Channel
@polyrangercom
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · View velocity · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Domains linked from posts · Cite this entry
1,782,465subscribers
-127,056 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among the largest entries.
| Telegram ID | -1002188840862 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @polyrangercom |
| Created | 23 May 2024 — measured — dated from the channel’s first post |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 18 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 34 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 18 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/polyrangercom |
Crypto & trading — 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 95% 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.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 18 Sept 2026, 00:39 | 1,782,465 | -6,289 |
| 15 Sept 2026, 19:02 | 1,788,754 | -4,780 |
| 14 Sept 2026, 00:21 | 1,793,534 | -5,800 |
| 12 Sept 2026, 08:20 | 1,799,334 | -4,987 |
| 10 Sept 2026, 03:54 | 1,804,321 | -11,751 |
| 6 Sept 2026, 18:15 | 1,816,072 | -6,739 |
| 4 Sept 2026, 04:39 | 1,822,811 | -4,411 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 18:02 | 1,827,222 | -3,701 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 14:17 | 1,830,923 | -4,211 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 14:13 | 1,835,134 | -2,589 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 14:25 | 1,837,723 | -3,235 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 14:14 | 1,840,958 | -2,733 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 17:04 | 1,843,691 | -3,541 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 16:28 | 1,847,232 | -1,077 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 19:07 | 1,848,309 | -2,489 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 22:23 | 1,850,798 | -2,832 |
| 24 Aug 2026, 22:47 | 1,853,630 | -5,376 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 08:43 | 1,859,006 | -5,310 |
| 21 Aug 2026, 18:28 | 1,864,316 | -2,889 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 18:47 | 1,867,205 | first reading |
59 posts held, back to 23 May 2024 — the reader has reached the start of this channel’s public history, so this is the full archive Telegram still exposes. Read across 2,923 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 24 September 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 59 (23 May 2024 – 24 September 2026) |
| Views total | 26,360 |
| Reactions total | 61 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 27 Sept 2026, 02:16 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.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 26 September 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
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 6 of this channel’s own posts over the last 30 days: across 6 of this channel’s own posts with a clear reading, a typical one reaches half of its last-observed view count within 3 days of being posted; a typical post has already reached 35.0% of its 24-hour view count within the first hour, and 67.2% within the first six; the median 24-hour reach across those posts is 896 views — 0.05% of this channel’s own subscriber count (90th percentile 1,078).
| Post | Readings | Latest reading | Curve | 24h reach | Half of last-observed views by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| /56217 Sept 2026, 09:46 UTC | 10734 minutes – 7 days old | 2,450 views ~4 reactions | 60 minutes: 278 interp. → 3.0 hours: 424 interp. → 6.0 hours: 533 interp. → 12 hours: 666 → 24 hours: 782 → 2 days: 967 → 7 days: 2,140still climbing at last reading | 782measured | 4 days |
| /56115 Sept 2026, 12:23 UTC | 1192 minutes – 9 days old | 2,860 views ~7 reactions | 60 minutes: 301 interp. → 3.0 hours: 494 → 6.0 hours: 623 → 12 hours: 743 → 24 hours: 922 → 2 days: 1,350 → 7 days: 2,310still climbing at last reading | 922measured | 2 days |
| /56010 Sept 2026, 12:21 UTC | 16826 minutes – 7 days old | 2,680 views ~8 reactions | 60 minutes: 322 → 3.0 hours: 491 interp. → 6.0 hours: 619 → 12 hours: 755 → 24 hours: 925 → 2 days: 1,130 → 7 days: 2,680still climbing at last reading | 925measured | 3 days |
| /5598 Sept 2026, 10:55 UTC | 15627 minutes – 7 days old | 2,160 views ~4 reactions | 60 minutes: 299 → 3.0 hours: 445 interp. → 6.0 hours: 574 → 12 hours: 693 → 24 hours: 871 → 2 days: 1,100 → 7 days: 2,160still climbing at last reading | 871measured | 46 hours |
| /5583 Sept 2026, 14:19 UTC | 18031 minutes – 7 days old | 2,670 views ~13 reactions | 60 minutes: 318 → 3.0 hours: 472 → 6.0 hours: 583 interp. → 12 hours: 682 → 24 hours: 869 → 2 days: 1,100 → 7 days: 2,670still climbing at last reading | 869measured | 3 days |
| /5561 Sept 2026, 09:32 UTC | 16124 minutes – 7 days old | 2,610 views ~8 reactions | 60 minutes: 434 interp. → 3.0 hours: 663 → 6.0 hours: 829 interp. → 12 hours: 1,040 → 24 hours: 1,230 → 2 days: 1,540 → 7 days: 2,610still climbing at last reading | 1,230measured | 28 hours |
| /55527 Aug 2026, 11:59 UTC | 1887 minutes – 7 days old | 2,760 views ~5 reactions | 60 minutes: 268 interp. → 3.0 hours: 415 → 6.0 hours: 554 → 12 hours: 673 → 24 hours: 809 → 2 days: 1,040 → 7 days: 2,760still climbing at last reading | 809measured | 4 days |
| /55425 Aug 2026, 10:42 UTC | 1514 minutes – 7 days old | 2,460 views ~2 reactions | 60 minutes: 309 interp. → 3.0 hours: 486 interp. → 6.0 hours: 628 → 12 hours: 805 → 24 hours: 978 → 2 days: 1,220 → 7 days: 2,460still climbing at last reading | 978measured | 2 days |
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.
222 reactions across 33 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 89.2% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 198 | 89.2% | |
| 🔥 | 11 | 4.95% | |
| 👍 | 5 | 2.25% | |
| ❤🔥 | 4 | 1.80% | |
| 🎉 | 3 | 1.35% | |
| 🏆 | 1 | 0.45% |
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 55 of the 59 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 725 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 59 most recent posts we hold, published 23 May 2024 to 24 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.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @polyrangercom. 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 59 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 23 May 2024 to 24 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.
Prediction markets may live on different platforms, but traders still need to see the bigger picture. Prices, liquidity, market activity and positions can all be scattered across different venues, making it harder to see where the real opportunities are. PolyRanger gives you one place to see the market as a whole and decide where to trade.
🎉3
A prediction market doesn’t have to end with making a prediction. You can create the question, bring traders to it, generate activity around the market and earn fees as people trade. With PolyRanger, market creation can become an economic opportunity of its own, where the value comes not only from the question you create, but from the participation and trading activity that develops around it.
❤7
What if the market you want to trade doesn’t exist yet? You have the question. You know the outcomes you’d want to see. But there’s no market for it. With PolyRanger, you can turn that idea into a prediction market, define how it resolves, and put it out there for others to trade. Sometimes participation means trading the market. Sometimes it means creating the question.
❤3❤🔥1
You can nail the prediction and still lose money on it. What happens between “I think X will happen” and actually closing the trade, your entry, your size, your timing, your exit, that’s the real skill. PolyRanger puts the market data and execution tools in one place, so you can turn a prediction into a more informed trade.
❤7
A market showing $0.68 doesn’t mean you can buy everything at $0.68. The order book tells you what’s actually available, how much liquidity is sitting at each price, and how easily you can get in or out. PolyRanger brings that market data together, so you can see beyond the headline price.
❤4🔥3👍1
An arbitrage opportunity means nothing if you can’t execute it in time. You might spot the price gap, but while you’re switching between platforms and getting ready to trade, it can disappear. That’s the part of arbitrage people overlook. Seeing the opportunity doesn’t mean you can capture it. PolyRanger keeps markets and execution in one place, so you can move while the opportunity is still there.
❤5
The same outcome can trade at different prices across prediction markets. That gap is where arbitrage opportunities appear. The challenge? Prices move fast. By the time you switch between platforms, the gap may already be gone. PolyRanger puts the markets side by side, so you can spot the difference before it closes.
❤11🔥3
PolyRanger pinned a photo
There is no single price for a prediction. The same event can trade at different prices across Polymarket, Kalshi, Limitless, and Myriad, with fragmented liquidity creating opportunities that are easy to miss when you only watch one platform. PolyRanger brings them together in one terminal.
❤11👍1🔥1
Prediction markets reward those who know how to read the market before putting capital behind a position. Price history, liquidity, order book depth and market signals can reveal what is happening beneath the surface, turning a simple prediction into a calculated decision. PolyRanger puts those tools in one place, giving every trade more context.
❤5
Cross-market arbitrage can disappear in seconds. A price gap might look like an easy opportunity, but once traders spot it, the gap can close fast. That’s why seeing prices across markets in one place matters.
❤4
News tells you what happened. Pricing asks what it changes. A headline can look massive while the market has already adjusted. Or it can look minor while traders have not yet connected its full impact to the outcome. Reacting means buying the story after everyone sees it. Pricing means asking how much probability should actually move, whether the change is already reflected, and whether the remaining upside justif…
Showing the 12 most recent of 59 posts we hold for @polyrangercom. 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.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
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.
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 7 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.
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.
This channel appears in 415 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.
One domain 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 18 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“PolyRanger” (@polyrangercom), 1,782,465 subscribers as measured 18 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/polyrangercom.
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.