5 measurements spanning 9 days. 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 2,412–2,420 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
16 Aug 2026, 07:46
2,413
-5
13 Aug 2026, 03:54
2,418
-1
10 Aug 2026, 11:21
2,419
+6
7 Aug 2026, 07:47
2,413
no change
7 Aug 2026, 00:46
2,413
first reading
Engagement
23 posts held, back to 12 July 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 2 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
53.1%
avg views ÷ 2,413 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,280
10 posts measured
Reaction rate
2.53%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
10
of 23 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 August 2026
Posts held
23 (12 July 2026 – 7 August 2026)
Views total
12,825
Reactions total
325
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
7 Aug 2026, 16:35 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.
Reaction mix
884 reactions across 22 posts, in 12 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 33.5% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
296
33.5%
👍
130
14.7%
😁
130
14.7%
🤣
99
11.2%
🔥
95
10.7%
💯
91
10.3%
🤡
16
1.81%
👎
13
1.47%
🙈
7
0.792%
🤬
4
0.452%
💩
2
0.226%
🫡
1
0.113%
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 22 of the 23 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 884reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 23 most recent posts we hold, published 12 July 2026 to 7 August 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.
Хороший тейк, пусть и безрадостный.
Сам на прошлой неделе наблюдал, как Тимофей Дерепаско и Егор Плешивцев спарринговались на НТЦ.
Лучшие наши молодые игроки на данный момент – а были без тренера. Понятно, что тот же Дерепаско многое уже перепробовал и много где побывал, и отец помогает ему, но со стороны выглядит это довольно печально.
Да и вообще достаточно открыть сайт ATP Rankings, выделить игроков, ну хотя бы…
Выношу интересное из комментариев к опросу.
Подписчики обращают внимание, что большинство нынешних топов – и те, кто пропускает Монреаль, и те, кто создает там сейчас эффект присутствия, – все больше воспринимают Мастерсы как повинность.
Тут можно, конечно, воткнуть еще одну шпильку в адрес боссов АТР – за это ли вы, ребята, боролись со своими двухнедельными марафонами? – но дело в том, что на Шлемах ситуация тоже …
Назрел вопрос. Вам Мастерс без топов и наших смотреть интересно?
Да28%
Нет43%
Смотрю только женщин18%
Зачем тратить время на всю эту бастурму?19%
The shares total 108%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Уравниловка
Интересно, а когда говорят, что в теннисе теперь такой высокий уровень у всех, и каждый может обыграть каждого, имеют ли в виду, что Мастерс в Монреале и челлик, скажем, в Лексингтоне — тоже зрелища одного порядка?
Еще немного о том, чем занимаются топовые теннисисты в период постуимблдонского безвременья.
Ссорятся-мирятся, женятся, катают 250-ки или, вот например, играют клубные матчи.
Легенда сообщества ТБН Святослав Гулин сообщает, что завтра сыграет матч немецкой клубной лиги против Флавио Коболли.
Помимо того, что факт такой встречи любопытен сам по себе, это еще и индикатор того, насколько силен уровень европейского кл…
Ну как, отличилась — это ее обычная подача.
Сапфо Сакеллариди, сестра того самого Стефаноса Сакелларидиса, который одну неделю стоял 143-м вслед за Дрейпером и Димитровым, по-другому вторую подавать не умеет. И стоит при этом в топ-450.
Ну и вообще семья эта в узких теннисных кругах довольно известная. Отец их как-то решил, что в Турции жизнь дешевле, чем в Греции, и перевёз туда детей. И вот Стефанос сидел там год…
Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Signed Aleksandr Anoshin
Showing the 12 most recent of 23 posts we hold for @tenniso4ek. 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.
Polls
The 4 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
Назрел вопрос. Вам Мастерс без топов и наших смотреть интересно?
Да28%
Нет43%
Смотрю только женщин18%
Зачем тратить время на всю эту бастурму?19%
The shares total 108%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Нужно хорошенько подумать перед ответом. Сегодня у Зверева были:
Кохонес27%
Кохончики50%
Бубенчики29%
The shares total 106%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
The shares total 104%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 23 most recent posts we hold, published 12 July 2026 to 7 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 1,291,872 of 1,481,243entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
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.
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 16 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Резать слайсы” (@tenniso4ek), 2,413 subscribers as measured 16 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/tenniso4ek.
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.
