The Bitcoin Cash (BCH) ecosystem faced one of its most intense internal conflicts during the November 2018 hard fork, a pivotal moment that split the community and ignited what became known as the "hash war." This high-stakes battle wasn't just about technical differences—it was a clash of ideologies, mining power, and market influence. Here’s a detailed look at what happened, who was involved, and which faction ultimately emerged stronger.
The Origins of the Bitcoin Cash Split
Bitcoin Cash was born on August 1, 2017, following a hard fork from the original Bitcoin (BTC) blockchain. The split stemmed from growing disagreements within the Bitcoin community over scalability. A faction led by Roger Ver advocated for larger block sizes to enable faster, cheaper transactions—positioning BCH as digital cash rather than a store of value.
This vision led to the creation of Bitcoin Cash with an 8MB block size (later increased), but the debate didn’t end there. Every six months, the BCH network undergoes scheduled protocol upgrades via hard forks. The November 2018 update, however, triggered unprecedented division.
Instead of a unified upgrade, competing proposals emerged, splitting the community into three main groups: Bitcoin ABC, Bitcoin SV, and Bitcoin Unlimited.
Bitcoin ABC: Stability Over Revolution
Bitcoin ABC (Adjustable Blocksize Cap) represented the more conservative wing of the BCH movement. Backed by prominent figures like Roger Ver and mining giant Bitmain, this group believed the existing BCH framework was fundamentally sound and required only incremental improvements.
Their primary goals included:
- Maintaining network stability
- Reducing transaction fees
- Supporting widespread adoption through exchange listings
Major platforms such as Binance, Coinbase, and Bitstamp aligned with Bitcoin ABC, giving it strong institutional backing.
Bitcoin SV: Returning to "Satoshi’s Vision"
Bitcoin SV (Satoshi’s Vision), launched in August 2018 by Craig Wright’s team, aimed to restore what they claimed was the original Bitcoin protocol designed by Satoshi Nakamoto. SV supporters pushed for radical changes, including increasing the block size limit from 32MB to up to 128MB to enhance scalability.
SV positioned itself as the true successor to Bitcoin’s original design, emphasizing:
- On-chain scaling
- Enterprise-level data processing
- Full node control over consensus rules
Despite its bold claims, SV lacked broad support from major exchanges at launch.
Bitcoin Unlimited: The Neutral Mediator
Bitcoin Unlimited proposed a compromise—allowing miners to vote on consensus rules during the fork. This approach aimed to decentralize decision-making and prevent any single group from dominating. However, their neutral stance meant they didn’t gain significant traction in the heat of the conflict.
👉 Discover how blockchain forks shape digital asset evolution.
The Hash War Begins
On November 15, 2018, both factions activated their respective chains simultaneously:
- BCH ABC mined its first block (height 556767) at approximately 1:00 PM EST via the Bitcoin.com mining pool.
- BCH SV followed minutes later, creating its own version of block 556767.
Thus began the hash war—an intense competition where mining power (hashrate) determined chain survival.
Jihan Wu, co-founder of Bitmain, signaled strong support for BCH ABC by redirecting mining resources from Bitcoin (BTC) to BCH. In a now-famous Reddit post, he stated:
“I have no intention to start a hash war with [Craig Wright], because if I do—by relocating hash power from BTC mining to BCH mining—BTC price will dump below yearly support; it may even breach $5,000. But since [Craig Wright] is relentless, I am all in to fight till death!”
Roger Ver’s Bitcoin.com also temporarily shifted BTC hashrate to BCH ABC, intensifying pressure on SV.
In response, Craig Wright vowed continuous mining:
“Continuous competition until one dies as we do not stop.”
Data from fork.lol showed a dramatic shift in hashrate distribution:
- BCH’s total hashrate surged from 9.54% to 15.43% between November 10–17
- BTC’s hashrate dropped by 7 percentage points, falling from 90.46% to 84.57%
This redistribution confirmed that massive mining power had been reallocated—temporarily destabilizing BTC and highlighting the real economic stakes behind blockchain governance.
Market Response and Exchange Decisions
While both chains continued producing blocks, exchanges held a decisive role in determining legitimacy.
Initially, platforms like Coinbase, Bitstamp, and Poloniex suspended BCH trading and withdrawals pending clarity. But within days, outcomes started to crystallize.
As of press time:
- BCH ABC led by two blocks
- More critically, BCH ABC accumulated nearly 50% more proof-of-work than BCH SV
- Despite similar current hashrates, ABC's historical PoW advantage signaled greater security and resilience
On November 16, Binance became the first major exchange to distribute both assets:
- BCHABC/USDT: $287
- BCHSV/USDT: $123.62
Crucially, over the following days, more than ten leading exchanges—including Kraken, Bittrex, Coinbase, and Bitstamp—assigned the "BCH" ticker to Bitcoin ABC, effectively recognizing it as the dominant continuation of the original chain.
Changpeng Zhao of Binance confirmed both tokens would remain tradable under distinct tickers (BCHABC and BCHSV), preserving user access without conflating identities.
👉 Explore how market dynamics influence cryptocurrency valuations.
Current State and Long-Term Implications
Despite the technical parity during active mining, Bitcoin ABC clearly won the broader battle:
- Institutional recognition via ticker retention
- Superior proof-of-work accumulation
- Wider merchant and wallet support
Meanwhile, BCH (the ABC chain) saw a 30% price drop over ten days leading up to the fork—falling to $384—but remained significantly higher in value than BCHSV in early trading.
The rest of the crypto market showed signs of recovery during this period, with most major coins posting modest gains—suggesting that while internal conflicts impacted BCH specifically, systemic risk was contained.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q: What caused the Bitcoin Cash hard fork in November 2018?
A: A disagreement over protocol upgrades led to incompatible proposals—Bitcoin ABC favoring stability and Bitcoin SV pushing for larger blocks under "Satoshi’s Vision."
Q: What is a hash war?
A: A hash war occurs when two blockchain forks compete using computational power (hashrate). The chain with more cumulative proof-of-work is considered more secure and legitimate.
Q: Did Bitcoin SV disappear after the fork?
A: No. Although BCH ABC won exchange support and the "BCH" ticker, Bitcoin SV continues to operate independently with its own development roadmap and community.
Q: How did exchanges decide which chain to call BCH?
A: Exchanges evaluated multiple factors including hashrate dominance, proof-of-work totals, developer activity, and community support before assigning the main ticker.
Q: Can users still access both chains after the fork?
A: Yes. Users who held BCH before the fork received equal amounts of both BCHABC and BCHSV (1:1), assuming their wallet or exchange supported the split.
Q: Why does proof-of-work matter in a fork?
A: Proof-of-work reflects security investment. A chain with more accumulated PoW is harder to attack or reverse, making it more trustworthy for long-term use.
👉 Stay ahead in crypto with real-time market insights and secure trading tools.
The 2018 Bitcoin Cash hard fork underscored a critical truth in decentralized systems: governance isn’t just about code—it’s about consensus, capital, and credibility. While both chains survived technically, market forces decisively favored Bitcoin ABC as the legitimate heir to BCH’s legacy.
Core keywords: Bitcoin Cash, hard fork, hash war, BCH ABC, BCH SV, proof-of-work, blockchain split, mining hashrate