The long-anticipated Bitcoin Cash (BCH) fork has finally arrived — not with a whisper, but with a full-blown hash war. As the network splits into competing chains, the battle for dominance between Bitcoin ABC and Bitcoin SV (Satoshi Vision) is unfolding in real time, measured not in votes or statements, but in mined blocks and hashing power.
At the heart of this high-stakes conflict are two opposing visions for the future of Bitcoin Cash. On one side, Bitcoin SV, backed by controversial figure Craig Wright and billionaire mining entrepreneur Calvin Ayre, pushes for massive 128 MB blocks — a move aimed at restoring what they claim is Satoshi Nakamoto’s original vision. On the other, Bitcoin ABC, supported by key industry players like Roger Ver’s Bitcoin.com and Bitmain co-founder Jihan Wu, favors a more cautious evolution, prioritizing stability and new transaction types over raw scalability.
👉 Discover how blockchain forks shape market dynamics and investor strategy.
The Fork Unfolds: A Tale of Two Chains
In the immediate aftermath of the fork, the network fragmented cleanly. The first two blocks post-fork were mined on the Bitcoin ABC chain, signaling early momentum. However, within hours, SV-linked mining pools began gaining ground — four out of the next six blocks came from SV-affiliated miners.
Despite this push, the tide quickly shifted. Data from CoinDance shows that within an hour, the ABC chain pulled ahead, eventually building a six-block lead by mid-afternoon Eastern Time. This lead was largely fueled by Bitcoin.com’s “hash explosion” — a coordinated surge in mining power directed exclusively at supporting the ABC chain.
As of now, approximately 75% of hashrate appears aligned with Bitcoin SV, while only 20% supports ABC, and a negligible amount backs Bitcoin Unlimited. Yet, hashrate dominance doesn’t always translate to chain survival. In proof-of-work systems like Bitcoin Cash, the longest valid chain wins — and right now, ABC holds that advantage.
Why Hash Rate Isn’t Everything
While SV leads in raw mining power, chain consistency and block propagation matter just as much. The ABC chain has demonstrated stronger continuity, with faster block confirmations and broader support from wallet providers, exchanges, and payment processors.
Most businesses operating on the BCH network have signaled support for ABC. This ecosystem alignment could prove decisive. Even if SV controls more miners, without merchant adoption, exchange listings, or user wallets, its economic viability remains questionable.
Conversely, SV’s backers argue that miner support reflects true decentralization — that the network should follow the majority of computational power, not corporate interests. But this ideological stance faces practical hurdles: several major platforms have suspended BCH trading amid the uncertainty, including Bitfinex, where prices plummeted from $590 to $250 in minutes.
The Players Behind the Protocols
Understanding the fork means understanding the people driving it.
- Bitcoin SV (Satoshi Vision): Championed by Craig Wright and Calvin Ayre, this version seeks to scale BCH to 128 MB blocks. Critics argue this centralizes mining around a few large players capable of handling such massive data loads.
- Bitcoin ABC: Backed by Roger Ver and Jihan Wu, ABC proposes incremental upgrades, including smart contract-like functionality through non-cash transactions. It emphasizes developer-led innovation and ecosystem compatibility.
- Bitcoin Unlimited: A third option allowing miners to vote on block size dynamically. Despite its flexibility, it failed to gain traction — a sign that the community wanted a clear direction, not ambiguity.
👉 Explore how miner behavior influences blockchain security and network outcomes.
Market Reaction: Volatility Meets Uncertainty
The fork’s impact on price has been dramatic. BCH experienced sharp volatility in the days leading up to the split, spiking to nearly $590 before crashing below $250 amid trading halts and investor panic.
This turbulence underscores a broader truth: protocol instability harms market confidence. While forks are a natural part of blockchain evolution, hostile splits — especially those involving well-funded factions — introduce risk that average users and institutions are quick to flee.
Moreover, the hash war itself consumes enormous energy and resources. Miners spending millions on equipment and electricity to back one chain over another isn’t value creation — it’s value diversion.
What Comes Next?
There are three possible outcomes:
- ABC Prevails: The chain maintains its lead, gains exchange support, and becomes the recognized BCH. SV fades into obscurity or continues as a minor altcoin.
- SV Takes Over: Despite slower start, sustained hashrate pressure overwhelms ABC. Miners switch allegiance, and exchanges relist under the SV chain.
- Coexistence: Both chains survive long-term, creating a dual-BCH market — though this risks confusing users and fragmenting liquidity.
Current indicators favor outcome #1 — but nothing is certain. Mining pools can switch chains instantly. A single large player changing sides could reverse fortunes overnight.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is a hash war?
A: A hash war occurs when competing factions in a blockchain network use their mining power to push different versions of the blockchain, attempting to make their version the longest (and thus accepted) chain.
Q: Is my BCH safe during the fork?
A: If you held BCH before the fork and used a private wallet, you likely control both resulting chains’ coins. However, during active hash wars, replay protection is critical to avoid unintended transactions.
Q: Which chain will exchanges support?
A: Most major exchanges have paused deposits and withdrawals. They’ll likely resume based on chain stability, community consensus, and economic activity — factors currently favoring ABC.
Q: Can Bitcoin SV really scale to 128 MB blocks?
A: Technically possible, but practically challenging. Such large blocks increase centralization risks, as only well-resourced nodes can process them efficiently.
Q: Why did this fork happen?
A: Disagreements over development philosophy — specifically block size limits and roadmap control — led to irreconcilable differences between core developers and mining interests.
Q: What happens to Bitcoin Cash’s reputation after this?
A: Repeated contentious forks damage trust. Investors may view BCH as unstable compared to more consensus-driven networks like Bitcoin or Ethereum.
👉 Stay ahead of crypto market shifts with real-time insights and secure trading tools.
Final Thoughts
The Bitcoin Cash fork is more than a technical upgrade — it’s a stress test for decentralized governance. While ideals like free market choice and miner sovereignty are important, they mean little without network cohesion and user trust.
Right now, Bitcoin ABC holds the upper hand, thanks to strategic mining coordination and stronger ecosystem backing. But the war isn’t over. Every new block could change the narrative.
For observers, this moment offers valuable lessons about the interplay between technology, economics, and human ambition in blockchain networks. One thing is clear: in the world of crypto, vision without consensus is just noise.
This article will continue to be updated as new developments emerge.