Gambling & betting — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 8 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 84% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
Observations
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Views and reactions moved apart
On 98 of the 629 posts we watched over 30 days, the view counter climbed while the reaction counter stayed where it was — by more than this channel’s own reactions-per-view rate can account for. That rate, measured on this entry, is 0.0030 reactions per view.
Each interval, as we read it — views and reactions before and after
Expected is the view gain multiplied by this channel’s own prior reactions-per-view rate over the same post — not a corpus average, so a channel whose audience never reacts is compared only against itself. Every interval is credited in the direction that makes the observation harder to record, never easier: t.me renders views and reactions to three significant figures above ~1,000, so a raw delta can be a rendering step. Every delta below is at least 4 x the coarser reading's step, the view gain is discounted by a full step and the reaction gain credited with one. Measured by tgregister velocity.py (our own t.me/s/ readings).
What this does and does not say. It says the two counters moved apart, by more than rounding and more than this channel’s own history predicts. It asserts no cause. Views arriving from outside Telegram, an embedded or forwarded copy of the post, and a burst of readers who simply do not react all produce this shape. This detector has recorded very few observations across the whole register, and its precision has not been measured; treat it as an anomaly worth looking at, not as a finding.
Recorded under the key view_reaction_decoupling, last confirmed 11 September 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
Growth
31 measurements spanning 35 days, net +734,425. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 688,650–1,643,403 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 31
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
10 Sept 2026, 03:59
1,533,239
+65,875
6 Sept 2026, 22:37
1,467,364
+8,064
4 Sept 2026, 07:00
1,459,300
+7,375
2 Sept 2026, 17:58
1,451,925
+3,880
1 Sept 2026, 18:45
1,448,045
+2,643
31 Aug 2026, 21:26
1,445,402
-3,726
30 Aug 2026, 21:53
1,449,128
-1,295
30 Aug 2026, 00:28
1,450,423
+6,331
29 Aug 2026, 00:56
1,444,092
+5,287
28 Aug 2026, 01:24
1,438,805
+8,868
27 Aug 2026, 03:45
1,429,937
+6,909
26 Aug 2026, 00:41
1,423,028
+2,701
24 Aug 2026, 23:26
1,420,327
+14,385
23 Aug 2026, 08:25
1,405,942
-1,339
21 Aug 2026, 22:14
1,407,281
+14,936
20 Aug 2026, 14:23
1,392,345
+18,200
19 Aug 2026, 17:53
1,374,145
+23,046
18 Aug 2026, 16:17
1,351,099
+32,283
17 Aug 2026, 12:58
1,318,816
+39,379
16 Aug 2026, 07:26
1,279,437
first reading
Engagement
802 posts held, back to 5 August 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 76 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
2.03%
avg views ÷ 1,533,239 subscribers
Avg views / post
31,000
642 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.41%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
647
of 802 held
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views — note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 11 September 2026
Posts held
802 (5 August 2026 – 11 September 2026)
Views total
19,933,950
Reactions total
81,754
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
11 Sept 2026, 13:52 UTC
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
What this channel posts
Photos
≈13,100
Videos
≈265
Links
≈809
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 11 September 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
Video runtime
21m 13s
Average length
1m 38s
Measured directly from 13 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
View velocity
How fast this channel’s own posts pick up views, from re-reading them repeatedly in the hours and days after they were published rather than the single reading most entries on this register get. Coverage is early and only a small minority of channels hold it at all — a gap in this section means the post has not been re-read again yet, not that nothing happened.
Computed from 635 of this channel’s own posts over the last 30 days (2 of the 24-hour readings behind this are interpolated, not measured directly): across 609 of this channel’s own posts with a clear reading, a typical one reaches half of its last-observed view count within 5.8 hours of being posted; a typical post has already reached 19.8% of its 24-hour view count within the first hour, and 63.3% within the first six; the median 24-hour reach across those posts is 21,500 views — 1.40% of this channel’s own subscriber count (90th percentile 38,040).
8 most recently posted, with a view-velocity reading
60 minutes: 2,404 interp. → 3.0 hours: 5,940still climbing at last reading
not yet at 24h
2.0 hoursprovisional — final view count still climbing
Curve is every standard checkpoint we hold a reading for (+1h, +3h, +6h, +12h, +24h, +48h, +7d after posting) — measured where a real reading landed close enough to that age, interpolated where it did not but readings on both sides let one be worked out between them. Nothing is ever extrapolated past the last real reading. Latest reading is the newest view and reaction count we hold for the post, side by side, so a gap between how views and reactions moved is visible without following it into the Observations section above. 24h reach is that one checkpoint on its own, labelled the same way. Half of last-observed views is the age at which a post’s view count crossed half of the highest figure we have read for it so far — an upper bound when the very first reading was already past half (we cannot see the actual crossing), and biased low while the post is still climbing, since “half of final” is dividing by a number that has not finished growing yet. Both caveats are printed inline wherever they apply, never silently dropped.
Reaction mix
106,375 reactions across 792 posts, in 10 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 55.7% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
59,253
55.7%
🔥
10,667
10.0%
👍
9,806
9.22%
👏
6,015
5.65%
🙏
5,040
4.74%
🐳
4,864
4.57%
👌
4,159
3.91%
😍
3,328
3.13%
💯
2,211
2.08%
🤩
1,032
0.97%
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 797 of the 802 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 107,046 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 802 most recent posts we hold, published 5 August 2026 to 11 September 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
214
across the posts below
Posts paid on
62
of 797 we hold a reading for · 8%
Most on one post
61
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @TROON. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 802 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 5 August 2026 to 11 September 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
هرکسی که واجد الشرایط بود
لطفا داخل لایو باشه
برنده رو میخام اعلام کنم
و ایفون رو براش بفرستم
❤205🔥57👌50😍50👍22🙏16🐳15👏12
Showing the 12 most recent of 802 posts we hold for @TROON. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
Posts edited after publishing
@TROON edited 7 posts after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
First edit seen
11 August 2026
Most recent edit
10 September 2026
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
Named by 9 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Channels Telegram recommends alongside this one
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 8 August 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
دارکوب ترید @darkob_trade · 40,805 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 64 here — alongside 63 others — read 29 August 2026
Crypto Azarmi | ارز دیجیتال @Crypto_Azarmi · 54,854 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 90 here — alongside 89 others — read 25 August 2026
سیگنال رایگان 🐊Crocodile Trade @crocodile_trade · 210,190 Telegram ranks this channel #4 of 83 here — alongside 82 others — read 12 August 2026
اخبار جنگ / TIME GOLD @GOLDVSBTC1 · 44,282 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 28 August 2026
ساتوشی @Satoshi_GOLD_BTC · 83,750 Telegram ranks this channel #10 of 89 here — alongside 88 others — read 18 August 2026
پاشا تریدر | BTC @traderpasha · 115,504 Telegram ranks this channel #11 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 14 August 2026
کریپتو با امیرسام | CBA @amirsambtc · 119,516 Telegram ranks this channel #14 of 94 here — alongside 93 others — read 13 August 2026
TATCOiNN | ارز دیجیتال @tatcoinn · 46,684 Telegram ranks this channel #15 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 31 August 2026
دکتر فرهاد شایگان👑 @farhad1356 · 80,325 Telegram ranks this channel #17 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 15 August 2026
زاپاس اخبار @short_cryptoo · 2 Telegram ranks this channel #18 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 20 August 2026
👑 KING CRYPTO | کینگ کریپتو @KINGCRYPTO1 · 106,974 Telegram ranks this channel #18 of 89 here — alongside 88 others — read 14 August 2026
TP Hunter | سیگنال اساتید @tphunter · 139,380 Telegram ranks this channel #19 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 15 August 2026
Bufalo🦬crypto🔝 @bufalo_cryptoo · 27,533 Telegram ranks this channel #20 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 10 September 2026
بنی ترید | Beny.Trade @beny_trade · 55,682 Telegram ranks this channel #20 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 24 August 2026
ترید با الگوهای کلاسیک @mahdiazimi_classic_patterns · 69,233 Telegram ranks this channel #20 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 23 August 2026
HajAli | CryptoPlus🚀 @cryptoplusers · 481,931 Telegram ranks this channel #20 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 10 August 2026
⚠️CRYPTO PLUS+⚠️ @Real_Ayhan · 114,536 Telegram ranks this channel #22 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 14 August 2026
Cryptofa | کریپتوفا @Cryptofa_official · 45,040 Telegram ranks this channel #24 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 27 August 2026
سامان صادقی @samansadeghi_i · 67,794 Telegram ranks this channel #24 of 83 here — alongside 82 others — read 20 August 2026
⚜₿signal⚜ @bsignal · 445,543 Telegram ranks this channel #26 of 84 here — alongside 83 others — read 10 August 2026
Nova Trader ⚛️ نوآ تریدر @NovaSignalss · 500,645 Telegram ranks this channel #27 of 83 here — alongside 82 others — read 10 August 2026
سیگنال آلفا کریپتو @Signal_Alpha · 166,319 Telegram ranks this channel #28 of 84 here — alongside 83 others — read 12 August 2026
Crypto 248 @CryptoT248 · 42,354 Telegram ranks this channel #30 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 3 September 2026
کریپتولند - سیگنال کریپتو - آموزش ارز دیجیتال @CryptoLand · 49,418 Telegram ranks this channel #31 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 25 August 2026
This channel appears in 63 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
Domains linked from posts
4 domains this channel’s own posts have linked to, measured by scanning the post bodies themselves — not the channel’s description, which is the separate Declared links section below when this entry has one. Appearing here is not a claim about who runs the linked site or why the channel linked to it; an advertisement, a news citation and a malicious link all leave the same kind of row.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 10 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“TROON🔷محسن ترون” (@TROON), 1,533,239 subscribers as measured 10 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/TROON.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.
