Notes
Tyler and Jason told me I had some bad takes on races when I was literally just describing what was happening. It makes zero sense and I'm pretty sure Tyler's argument strategy is "Fred is always wrong so I'll prove him wrong."
I.E. my "bad take" was that Fisher trying to pass on the inside in the last 300 solidified him out of the top 4 and especially medal contention.
Honorable Mention: Ajee Wilson ran 1:57 less than 2 weeks before the Olympics, which ty vehemently denied and continued to rave about how she was a horrible pick and sucked at the trials (which her sucking still ran a 1:58.9), I showed him the results, and then just played it off like whatever.
I apparently have just like a face for that because like I don't remember all of the times this happens, usually just the most recent, but like EVERYBODY pulls the wrong side of an argument against me when I KNOW I'm right, I give them the benefit of the doubt when they say they 100% are right, I PROVE them wrong, and then they shrug it off like they were still right. It makes no sense. Like this is a recurring enough thing from a wide variety of people that I recognize it as a pattern. Whenever I say I'm "like 95% sure, but could be wrong", translates to "150% confident."
Opinions?