You didn't say he would have a "tough time" beating him. Your words were you don't think it's easy to see NaTo beating Gilman. There's a difference in the two..Close wrestling matches are tough matches, even if it's easy to see somebody winning it (It's easy to see Dake beating Taylor, even if it is a tough match). Maybe you meant that it would be a close match, which I agree with (and I bet sgallen would too). But that's not what you posted.
On an off topic note: did you end up hedging the Mayweather/Mcgregor fight?
I don't think the concepts are different. Something that is easy to see happens easily, that's why it's easy to see. It's probably semantics, but it's not easy for me to see Fix beating Nato again, whether by 1 or 10 points. I saw the second match, which was allegedly the "easier" match, and there was absolutely nothing easy about it. It was a 1-point math with the TD in the ending seconds the result of Nato's desperation moves. And Nato got only 1 point because he was such a freestyle newbie that he wasn't able to convert from Fix's quadpod position.
Now on to the May-Mac fight. THAT is an outcome that is easy to see, i.e. Mayweather winning. I ended up losing a small percentage of the total amount wagered off my hedges, mainly because I figured if I was going to go for the big result, I might as well not hedge too much or I'd never make a killing if the unthinkable actually happened. I got McGregor at close to 10:1, then bet the other way but not in fully hedged size a few days from the fight. If I were to do it again, I would've bet some of the prop lines like picking rounds, etc. since it was fairly obvious to me there was practically no chance the fight would end quickly either way. In retrospect, that was the gimme bet that so few took and I should've known better. You live and learn. I'm just happy I didn't lose much money on it.