user60540: This blog post describes a method for protecting against replay attacks after any hard fork on the Bitcoin blockchain. It asumes you have BTC in a wallet and want to transfer it without risking the forked coin.
In summary it says:

Buy BTC in an exchange
Transfer BTC from exchange to your wallet
Transfer full amount including newly received BTC from wallet to another wallet

According to the author, the last transaction can't be replayed on the new chain since it is for a larger amount than what that address would have in the new chain.
Can someone confirm whether this does in fact protect from replay attacks? Would this be a valid method for any hard fork?
My concern is that somebody could replicate the first transfer (step 2) in the new chain, therefore making the second transaction (step 3) replay-able. 

user31844: Your concern is valid. However, the author mentions this.
"... Check your other pile if there is also something being added to that. If there is, keep buying on that exchange because they are sending you free coins! But normally these exchanges will understand that they can split their coins as well, and you should not get these extra coins."

user12983: 
this does in fact protect from replay attacks?

no

Would this be a valid method for any hard fork?

no

My concern is that somebody could replicate the first transfer 

you are right

60540: <p>This <a href="https://blog.tenx.tech/bitcoin-fork-simple-trick-to-secure-your-coins-without-replay-protection-transcript-f1a58b08edf2" rel="nofollow noreferrer">blog post</a> describes a method for protecting against replay attacks after any hard fork on the Bitcoin blockchain. It asumes you have BTC in a wallet and want to transfer it without risking the forked coin.</p>

<p>In summary it says:</p>

<ol>
<li>Buy BTC in an exchange</li>
<li>Transfer BTC from exchange to your wallet</li>
<li>Transfer full amount including newly received BTC from wallet to another wallet</li>
</ol>

<p>According to the author, the last transaction can't be replayed on the new chain since it is for a larger amount than what that address would have in the new chain.</p>

<p>Can someone confirm whether this does in fact protect from replay attacks? Would this be a valid method for any hard fork?</p>

<p>My concern is that somebody could replicate the first transfer (step 2) in the new chain, therefore making the second transaction (step 3) replay-able. </p>
 31844: <p>Your concern is valid. However, the author mentions this.</p>

<p>"... Check your other pile if there is also something being added to that. If there is, keep buying on that exchange because they are sending you free coins! But normally these exchanges will understand that they can split their coins as well, and you should not get these extra coins."</p>
 12983: <blockquote>
  <p>this does in fact protect from replay attacks?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>no</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Would this be a valid method for any hard fork?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>no</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>My concern is that somebody could replicate the first transfer </p>
</blockquote>

<p>you are right</p>
