Sports — 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 18 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 100% 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 the other topics.
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 43 of the 1,909 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 0.0146 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 8 November 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
51 measurements spanning 81 days, net +1,604,016. 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 2,084,106–4,716,603 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 51
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
7 Nov 2026, 16:07
4,044,839
+33,491
6 Nov 2026, 12:29
4,011,348
-25,956
5 Nov 2026, 16:00
4,037,304
-23,991
4 Nov 2026, 15:44
4,061,295
+65,177
3 Nov 2026, 15:46
3,996,118
+96,231
2 Nov 2026, 12:56
3,899,887
+51,444
1 Nov 2026, 09:26
3,848,443
+79,429
31 Oct 2026, 08:20
3,769,014
-32,545
30 Oct 2026, 07:40
3,801,559
-126,224
29 Oct 2026, 10:38
3,927,783
-123,431
28 Oct 2026, 07:20
4,051,214
+30,993
27 Oct 2026, 04:27
4,020,221
-48,482
26 Oct 2026, 04:08
4,068,703
-42,820
25 Oct 2026, 06:15
4,111,523
-29,158
24 Oct 2026, 04:17
4,140,681
+85,847
23 Oct 2026, 04:49
4,054,834
-90,326
22 Oct 2026, 03:17
4,145,160
-30,379
20 Oct 2026, 21:48
4,175,539
+2,876
19 Oct 2026, 21:34
4,172,663
+137,156
18 Oct 2026, 21:56
4,035,507
first reading
Engagement
4,049 posts held, back to 18 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 164 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
0.293%
avg views ÷ 4,044,839 subscribers
Avg views / post
11,900
1,934 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.80%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
1,935
of 4,049 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 7 November 2026
Posts held
4,049 (18 August 2026 – 7 November 2026)
Views total
22,923,190
Reactions total
412,346
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
8 Nov 2026, 03:05 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
Video runtime
4h 33m
Average length
52s
Measured directly from 314 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 1,911 of this channel’s own posts over the last 30 days (203 of the 24-hour readings behind this are interpolated, not measured directly): across 1,715 of this channel’s own posts with a clear reading, a typical one reaches half of its last-observed view count within 2.2 hours of being posted; a typical post has already reached 33.9% of its 24-hour view count within the first hour, and 78.8% within the first six; the median 24-hour reach across those posts is 11,200 views — 0.277% of this channel’s own subscriber count (90th percentile 14,230).
8 most recently posted, with a view-velocity reading
60 minutes: 5,420 → 3.0 hours: 7,708 interp. → 6.0 hours: 8,940still climbing at last reading
not yet at 24h
47 minutesprovisional — 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
224,989 reactions across 1,000 posts, in 71 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 34.8% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
78,199
34.8%
👍
40,824
18.1%
🤣
30,722
13.7%
🔥
20,901
9.29%
😁
14,943
6.64%
🤬
7,893
3.51%
👎
6,383
2.84%
💔
6,126
2.72%
👏
5,640
2.51%
🖕
1,949
0.866%
😐
1,692
0.752%
🤮
1,092
0.485%
❤🔥
1,028
0.457%
😢
1,025
0.456%
🍌
857
0.381%
🥰
566
0.252%
😡
416
0.185%
😱
409
0.182%
🥴
405
0.18%
🙏
303
0.135%
51 further kinds
3,616
1.61%
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 1,000 of the 1,000 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 224,989 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 1,000 most recent posts we hold (the sample is capped at 1,000), published 24 October 2026 to 7 November 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.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 1,879 of 1,935 posts held from the last 30 days (97.1%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
💙اینکه تیمت دقیقه ۹۵ گل بخوره و ۹ نفره، دقت کنید ۹ نفره در حالی که فقط چند دقیقه تا سوت پایان مونده توپ رو بذاره وسط زمین و از بچه ها بخواد روحیشون رو نبازن و خودش هم گل مساوی رو بزنه بدون شک لایق احترامه
🔸تو روز بد انتقاد میکنیم ولی روز خوبشم باید بگیم؛ صالح امروز با این بازی و دو گلی که زد جواب محکمی به منتقدان و حاشیه سازان داد💙
✅ @TajFans1945
📲استوری وحید صالحی، کارشناس داوری:
🔵حرکت یاسر آسانی اشتباه بود، اما باید دید کمک داور چه حرفی و چگونه به او زده که بازیکن همچین واکنشی داشته!
✅ @TajFans1945
کاشتهای که در ادامه منجر به گل رئال مادرید به والنسیا شد، حاصل خطای بازیکنان والنسیا بود که مشمول دریافت کارت زرد شد. صحنهی خطا شبیه صحنهی منجر به اخراج عارف آقاسی مقابل استقلال خوزستان بود؛ با این تفاوت که بازیکن والنسیا اخراج نشد ❌ نکتهای که گزارشگر شبکهسه هم بهش اشاره کرد.
جالبه که تقریباً هر زمانی که در لیگ ایران بحث داوری جنجالیای به وجود اومده، چیزی شبیه اون صحنه در لیگهای خارجی رخ داده که خلاف لیگ ایرا…
🔵فتاحی: از کار آسانی دفاع نمیکنم ولی یک مدت زیادی او را درگیر حاشیه کردند
🔹 خوزستان است و فوتبالش/ نمیگویم داوری مشکل داشت/ ما با پنجره بسته تلاش کردیم آبروی فوتبال ایران در آسیا را حفظ کنیم/ یاسر آسانی را چند وقتی درگیر مسایل حاشیهای کردند که صحت هم نداشت/ از کارش دفاع نمیکنم ولی بازیکن هم ظرفیت خاصی دارد/ ما تلاش میکنیم مثل آسیا، صدر جدول را بگیریم/ بخش اعظم خوزستانیها استقلالی هستند/ از هواداران خواهش میکن…
👍183🤬63❤12👎8🍌2👏1
Showing the 12 most recent of 4,049 posts we hold for @Es_t4. 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.
Posts edited after publishing
@Es_t4 edited 67 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
20 August 2026
Most recent edit
8 November 2026
Posts recorded as deleted after publishing
We recorded 3 posts on @Es_t4 as deleted — posts this register held that were missing from the channel’s public page on two separate reads, taken from different network addresses at least an hour apart.
A deletion is not wrongdoing. This register can see that a post it held is no longer on the channel’s public page, and when — not why. Expired ad placements, reposts, rotating links and corrections all look the same. This is a count of recorded detections, not an exact total: it misses deletions we could not see, because only a post we held and later re-read inside the page can be seen to go, and it may include a small number of wrong records. How this is measured.
First seen missing
18 September 2026
Most recent seen missing
1 November 2026
Median time before seen missing
8.8 hours
Seen missing in the last 30 days
2
Forward network
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
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 1 registered channel — 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.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
Dead references
1
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
0
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
1
vacant every time we have ever looked
@Es_t4 named 1 handle that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all. A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
@tajfans194 named in 1 post, 7 November 2026 – 7 November 2026
Cite this entry
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 7 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“کانال هواداران استقلال (تاج)” (@Es_t4), 4,044,839 subscribers as measured 7 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/Es_t4.
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.
