user65884: Is it enough that the funds where sent before the forks on the blockchain, or should they also have been recieved (enough with 1 confirmation on the blockchain?)  before the forks, and why?

user69241: 
Is it enough that the funds where sent before the forks on the blockchain, or should they also have been recieved (enough with 1 confirmation on the blockchain?) before the forks

The bitcoins must have been recieved BEFORE the hardfork.

and why?

If I understood it correctly, an unconfirmed transaction during the hardfork means "that the BTC's are still on the sender's adress".
Why? Because the people behind BCH/BTG copy the whole blockchain at one moment and if your transaction is unconfirmed => it's not in the blockchain => they can't copy it.
And that means that the sender of the BTC will have access to the BCH/BTG and the receiver gets nothing of that.

65884: <p>Is it enough that the funds where sent before the forks on the blockchain, or should they also have been recieved (enough with 1 confirmation on the blockchain?)  before the forks, and why?</p>
 69241: <blockquote>
  <p>Is it enough that the funds where sent before the forks on the blockchain, or should they also have been recieved (enough with 1 confirmation on the blockchain?) before the forks</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The bitcoins must have been recieved BEFORE the hardfork.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>and why?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>If I understood it correctly, an unconfirmed transaction during the hardfork means "that the BTC's are still on the sender's adress".
Why? Because the people behind BCH/BTG copy the whole blockchain at one moment and if your transaction is unconfirmed => it's not in the blockchain => they can't copy it.
And that means that the sender of the BTC will have access to the BCH/BTG and the receiver gets nothing of that.</p>
