คาสิโน ฟรีเครดิต 2020
22Bet ประกาศข้อเสนอคืนเงินสำหรับการแข่งขันเทควันโดชิงแชมป์โลกแบบไม่หยุดยั้ง
By admin | | 0 Comments |

22Bet ได้เปิดตัวข้อเสนอการคืนเงินสำหรับ 20H IIHF World Championship โปรโมชั่นนี้ช่วยให้ผู้เล่นได้รับเงินสด 8% เป็นประวัติการณ์สูงถึงເອີ 1,000 เมื่อปีที่แล้ว 22Bet ได้ยกระดับโปรโมชั่นหนังสือกีฬาโดยเสนอขายรถยนต์หลายคัน ตอนนี้ บริษัท ตั้งเป้าที่จะเขย่าตลาดอีกครั้งโดยเสนอเดิมพันที่ดีขึ้นสำหรับฟุตบอลโลก IIHF Hockey World Cup ปี 2021 ที่ริกาประเทศลัตเวีย นี่คือสิ่งที่คุณคาดหวังได้จากโปรโมชั่น: เงินคืน: 8% ของยอดเดิมพันทั้งหมดວາງการคืนเงินขั้นต่ำ ຳ: จำนวนเงินคืนสูงสุด 10 ยูโร: ເອີ 1,000 สิทธิ์: การเดิมพันในข้อเสนอของ IIHF World Championship Game Chance 1 เดือน: ฟรีเครดิตวันที่: เมืองเจ้าภาพและสนามกีฬาชิงแชมป์โลก IIHF ปี 2021 จัดขึ้นที่เมืองริกาประเทศลัตเวีย การแข่งขันจะเล่นที่สนามกีฬาสองแห่งคือศูนย์กีฬาโอลิมปิกและสนามกีฬาริกา สถานที่แรกจุผู้ชมได้ 6,200 คนในขณะที่สถานที่ที่สองจุได้ 10,300 คน ในตอนแรกมินสค์เบลารุสได้รับเลือกให้เป็นเจ้าภาพร่วม แต่ประเทศในยุโรปตะวันออกถูกละเมิดเนื่องจากสถานการณ์ด้านความปลอดภัยและความปลอดภัยในประเทศ ทีมและทีมชิงแชมป์โลก IIHF จะมีตัวแทนจาก 15 ประเทศและคณะกรรมการโอลิมปิก 1 ทีม (เป็นตัวแทนนักกีฬาจากรัสเซียซึ่งทีมชาติถูกห้ามไม่ให้แข่งขันเนื่องจากถูกคุมขัง) คณะกรรมการแบ่งออกเป็นสองกลุ่มดังต่อไปนี้: กลุ่ม A, กลุ่ม B, คณะกรรมการโอลิมปิก, รัสเซีย, แคนาดา, สวีเดน, ฟินแลนด์, สาธารณรัฐเช็ก, สหรัฐอเมริกา, สวิตเซอร์แลนด์, เยอรมนี, สโลวาเกีย, ลัตเวีย, เดนมาร์ก, นอร์เวย์, เบลารุส, บริเตนใหญ่, ผู้ยิ่งใหญ่คาซัคสถาน 2021 IIHF World Championship Odds ตามส่วนใหญ่ ทั้งสองทีมสามารถได้รับการสนับสนุนสำหรับอัตราต่อรองระหว่าง 3.25 ถึง 5.50 คุณเป็นแฟนของการเดิมพันที่คิดไม่ถึงหรือไม่? จากนั้นกลับไปที่บริเตนใหญ่ในตลาดผู้ชนะทั้งหมดและรับสูงถึง 1,500: 1 เดิมพัน 100 ยูโรในโอกาสแปลก ๆ เหล่านี้และคุณจะกลับบ้านพร้อมຄວາມ 150,000 เจ๋งถ้าทีม GB ได้ถ้วย IIHF ข้อห้ามสำหรับ COVID-19 ชิงแชมป์โลก IIHF ปี 2021 เนื่องจากการแพร่ระบาด IIHF ต้องใช้มาตรการด้านความปลอดภัยเพิ่มเติมเพื่อปกป้องสุขภาพของผู้เล่นโค้ชและเจ้าหน้าที่: เกมทั้งหมดจะเล่นในเมืองเดียวกัน (ริกาลัตเวีย) ทั้ง 16 ทีมจะอยู่ในโรงแรมเดียว ห้ามมิให้แฟนเพลงเข้าร่วมงาน วิธีการเดิมพันในเกมชิงแชมป์โลก IIHF ปี 2021 ผู้ใช้ 22Bet จะสามารถวางเดิมพันและเดิมพันในเกมชิงแชมป์โลก IIHF ปี 2021 ทั้งหมดได้ แต่ละเกมมาพร้อมกับลายเซ็นของเราซึ่งเป็นตัวเลือกชั้นนำของอุตสาหกรรมในตลาดการพนันกีฬา ผู้เล่นบน 22Bet จะสามารถรับโบนัสเงินฝาก 100% ในครั้งแรกที่โพสต์ โบนัสเหล่านี้สามารถใช้เพื่อสะสมเดิมพันในเกม IIHF Championship ทั้งหมด
คาสิโน มือถือ คาสิโน ฝากถอนไม่มีขั้นต่ำ ไลน์ คาสิโน คาสิโน sagame350 คาสิโน ออนไลน์ ได้เงินจริงฟรีเครดิต
5 กิจกรรมสนุก ๆ รับซัมเมอร์นี้
By admin | | 0 Comments |

ในที่สุดฤดูร้อนก็มาถึงแล้ว! อย่างไรก็ตามความตื่นเต้นของฤดูกาลที่รอคอยมากที่สุดได้หายไปเล็กน้อยท่ามกลางการแพร่ระบาด เป็นเรื่องปกติมากที่จะเบื่อและคิดถึงยุคโรคระบาดเพราะเราถูกขังอยู่ในบ้านอย่างปลอดภัย นั่นคือวันที่เราทำแผนฤดูร้อนเต็มรูปแบบ ทุกอย่างเป็นไปได้ตั้งแต่วันหยุดพักผ่อนไปจนถึงการสังสรรค์กับเพื่อน ๆ แต่ชีวิตเปลี่ยนไปสำหรับทุกคนและเราไม่สามารถทำอะไรกับมันได้ เพื่อให้เกิดประโยชน์สูงสุดเราได้จัดทำโซลูชันเสมือนจริงสองสามอย่างเพื่อ "รักษาความปลอดภัยและสุขภาพที่ดี" ไว้ที่บ้าน อ่านต่อเพื่อค้นหาวิธีแก้ปัญหาเหล่านี้ การเปิดตัว OTT ล่าสุดของ Binge-watch เรารู้ว่านี่เป็น "สิ่งสนุก ๆ " ที่คุณสามารถหาได้จากเว็บไซต์ออนไลน์ใด ๆ ปีที่แล้วเราเห็น OTT ออกมามากมายและมันก็คุ้มค่า มีซีรีส์และภาพยนตร์หลายเรื่องที่คาดว่าจะดึงดูดคุณได้ยาวนานที่สุดในปีนี้เช่นกัน นอกจากนี้ยังเป็นวิธีที่ดีที่สุดในการฆ่าเวลาในระหว่างการกักกัน บางทีการผูกพันกับคนที่รักอาจเป็นข้อแก้ตัวที่ดี เตรียมของว่างที่คุณชื่นชอบและเพลิดเพลินไปกับความสนุกสนานละครและความบันเทิงที่จริงจัง! การเล่นเกมออนไลน์การเล่นเกมเป็นหนึ่งในกิจกรรมยามว่างที่ได้รับความนิยมมากที่สุด ผู้ที่ไม่ใช่นักเล่นเกมจำนวนมากหันมาใช้โลกแห่งความเป็นจริงเช่นเดียวกับเกมออนไลน์เพื่อเอาชนะความเบื่อหน่ายจากการล็อก มีเกมมากมายที่คุณสามารถเล่นออนไลน์ได้ คุณสามารถเริ่มต้นด้วยเกมโปรดที่คุณชื่นชอบในโลกแห่งความเป็นจริง ตัวอย่างเช่นเหล้ารัมของอินเดียเป็นที่นิยมอย่างมากและมีผู้เล่นหลายล้านคนที่ชื่นชอบเกมนี้ ผู้ให้บริการรัมมี่ออนไลน์ยอดนิยมเช่น Junglee Rummy เป็นเจ้าภาพจัดการแข่งขันที่น่าตื่นเต้นทุกสัปดาห์และทุกเดือน ผู้เล่นสามารถแสดงทักษะของตนเองและรับรางวัลที่น่าทึ่งรวมถึงรูปีและรางวัลเงินสดเทียบเท่ากับรูปี การเล่นเกมออนไลน์อย่างรัมมี่นั้นสนุกและน่าตื่นเต้นแม้ว่าจะปิดอยู่ก็ตาม Board Game Night ใครเกลียดเกมกระดาน? ฉันไม่รู้! ในอดีตฤดูร้อนเป็นเกมกระดานทั้งหมด ตั้งแต่ลูโดไปจนถึงคาร์รอมคุณต้องเติบโตมาพร้อมกับการเล่นเกมที่ยอดเยี่ยมกับเพื่อนและครอบครัวของคุณ การรื้อฟื้นความทรงจำเก่า ๆ ในปี 2021 เป็นอย่างไรบ้าง? ทำความสะอาดสิ่งสกปรกบนกระดานคาร์อมหรือกระดานหมากรุกและเชิญเพื่อนของคุณมาร่วมสนุกกับเกมกระดานยามค่ำคืน บางทีคุณอาจวางแผนการแข่งขันทั้งหมดและเล่นด้วยเงินเดิมพันเพื่อเพิ่มความสนุกเป็นสองเท่า คุณยังสามารถให้ของว่างแก่เพื่อนของคุณเพื่อเล่นเกมหลาย ๆ เกมและจัดปาร์ตี้เล็ก ๆ เนื่องจากการแพร่ระบาดของแฮงเอาท์กลุ่มเสมือนทำให้หลายคนทำงานอยู่ที่บ้านอย่างถาวรและดูเหมือนจะขาดการติดต่อกับโลกภายนอก โชคดีที่มีหลายวิธีในการติดต่อกันโดยไม่ได้พบกับคนที่คุณรัก ด้วยเทคโนโลยีทำให้เราสามารถติดต่อกับญาติและเพื่อนทางไกลได้ ดังนั้นหากคุณพลาดโทรหรือแฮงเอาท์วิดีโอหรือส่งข้อความ แฮงเอาท์กลุ่มเสมือนได้รับความนิยมอย่างมากในช่วงปีที่ผ่านมา ผู้คนติดตั้งแอปอย่าง Google Duo หรือ Zoom และเชื่อมต่อกับผู้คนทั่วโลก !! เรียนรู้ทักษะใหม่ ๆ การเรียนรู้ทักษะใหม่ ๆ จะไม่มีวันล้าสมัย มีเวลาว่างมากมายที่คุณสามารถใช้มันได้หากคุณเรียนรู้ทักษะใหม่ ๆ หากคุณเป็นมืออาชีพในการทำงานคุณสามารถเรียนหลักสูตรออนไลน์เพื่อยกระดับทักษะของคุณได้ หากคุณเป็นนักเรียนคุณสามารถเลือกเรียนภาษาใหม่หรือการเขียนโปรแกรมคอมพิวเตอร์ได้ หากคุณมีกีตาร์อยู่ในร้านคุณสามารถเข้าร่วมหลักสูตรการเรียนรู้กีตาร์ออนไลน์และใช้งานได้ ไม่ว่าคุณจะเรียนรู้ทักษะใดคุณก็จะได้รับประโยชน์จากทักษะนั้นไม่ทางใดก็ทางหนึ่งเสมอ เราหวังว่าวิธีการเหล่านี้จะช่วยคุณและเข้าร่วมการเดินทางของเราเพื่ออยู่ร่วมกันในสัปดาห์ที่อบอุ่นของปี เล่นรัมมี่ออนไลน์และรับรางวัลสุดพิเศษเพื่อทำให้ฤดูร้อนเป็นที่จดจำ ลงทะเบียนสำหรับแพลตฟอร์มที่มีการใช้งานมากที่สุด Junglee Rummy และรับโบนัสต้อนรับ $ 5250 ในบัญชีของคุณ เกมสนุก!
คาสิโน โบนัส 100% คาสิโน โบนัส100% เฮงๆ 666 คาสิโน หวยออนไลน์ แทงบอล
Staying in Control when Playing Poker Online
By admin | | 0 Comments |

Much like when you place a sports bet, gamble in a casino or even try your luck at playing bingo, when you choose to play poker online you do, of course, need to stay in control and have a sensible playing strategy in place. You stand just as much chance of losing when playing poker as when you set about gambling in any shape or form, but the most poker players know there is an element of skill about that game and each of the many different poker game variants, and that is what they are looking to exploit when playing. This article is going to be reminding you of the days of losing control when playing poker online and will additionally ensure that you are away of the many additional tools and options you can take as an online real money poker player to allow you to stay in control when playing too. The first thing I always do advise anyone that wishes to venture into the online poker environment, however, is to first and foremost ensure the sites they choose to play at, if living in the United Kingdom, are those that hold a full UK Gambling Commission issued gambling license. That way above all else you will know the games are fair, your funds are secure at those sites, too, and you will have a range of responsible gambling tools and option settings at your disposal when playing at such sites, too. As for just how you can remove the risk of you being tempted to gamble at those Non GamStop poker sites in the future, well one quite and easy way you can stop yourself from ever being in a position to sign up to those other sites, is by simply downloading a blocker tool onto your computer and mobile devices. Taking Steps to Give Up Gambling You may have come to the conclusion that you do have a gambling problem and when you do then you will always need to know just what help and support is available to you, and there is plenty of support out there if you are prepared to reach out and ask for it. As for what ways you can set about getting help and support with any gambling problems you do have, spend as much time as you need and require checking out websites such at both the Gamblers Anonymous and GamCare websites. They both offer a lot of practical advice and will certainly point you in the right direction of where to get help with any gambling problems. Keep in mind though that once you do admit to yourself that you have a gambling problem you are going to have to start closing down online and mobile gambling site accounts that you have, and that could take you quite some time of course if you have lots of such accounts open. However, you can head on over to the GamStop website right now and what you can do when you arrive at their website is sign up to their United Kingdom gambling industry wide self-exclusion register. On you have signed up onto that register all United Kingdom-based gambling site operators are then going to close your accounts with them down and to ensure you do not try to gamble at those sites again in the future each of them will block you from being able to do so. Stay Away from Non-UK Licensed Poker Sites One final thing that you need bringing to your attention, if you are now determined to give up playing poker and gambling online, is that there are quite a number of casinos, poker and other gambling sites that are not located or licensed in the United Kingdom. That does, of course, mean that even if you do sign up to the GamStop self-exclusion register you are still always going to be more than welcome to sign up to and then gamble at those other sites and will never be blocked form doing so even if you are on that register. A gambling site blocker as they are known has one simple yet highly effective purpose and that is to block you from being able to access any website that is related to gambling, and therefore by not being able to access those sites you will never have the chance of giving in to temptation and gambling at any of them.
คาสิโน ออนไลน์ ที่ดีที่สุด 123 yesคาสิโน คาสิโน ที่ดีที่สุด คาสิโนufabet คาสิโน ufabet
Tokyo Olympics panel starts search for new boss after sexism row
By admin | | 0 Comments |

FILE PHOTO: Tokyo 2020 Olympics organizing committee president Yoshiro Mori announces his resignation as he takes responsibility for his sexist comments at a meeting with council and executive board members at the committee headquarters, in Tokyo, Japan February 12, 2021. Yoshikazu Tsuno/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo The panel charged with finding a new Tokyo Olympics chief after a sexism row began talks on Tuesday as campaigners called for more transparency in the selection process. The eight-person committee convened for the first time to discuss choosing a successor to Yoshiro Mori, 83, who stepped down Friday after his claims that women talk too much in meetings sparked widespread outrage. The panel “discussed the qualities required of a new president,” according to Tokyo 2020 organizers, and agreed on five selection criteria. But campaigners said the process should be made more transparent, with Games chiefs declining to identify the members of the panel, which was expected to have a 50-50 gender split. The postponed 2020 Games are set to begin in July, with officials and organizers insisting they will go ahead despite doubts over the event’s viability given the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. The formation of the new panel, headed by 85-year-old Canon CEO Fujio Mitarai, was announced Friday after Mori’s reported attempts to hand-pick 84-year-old Saburo Kawabuchi as his successor was met with opposition. “Now they say they won’t reveal who the members are of the committee to choose the next chief,” Kazuko Fukuda, a campaigner for women’s sexual and reproductive rights, told AFP. “So it’s really like the whole process will take place in secret again.” ‘DEEP UNDERSTANDING’ Equality campaigners handed a petition with more than 150,000 signatures to Tokyo 2020 organizers on Tuesday morning, urging them to put concrete measures in place to prevent further discrimination. The selection committee laid out five criteria for choosing a new president — sporting knowledge, international experience, management skills, familiarity with the Tokyo Games organization and “deep understanding” of Olympic principles, including “gender equality, diversity and inclusion.” The committee pledged to select candidates “as swiftly as possible”, with local media suggesting a new president could be named before the end of the week. Reports said Olympic Minister Seiko Hashimoto, Japanese Olympic Committee president Yasuhiro Yamashita and former hammer-thrower Koji Murofushi are among those in contention. Hashimoto — one of just two women in Japan’s cabinet — was reported as saying Tuesday that she had not been approached about taking over. “It should be done with transparency,” she said. “I hope we can get the new structure in place quickly.” Reports said the selection panel is expected to meet again on Wednesday to draw up a list of nominees. The final choice must be endorsed by Tokyo 2020’s executive board. Read Next Don't miss out on the latest news and information. Subscribe to INQUIRER PLUS to get access to The Philippine Daily Inquirer & other 70+ titles, share up to 5 gadgets, listen to the news, download as early as 4am & share articles on social media. Call 896 6000. For feedback, complaints, or inquiries, contact us.
ปอยเปต คาสิโน เกมส์ยิ่งปลา คาสิโน ได้เงินจริงไหม เล่น คาสิโน คาสิโน191 คาสิโน 88
Know the Top 5 Wicket-takers in ICC Champions Trophy 2017
By admin | | 0 Comments |

Today we bring you the Cricketers who picked the most wickets in Champions Trophy 2017. The 2017 Champions Trophy was played during June 1-18 in England, with eight teams participating divided in two groups and round robin matches among group teams would give the top 2 on points table, the 4 semifinalists who would then fight to enter the tournament final. India & Pakistan played the tournament final with Pakistan winning their first Champions Trophy title. Indian Batsman Shikhar Dhawan led the batting cards of the tournament edition. Here we detail the bowlers who grabbed the most wickets in Champions Trophy 2017. 5. Adil Rashid (England) The England Leg-spin bowler Adil Usman Rashid would go on to take 7 wickets from the three matches he played at an average of 20.28 & strike rate of 25.7. With these wickets, Adil Rashid featured in the top 5 list of the most wickets in Champions Trophy 2017. His best was 4/41 against Australia on June 10 at Edgbaston, Birmingham. Australia had made 277/9 from their overs with Aaron Finch’s 68, Steven Smith’s 56 & Travis Head’s 71 not out. Rashid & Mark Wood both took 4 wickets each. England won the rain curtailed match by 40 runs. Eoin Morgan scored 87 while Ben Stokes scored 102 not out to take the team through. 4. Liam Plunkett (England) The England Fast Bowler Liam Edward Plunkett would pick 8 wickets from the four matches he played in the ICC Champions Trophy 2017 at an average of 24.50 & strike rate of 25.1. With these wickets, Plunkett featured in the top 5 list of the most wickets in Champions Trophy 2017. His best was 4/55 at Sophia Gardens, Cardiff against New Zealand on June 6. England had batted first and were bowled out for 310 from their overs with Alex Hales’ 56, Joe Root’s 64 & Jos Buttler’s 61 not out. New Zealand, in reply, were bowled out for 223 with Plunkett’s 4, Jake Ball’s 2 & Adil Rashid’s 2. 3. Junaid Khan (Pakistan) The Pakistan Medium pace bowler would pick 8 wickets from the four matches he played in the ICC Champions Trophy 2017 at an average of 19.37 & strike rate of 25.3. With these wickets, Junaid Khan featured in the top 5 list of the most wickets in Champions Trophy 2017. His best was 3/40 against Sri Lanka on June 12. Batting First, the Sri Lankan team was restricted for 236 with Junaid’s 3 & Hasan Ali’s 3. Pakistan chased down the target & won by 3 wickets; Fakhar Zaman scored 50 while Sarfaraz Ahmed scored 71 not out. 2. Josh Hazlewood (Australia) The Australia Medium Pacer Josh Reginald Hazlewood would pick 9 wickets from the three matches he played in the ICC Champions Trophy 2017 at an average of 15.77 & strike rate of 18.6. With these wickets, Hazlewood featured in the top 5 list of the most wickets in Champions Trophy 2017. His best was 6/52 against New Zealand on June 2. Batting first, New Zealand were bowled out for 291 despite Kane Williamson’s 100 & Luke Ronchi’s 65. Hazlewood picked 6 while John Hastings took 2. The match couldn’t be completed as rains would play spoilsport. HUGE WICKET!Virat Kohli is dismissed for 89 – Josh Hazlewood is at it again 🙌#AUSvIND pic.twitter.com/LHYqltc09q— ICC (@ICC) November 29, 2020 1. Hasan Ali (Pakistan) The Pakistan medium pacer would go on to take 13 wickets from the five matches he played in 2017 edition of the ICC Champions Trophy at an average of 14.69 & strike rate of 20.5. With these wickets, Hasan Ali led the top 5 list of the most wickets in Champions Trophy 2017. His best was 3/19 against arch rivals India on June 18 at Kennington Oval, London. Pakistan had batted first and scored 338/4 with Fakhar Zaman’s 114, Azhar Ali’s 59 & Mohammad Hafeez’s 57 not out. India, in reply, were bowled out for 158; Hasan Ali & Mohammad Amir took 3 wickets each while Shadab Khan took 2. Only one bowler took 6 wickets haul, while six bowlers took 4-wickets hauls in the tournament. These were the top wicket-takers, the ones who made the top 5 list of the most wickets in ICC Champions Trophy 2017. The eight teams’ tournament ICC Champions Trophy 2017 was won by Pakistan. Hope you liked the content, don’t shy away from asking your questions, commenting about the content.
คาสิโน ออนไลน์ ฟรีเครดิต โปรโมชั่น คาสิโน คาสิโน 168 คาสิโน168 คาสิโน ออนไลน์ 888
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
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 3 162