My point for saying that was how illogical you can be and stubborn. It wasn't the fact that you made a losing bet, but just how you fail to look at both sides on several occasions. This is one of them.
Your entire argument has been based on "we can't assume Gall's grappling skills will translate over with his inexperience". Ironically, or should I say illogically, your basis for betting Sage is based on making assumptions on Gall's skills NOT translating over. You are telling others not to make assumptions and then you do it yourself.
It's pretty easy to make a strong argument based off of things that have happened rather than going purely off assumption. Sage has shown fairly poor grappling ability. Sage always goes to the ground even when he has a standing advantage. Gall's grappling is solid outside of MMA, and so far, it has looked pretty smooth in MMA. Gall, although inexperienced, has been put in a big fight already with a lot of attention and pressure. From what I've seen of Sage, I'm not seeing improvements in between fights. I don't see how you can disagree with most of that, therefore, it's asinine to fail to see why someone would like Gall here. You may not agree, but to act like those points don't exist is crazy, just like acting like Gall may not have the grappling advantage lol.
