMkb9SAVF8xJ3L53gcWdisplay:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;margin-bottom:8px._7kAMkb9SAVF8xJ3L53gcW*-ms-flex:auto;flex:auto._1LAmcxBaaqShJsi8RNT-Vppadding:0 2px 0 4px;vertical-align:middle._3_HlHJ56dAfStT19Jgl1bF,.nEdqRRzLEN43xauwtgTmjpadding-right:4px._3_HlHJ56dAfStT19Jgl1bFpadding-left:16px._2QZ7T4uAFMs_N83BZcN-Emfont-family:Noto Sans,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-weight:400;line-height:18px;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-ms-flex-flow:row nowrap;flex-flow:row nowrap._19sQCxYe2NApNbYNX5P5-Lcursor:default;height:16px;margin-right:8px;width:16px.isInIcons2020 .icon._19sQCxYe2NApNbYNX5P5-Lmargin:-2px 8px 0 0._3XFx6CfPlg-4Usgxm0gK8Rfont-size:16px;font-weight:500;line-height:20px._34InTQ51PAhJivuc_InKjJcolor:var(--newCommunityTheme-actionIcon)._29_mu5qI8E1fq6Uq5koje8font-size:12px;font-weight:500;line-height:16px;display:inline-block;word-break:break-word._2BY2-wxSbNFYqAy98jWyTCmargin-top:10px._3sGbDVmLJd_8OV8Kfl7dVvfont-family:Noto Sans,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-weight:400;line-height:21px;margin-top:8px;word-wrap:break-word._1qiHDKK74j6hUNxM0p9ZIpmargin-top:12px.isNotInButtons2020 ._1eMniuqQCoYf3kOpyx83Jjdisplay:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;width:100%;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;margin-bottom:8px.isNotInButtons2020 ._326PJFFRv8chYfOlaEYmGtdisplay:-ms-flexbox;display:flex.isNotInButtons2020 .Jy6FIGP1NvWbVjQZN7FHA,.isNotInButtons2020 ._326PJFFRv8chYfOlaEYmGtwidth:100%;font-size:14px;font-weight:700;letter-spacing:.5px;line-height:32px;text-transform:uppercase;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:0 16px.isNotInButtons2020 .Jy6FIGP1NvWbVjQZN7FHAdisplay:block;margin-top:11px.isNotInButtons2020 ._1cDoUuVvel5B1n5wa3K507display:block;padding:0 16px;width:100%;font-size:14px;font-weight:700;letter-spacing:.5px;line-height:32px;text-transform:uppercase;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;margin-top:11px;text-transform:unset.isInButtons2020 .Jy6FIGP1NvWbVjQZN7FHA,.isInButtons2020 ._326PJFFRv8chYfOlaEYmGt,.isInButtons2020 ._1eMniuqQCoYf3kOpyx83Jj,.isInButtons2020 ._1cDoUuVvel5B1n5wa3K507-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;margin-top:12px;width:100%.isInButtons2020 ._1eMniuqQCoYf3kOpyx83Jjmargin-bottom:8px._2_w8DCFR-DCxgxlP1SGNq5margin-right:4px;vertical-align:middle._1aS-wQ7rpbcxKT0d5kjrbhborder-radius:4px;display:inline-block;padding:4px._2cn386lOe1A_DTmBUA-qSMborder-top:1px solid var(--newCommunityTheme-widgetColors-lineColor);margin-top:10px._2Zdkj7cQEO3zSGHGK2XnZvdisplay:inline-block.wzFxUZxKK8HkWiEhs0tyEfont-size:12px;font-weight:700;line-height:16px;color:var(--newCommunityTheme-button);cursor:pointer;text-align:left;margin-top:2px._3R24jLERJTaoRbM_vYd9v0._3R24jLERJTaoRbM_vYd9v0._3R24jLERJTaoRbM_vYd9v0display:none._38lwnrIpIyqxDfAF1iwhcVbackground-color:var(--newRedditTheme-line);border:none;height:1px;margin:16px 0.yobE-ux_T1smVDcFMMKFvfont-size:16px;font-weight:500;line-height:20px._2DVpJZAGplELzFy4mB0epQmargin-top:8px._2DVpJZAGplELzFy4mB0epQ .x1f6lYW8eQcUFu0VIPZzbcolor:inherit._2DVpJZAGplELzFy4mB0epQ svg.LTiNLdCS1ZPRx9wBlY2rDcolor:inherit;fill:inherit;padding-right:8px._2DVpJZAGplELzFy4mB0epQ ._18e78ihYD3tNypPhtYISq3font-family:Noto Sans,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-weight:400;line-height:18px;color:inherit .LalRrQILNjt65y-p-QlWHfill:var(--newRedditTheme-actionIcon);height:18px;width:18px.LalRrQILNjt65y-p-QlWH rectstroke:var(--newRedditTheme-metaText)._3J2-xIxxxP9ISzeLWCOUVcheight:18px.FyLpt0kIWG1bTDWZ8HIL1margin-top:4px._2ntJEAiwKXBGvxrJiqxx_2,._1SqBC7PQ5dMOdF0MhPIkA8height:24px;vertical-align:middle;width:24px._1SqBC7PQ5dMOdF0MhPIkA8-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center ._2a172ppKObqWfRHr8eWBKV-ms-flex-negative:0;flex-shrink:0;margin-right:8px._39-woRduNuowN7G4JTW4I8border-top:1px solid var(--newCommunityTheme-widgetColors-lineColor);margin-top:12px;padding-top:12px._3AOoBdXa2QKVKqIEmG7Vkbfont-size:12px;font-weight:400;line-height:16px;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;background-color:var(--newCommunityTheme-body);border-radius:4px;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;margin-top:12px.vzEDg-tM8ZDpEfJnbaJuUcolor:var(--newCommunityTheme-button);fill:var(--newCommunityTheme-button);height:14px;width:14px.r51dfG6q3N-4exmkjHQg_font-size:10px;font-weight:700;letter-spacing:.5px;line-height:12px;text-transform:uppercase;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between._2ygXHcy_x6RG74BMk0UKkNmargin-left:8px._2BnLYNBALzjH6p_ollJ-RFdisplay:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;margin-left:auto._1-25VxiIsZFVU88qFh-T8ppadding:0._3BmRwhm18nr4GmDhkoSgtbcolor:var(--newCommunityTheme-bodyText);-ms-flex:0 0 auto;flex:0 0 auto;line-height:16px ._3Qx5bBCG_O8wVZee9J-KyJborder-top:1px solid var(--newRedditTheme-line);margin-top:16px;padding-top:16px._3Qx5bBCG_O8wVZee9J-KyJ ._2NbKFI9n3wPM76pgfAPEsNmargin:0;padding:0._3Qx5bBCG_O8wVZee9J-KyJ ._2NbKFI9n3wPM76pgfAPEsN ._2btz68cXFBI3RWcfSNwbmJfont-family:Noto Sans,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-weight:400;line-height:21px;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;margin:8px 0._3Qx5bBCG_O8wVZee9J-KyJ ._2NbKFI9n3wPM76pgfAPEsN ._2btz68cXFBI3RWcfSNwbmJ.QgBK4ECuqpeR2umRjYcP2opacity:.4._3Qx5bBCG_O8wVZee9J-KyJ ._2NbKFI9n3wPM76pgfAPEsN ._2btz68cXFBI3RWcfSNwbmJ labelfont-size:12px;font-weight:500;line-height:16px;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center._3Qx5bBCG_O8wVZee9J-KyJ ._2NbKFI9n3wPM76pgfAPEsN ._2btz68cXFBI3RWcfSNwbmJ label svgfill:currentColor;height:20px;margin-right:4px;width:20px._3Qx5bBCG_O8wVZee9J-KyJ ._4OtOUaGIjjp2cNJMUxme_-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;padding:0;width:100%._3Qx5bBCG_O8wVZee9J-KyJ ._4OtOUaGIjjp2cNJMUxme_ svgdisplay:inline-block;height:12px;width:12px.isInButtons2020 ._4OtOUaGIjjp2cNJMUxme_padding:0 12px.isInButtons2020 ._1ra1vBLrjtHjhYDZ_gOy8Ffont-family:Noto Sans,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;font-weight:700;letter-spacing:unset;line-height:16px;text-transform:unset._1ra1vBLrjtHjhYDZ_gOy8F--textColor:var(--newCommunityTheme-widgetColors-sidebarWidgetTextColor);--textColorHover:var(--newCommunityTheme-widgetColors-sidebarWidgetTextColorShaded80);font-size:10px;font-weight:700;letter-spacing:.5px;line-height:12px;text-transform:uppercase;color:var(--textColor);fill:var(--textColor);opacity:1._1ra1vBLrjtHjhYDZ_gOy8F._2UlgIO1LIFVpT30ItAtPfb--textColor:var(--newRedditTheme-widgetColors-sidebarWidgetTextColor);--textColorHover:var(--newRedditTheme-widgetColors-sidebarWidgetTextColorShaded80)._1ra1vBLrjtHjhYDZ_gOy8F:active,._1ra1vBLrjtHjhYDZ_gOy8F:hovercolor:var(--textColorHover);fill:var(--textColorHover)._1ra1vBLrjtHjhYDZ_gOy8F:disabled,._1ra1vBLrjtHjhYDZ_gOy8F[data-disabled],._1ra1vBLrjtHjhYDZ_gOy8F[disabled]opacity:.5;cursor:not-allowed.isInIcons2020 ._3a4fkgD25f5G-b0Y8wVIBemargin-right:8px .c_dVyWK3BXRxSN3ULLJ_tborder-radius:4px 4px 0 0;height:34px;left:0;position:absolute;right:0;top:0._1OQL3FCA9BfgI57ghHHgV3-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-ms-flex-pack:start;justify-content:flex-start;margin-top:32px._1OQL3FCA9BfgI57ghHHgV3 ._33jgwegeMTJ-FJaaHMeOjVborder-radius:9001px;height:32px;width:32px._1OQL3FCA9BfgI57ghHHgV3 ._1wQQNkVR4qNpQCzA19X4B6height:16px;margin-left:8px;width:200px._39IvqNe6cqNVXcMFxFWFxxdisplay:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;margin:12px 0._39IvqNe6cqNVXcMFxFWFxx ._29TSdL_ZMpyzfQ_bfdcBSc-ms-flex:1;flex:1._39IvqNe6cqNVXcMFxFWFxx .JEV9fXVlt_7DgH-zLepBHheight:18px;width:50px._39IvqNe6cqNVXcMFxFWFxx ._3YCOmnWpGeRBW_Psd5WMPRheight:12px;margin-top:4px;width:60px._2iO5zt81CSiYhWRF9WylyNheight:18px;margin-bottom:4px._2iO5zt81CSiYhWRF9WylyN._2E9u5XvlGwlpnzki78vasGwidth:230px._2iO5zt81CSiYhWRF9WylyN.fDElwzn43eJToKzSCkejEwidth:100%._2iO5zt81CSiYhWRF9WylyN._2kNB7LAYYqYdyS85f8pqfiwidth:250px._2iO5zt81CSiYhWRF9WylyN._1XmngqAPKZO_1lDBwcQrR7width:120px._3XbVvl-zJDbcDeEdSgxV4_border-radius:4px;height:32px;margin-top:16px;width:100%._2hgXdc8jVQaXYAXvnqEyEDanimation:_3XkHjK4wMgxtjzC1TvoXrb 1.5s ease infinite;background:linear-gradient(90deg,var(--newCommunityTheme-field),var(--newCommunityTheme-inactive),var(--newCommunityTheme-field));background-size:200%._1KWSZXqSM_BLhBzkPyJFGRbackground-color:var(--newCommunityTheme-widgetColors-sidebarWidgetBackgroundColor);border-radius:4px;padding:12px;position:relative;width:auto /*# sourceMappingURL=https://www.redditstatic.com/desktop2x/chunkCSS/IdCard.80f3288bcfb1334f33fa.css.map*/]]>
ปอยเปต คาสิโน เกมส์ยิ่งปลา คาสิโน ได้เงินจริงไหม เล่น คาสิโน คาสิโน191 คาสิโน 88
J.J. Watt could screw over Texans and sign with AFC rival
By admin | | 0 Comments |

Would J.J. Watt head to the Music City? The Houston Texans will begin a new era down at NRG following recent decision making. The Texans and defensive end J.J. Watt elected to part ways after a decade of success.The Texans will save not just $17.5 million in cap space, but they’ll also save a legacy of Watt’s time with the franchise. That could be one of the few players who is given that treatment under the new regime of Nick Caserio, Jack Easterby and Cal McNair.I don't know if this will mean anything in the whole scheme of things when JJ Watt signs with a new team, but the Titans need a pass rusher, and owner Amy Adams gave $1 million to his Hurricane Harvey relief fund. Not to mention Watt's good relationship with Mike Vrabel, too.— John McClain (@McClain_on_NFL) February 15, 2021Watt now will have the option to sign with any team on the market, but could he be petty and stay in the division? If so, the Tennessee Titans would be a team to watch for due to the connection between Watt and head coach Mike Vrabel.I don't know if this will mean anything in the whole scheme of things when JJ Watt signs with a new team, but the Titans need a pass rusher, and owner Amy Adams gave $1 million to his Hurricane Harvey relief fund. Not to mention Watt's good relationship with Mike Vrabel, too.— John McClain (@McClain_on_NFL) February 15, 2021Should the Titans look to invest in Watt?Watt and Vrabel have ties due to their time in Houston. Vrabel worked under Bill O’Brien as the team’s linebacker coach and later defensive coordinator from 2014-17. During that span, Houston never finished below a top 10 in total defense.It’s more than that for the Titans though. Back in 2017, Watt’s foundation helped raise over $41.5 million in Hurricane Harvey relief for the city of Houston. Titans owner, Amy Adams, donated $1 million out of pocket to help the home of the AFC South franchise recover after a year of so much travesty.That, plus Watt’s relationship with the former defensive coordinator seems to connect Tennessee as a potential free agent destination.The Titans defense finished 28th in total yards allowed last season and 30th in total sacks with 19. They also were among the worst teams in terms of stopping offenses on third down, allowing them to convert over 54 percent of the time.Watt’s addition to the front seven would be terrifying for a team looking to rebound. His ability to add pressure in the backfield still allows him to be one of the top pass rushers in the league at 32. However, would he be willing to sign for a lower price?With Houston shipping players off left and right for the past several seasons, it would make sense for revenge games to be on the schedule. However, Watt might be willing to join Tennessee, not due to the rivalry, but rather the camaraderie between him and a coach.In the end, respect is earned. The Titans’ past might have gained their shot back in 2017.
คาสิโน มือถือ คาสิโน ฝากถอนไม่มีขั้นต่ำ ไลน์ คาสิโน คาสิโน sagame350 คาสิโน ออนไลน์ ได้เงินจริงฟรีเครดิต
Criticisms of Michael Slepian’s Stanford study on poker tells and hand movements (published 2015)
By admin | | 0 Comments |

Some places the study was featured. The following is reposted from a 2015 piece I wrote for Bluff magazine. It was originally located at this URL but has become unavailable due to Bluff going out of business. I saw this study mentioned recently in Maria Konnikova’s book ‘The Biggest Bluff’ and was reminded about this piece and noticed it was offline, so I wanted to share it again. A few notes on this piece: The original title below and was more negative-sounding than I liked; Bluff chose it. Also, if I could rewrite this piece now, I’d probably choose less negative-sounding phrasing in some places.  Regardless of the exact factors that might be at work in the found correlation, I realize it’s scientifically interesting that a significant correlation was found. But I also think it’s possible to draw simplistic and wrong conclusions from the study, and my piece hopefully gives more context about the factors that might be at work. Image on left taken from Michael Slepian’s media page. The Slepian Study on Betting Motions Doesn’t Pass Muster A 2013 study¹ conducted at Stanford University by graduate student Michael Slepian and associates found a correlation between the “smoothness” of a betting motion and the strength of the bettor’s hand. In a nutshell, there was a positive correlation found between betting motions perceived as “smooth” and “confident” and strong hands. The quality of the betting motions was judged by having experiment participants watch short clips of players making bets (taken from the 2009 WSOP Main Event) and estimate the hand strength of those bets. This experiment has gotten a lot of press over the last couple years. I first heard about it on NPR. Since, I’ve seen it referenced in poker blogs and articles and in a few mainstream news articles. I still occasionally hear people talk about it at the table when I play. I’ve had friends and family members reference it and send me links to it. It’s kind of weird how much attention it received, considering the tons of interesting studies that are constantly being done, but I guess it can be chalked up to the mystique and “sexiness” of poker tells. The article had more than casual interest for me. I’m a former professional poker player and the author of two books on poker behavior: Reading Poker Tells and Verbal Poker Tells. I’ve been asked quite a few times about my opinion on this study, and I’ve been meaning to look at the study more closely and write up my thoughts for a while. In this article, I’ll give some criticisms of the study and some suggestions for how this study (and similar studies) could be done better. This isn’t to denigrate the work of the experiment’s designers. I think this is an interesting study, and I hope it will encourage similar studies using poker as a means to study human behavior. But I do think it was flawed in a few ways, and it could be improved in many ways. That’s not to say that I think their conclusion is wrong; in fact, in my own experience, I think their conclusion is correct. I do, however, think it’s a very weak general correlation and will only be practically useful if you have a player-specific behavioral baseline. My main point is that this study is not enough, on its own, to cause us to be confident about the conclusion. I’ll give a few reasons for why I think the study is flawed, but the primary underlying reason is a common one for studies involving poker: the study’s organizers just don’t know enough about how poker works. I’ve read about several experiments involving poker where the organizers were very ignorant about some basic aspects of poker, and this affected the way the tests were set up and the conclusions that were reached (and this probably applies not just to poker-related studies but to many studies that involve an activity that requires a lot of experience to understand well). Poker can seem deceptively simple to people first learning it, and even to people who have played it for decades. Many bad players lose money at poker while believing that they’re good, or even great players. In the same way, experiment designers may falsely believe they understand the factors involved in a poker hand, while being far off the mark. Here are the flaws, as I see them, in this study: 1. The experimenters refer to all WSOP entrants as ‘professional poker players.’ This first mistake wouldn’t directly affect the experiment, but it does point to a basic misunderstanding of poker and the World Series of Poker, which might indirectly affect other aspects of the experiment and its conclusions. Here are a couple examples of this from the study: The World Series of Poker (WSOP), originating in 1970, brings together professional poker players every year (from the study’s supplemental materials) These findings are notable because the players in the stimulus clips were highly expert professionals competing in the high-stakes WSOP tournament. The WSOP Main Event is open to anyone and most entrants are far from being professional poker players. Categorizing someone’s poker skill can be difficult and subjective, but Kevin Mathers, a long-time poker industry worker, estimates that only 20% of WSOP Main Event entrants are professional (or professional-level) players. This also weakens the conclusion that the results are impressive due to the players analyzed being professional-level. While the correlation found in this experiment is still interesting, it is somewhat expected that amateur players would have behavioral inconsistencies. I’d be confident in predicting that a similar study done on only video clips of bets made by professional poker players would not find such a clear correlation. 2. Hand strength is based on comparing players’ hands This is a line from the study that explains their methodology for categorizing a player’s hand as ‘weak’ or ‘strong’: Each player’s objective likelihood of winning during the bet was known (WSOP displays these statistics on-screen; however, we kept this information from participants by obscuring part of the screen). They relied on the on-screen percentage graphics, which are displayed beside a player’s hand graphics in the broadcast. These graphics show the likelihood of a player’s hand winning; it does this by comparing it to the other players’ known hands. This makes it an illogical way to categorize whether a player believes he is betting a weak or strong hand. If this isn’t clear, here’s a quick example to make my point: A player has QQ and makes an all-in bet on a turn board of Q-10-10-8. Most people would say that this player has a strong hand and has every reason to believe he has a strong hand. But, if his opponent had 10-10, the player with Q-Q would have a 2.27% chance of winning with one card to come. According to this methodology, the player with the Q-Q would be judged as having a weak hand; if the test participants categorized that bet as representing a strong hand, they would be wrong. It’s not stated in the study or the supplemental materials if the experimenters accounted for such obvious cases of how using the percentage graphics might skew the results. It’s also not stated how the experimenters would handle river (last-round) bets, when one hand has a 100 percent winning percentage and the losing hand has 0 percent (the only exception would be a tie). It’s admittedly difficult to come up with hard-and-fast rules for categorizing hand strength for the purposes of such an experiment. As someone who has thought more than most about this problem, for the purpose of analyzing and categorizing poker tells, I know it’s a difficult task. But using the known percentages of one hand beating another known hand is clearly a flawed approach. The optimal approach would probably be to come up with a system that pits a poker hand against a logical hand range, considering the situation, or even a random hand range, and uses that percentage-of-winning to rank the player’s hand strength. If this resulted in too much hand-strength ambiguity, the experiment designers could throw out all hands where the hand strength fell within a certain medium-strength range. Such an approach would make it more likely that only strong hand bets and weak hand bets were being used and, equally important for an experiment like this, that the player believed he or she was betting either a strong or weak hand. 3. Situational factors were not used to categorize betting motions When considering poker-related behavior, situations are very important. A small continuation-bet on the flop is different in many ways from an all-in bet on the river. One way they are different: a small bet is unlikely to cause stress in the bettor, even if the bettor has a weak hand. Also, a player making a bet on an early round has a chance for improving his hand; whereas a player betting on the river has no chance to improve his hand. When a player bets on the river, he will almost always know whether he is bluffing or value-betting; this is often not the case on earlier rounds, when hand strength is more ambiguous and undefined. This experiment had no system for selecting the bets they chose for inclusion in the study. The usability of the clips was apparently based only on whether the clip meant certain visual needs of the experiment: i.e., did the footage show the entirety of the betting action and did it show the required amount of the bettor’s body? From the study: Research assistants, blind to experimental hypotheses, extracted each usable video in each installment, and in total extracted 22 videos (a standard number of stimuli for such studies; Ambady & Rosenthal, 1993) for Study 2 in the main text. Study 1 videos required a single player be in the frame from the chest-up, allowing for whole-body, face-only, and arms-only videos to be created by cropping the videos. These videos were therefore more rare, and the research assistants only acquired 20 such videos. The fact that clips were chosen only based on what they showed is not necessarily a problem. If a hand can be accurately categorized as strong or weak, then it doesn’t necessarily matter when during a hand it occurred. If there is a correlation between perceived betting motion quality and hand strength, then it will probably make itself known no matter the context of the bet. Choosing bets only from specific situations would have made the experiment stronger and probably would have led to more definite conclusions. It could also help address the problem of categorizing hand strength. For example, if the experiment designers had only considered bets above a certain size that had occurred on the river (when all cards are out and there are no draws or semi-bluffs to be made), then that would result in polarized hand strengths (i.e., these bets would be very likely to be made with either strong or weak hands). Also, the experiment’s method for picking clips sounds like it could theoretically result in all strong-hand bets being picked, or all weak-hand bets being picked. There is nothing in the experiment description that requires a certain amount of weak hands or strong hands. This is not in itself bad, but could affect the experiment in unforeseen ways. For example, if most of the betting motion clips chosen were taken from players betting strong hands (which would not be surprising, as most significant bets, especially post-flop, are for value), then this could introduce some unforeseen bias into the experiment. One way this might happen: when a video clip shows only the betting motion (and not, for example, the bettor’s entire torso or just the face, as were shown to some study groups), this focus might emphasize the bet in the viewer’s mind and make the bet seem stronger. And if most of the hands-only betting clips were of strong-hand bets (and I have no idea how many were), the study participants watching only the hand-motion betting clips would falsely appear to be making good guesses. My main point here is that thinking about the situational factors of a betting motion, and incorporating that into the experiment in some way, would have resulted in less ambiguity about the results. (It appears that it was difficult to find usable clips from a single WSOP event; in that case, the experimenters could just add footage from another WSOP Main Event to the study.) 4. The number of chips bet was not taken into account The experiment designers did not take into account the chips that were bet. In their words: During betting, each player pushes poker chips into the center of the table. Each chip has a specific color, which indicates a specific value. These values range from $25 to $100,000. This range of chip values has a crucial consequence for the current work. The number of chips does not correlate with the quality of the hand (see Table 1A in the main text). Players could move a stack of 20 chips into the center of the table, and this could be worth $500 or $2,000,000 (the winner of the 2009 WSOP won $8,547,042, thus the latter bet magnitude is a bet that can be made in the WSOP). Because no participants were professional poker players, nor considered themselves poker experts, they were not aware of chip values. They could not, then, use the number of chips as a valid cue to judge poker hand quality. It’s true that your average person would not know what the chip colors at the WSOP Main Event mean. But it seems naïve to think that seeing the chips being bet couldn’t possibly have an effect on the experiment. For one thing, the number of chips being bet could bias a participant to think a bet was stronger or weaker, whether correctly or incorrectly. What if all the strong-hand bets in the study were also bets that involved a lot of chips? (This is not implausible because smaller bets with weak hands are common early in a hand, when bets are small, whereas larger bets later in the hand are more likely to represent strong hands.) And what if some of the study participants were able to deduce (consciously or unconsciously) the strength of the bet from the number of chips? Also, it’s possible that some of the test participants were knowledgeable (consciously or not) about some WSOP chip colors and what their denominations were. Or they were able to deduce (consciously or not), from the arrangement and number of chips, what the chip values were. (For example, large denomination chips are generally required to be kept at the front of a player’s stack.) Again, this could have been addressed by selecting bets taken only from specific situations and only of certain bet sizes. If all bets chosen were above a certain bet size, and this was communicated to the study participants, then this would have lessened the impact of the chips being able to be seen. 5. Quality of “smoothness” was subjective The experiment was based on the perceptions of study participants watching the assembled video clips. It was not based on objective measurements of what constitutes “smoothness” of a betting motion. This was a known issue in the experiment: Thus, both player confidence and smoothness judgments significantly predicted likelihoods of winning, which suggests that movement smoothness might be a valid cue for assessing poker hand quality. It is unknown, however, how participants interpreted “smoothness” or whether the players’ movements that participants rated as smooth were truly smoother than other players’ movements. Other physical factors, such as speed, likely played a role. This is not a major criticism; I think using perception is a fine way to find a correlation, especially for a preliminary study. But I think it does mean that we have no reason to be confident in the idea that smoothness of betting motion is correlated with hand strength. If there is are correlations between betting motion and hand strength (which I believe there are), these could be due to other aspects of arm motion or hand motion, such as: the betting speed, the position of the hands, the height of the hand, or other, more obscure, factors. In summary Again, I don’t mean to denigrate the experiment designers and the work they’ve done. I think this was an interesting experiment, and I think it’s probable the correlation they noticed exists (however weak the correlation may be). Also, as someone who is very interested in poker behavior, I’d love to see similar studies be done. My main goal in writing these criticisms and suggestions was to emphasize that poker is complex, as is poker behavior. There are many behavioral factors in a seemingly simple hand of poker and taking these factors into account can make an experiment stronger and the results more conclusive. Patricia Cardner, PhD, EdD, is a poker player and the author of Positive Poker, a book about the psychological characteristics of professional poker players. She had this to say about poker’s use in scientific studies: “While researchers often have the best of intentions, it is difficult for them to fully understand the nuances of poker. Researchers who reach out to poker players for help can make more informed decisions about the research areas they choose to pursue, increase reliability and validity, and improve the overall quality of their results and conclusions.” ¹: Slepian, M.L., Young, S.G., Rutchick, A.M. & Ambady, N. Quality of Professional Players’ Poker Hands Is Perceived Accurately From Arm Motions. Psychological Science (2013) 24(11) 2335–2338. Related
หวยออนไลน์ เล่นหวยออนไลน์ ไพ่ออนไลน์ เว็บ คาสิโน คาสิโน777
I’m starving to death
By admin | | 0 Comments |

 and heres the reason why. ive got no food in my hotel room, and its too late at night to buy groceries and i forgot to stop at a convenience store enroute home. this is why i hate the fact theres no 24 hour walmarts no more since the virus. And i dont want to get back out of bed. i bought a little food when i took this hotel room for 3 nights, when i had to check out of my other airbnb. (i had been doing one month at a time and someone had it booked up for moving in mid february so i couldnt renew for another month). i didnt buy quite enough, i wouldve bought more, but the fridge was so small it didnt have a freezer. i dont want to say which hotel im at of course, but i thought this was a far nicer brand because in many cities, this chain would be over $100. but i paid $209 for 3 nights. still thats high paying by the day, because if 3 days is $209, guess how much that makes 30 days when u add a zero. not only did i not buy enough food since i didnt have a freezer to store burritos and frozen meals, the shower will not work properly because i cant adjust the water to make it hotter so its not too cold. i cant imagine anyone not wanting to use hot water for a shower. only thing that does work really well in here is the wifi. and some (but i doubt 52 social but maybe im wrong) will be closed monday, due to very cold icy lousy winter weather which is unheard of here in texas. its rarely below 40 in the winter and certainly no snow this far south. but we are supposed to be 14 degrees monday. Kerrville TX, a couple hundred miles or more further west, is only going to be 7 degrees. no one is used to driving on ice so there will be hundreds of accidents hopefully not as bad in the terrible one in fort worth the other day all over the news which involved 100 vehicles and multiple deaths. i dont think id have an easy time finding an Uber that day to buy food without huge surcharges. local schools are closing. a lot of texas will have ice and snow, theres winter storm warnings for almost the entire state. now about that hand i promised to share on twitter in this blog, i had made so many rebuys and addons due to not getting any hands and starting to get tired since id played at a different casino for 3-4 hours earlier, id totally lost track of how much money i was in for and i dont normally do that, but i wouldnt know til i got home and read the paper listing the amount of cash i had when i left my room. id just got done adding on a few more hundred and had a bit less than $500 in front of me when the following hand occured. a guy makes it $15 that id seen capable of folding the other day when i reraised big preflop. one guy called and i decided to make it $70 with Q4 of clubs in late position, and we are deep stacked, all 3 of us. the only thing i have working for me is my tight image and position, and of course i am very much on tilt and want to quit the game, but sure not when im stuck.one guy called. the original raiser. flop comes 225 or 255. i dont even remember. all i remember is i bet but not the amount i bet. and he called me. Turn comes 3 which improved my hand slightly to a draw, but no flush draw. i remember betting $150 and he thinks and then goes allin. turns out later he has 99. i guess he read my tilted image well.we agree to run it twice, and i hit the A on top for a straight, and a Q on the bottom for two pair and i scooped the pot where i doubled up and cashed out $1036 and left due to the fact i couldnt play worth a shit and knew id got unstuck. turned out when i got home i was up over $300.a little more than i thought i was. Since i was up over $180 at one point before i got stuck, i felt stuck more than i actually was. i thought i was only up about $200 after winning the pot. 
คาสิโน888 คาสิโน88 เกม คาสิโน เกมส์ คาสิโน ts911 คาสิโน ออนไลน์
1 2 3 167