# American sporting idiom - "3 for 6" etc **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 8, 2005, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524 "2005-06-08T23:31:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![seosamh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce7236/32.png) [@seosamh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/seosamh)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/1 "2005-06-08T23:31:18Z")
Fresh from a visit to the US, which included Sunday’s tremendous baseball game between the Oakland A’s and the Toronto Blue Jays, it occurred to me that I could not work out what that sporting idiom actually means. For example, when a batter has been at bat 6 times and scored 3 hits, he is said to be “3 for 6”. Why _for_? In fact, “6 for 3” (i.e. 6 at bats for 3 runs) would make more sense to me! I suspect the answer is that it’s just an idiom. But any enlightenment would be appreciated. (Over here we’d say “3 _out of_ 6”) ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Blue\_Sky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d26b3c/32.png) [@Mr.Blue\_Sky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Blue_Sky)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/2 "2005-06-08T23:33:02Z")
He’s 3 (hits) for (every) 6 (at-bats). ---
**Author:** ![BobT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e8cbc/32.png) [@BobT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobT)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/3 "2005-06-09T00:13:20Z")
“3 for 6” would make more sense to a baseball fan because they tend to relate to performance in percentages. “3 for 6” means the player was successful 50% of the time. At bats are the denominator. ---
**Author:** ![Manduck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manduck/32/256_2.png) [@Manduck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Manduck)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/4 "2005-06-09T01:09:25Z")
Just an idiom 🙂 Don’t they use the same idiom in cricket, except that instead of hits and at-bats, it’s runs and outs? ---
**Author:** ![Casey1505](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dc4da7/32.png) [@Casey1505](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Casey1505)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/5 "2005-06-09T01:25:44Z")
> [@seosamh](#): > > (Over here we’d say “3 _out of_ 6”) He got a hit _3 out of 6_ times he was at bat. Basically. What is considered an at-bat is a bit confusing. ---
**Author:** ![TheLoadedDog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/35a633/32.png) [@TheLoadedDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TheLoadedDog)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/6 "2005-06-09T01:30:15Z")
> [@Manduck](#): > > Don’t they use the same idiom in cricket, except that instead of hits and at-bats, it’s runs and outs? Yes. For example, “India is three for a hundred and six”, means that side has scored 106 runs and has lost three men. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/7 "2005-06-09T01:31:46Z")
> [@Casey1505](#): > > What is considered an at-bat is a bit confusing. Not at all. A player is not charged with an at bat if he hits a sacrifice bunt or sacrifice fly, is walked, is hit by a pitch, or is given first base on interference. Everything else is a charged at bat. ---
**Author:** ![Casey1505](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dc4da7/32.png) [@Casey1505](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Casey1505)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/8 "2005-06-09T01:34:21Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > Not at all. A player is not charged with an at bat if he hits a sacrifice bunt or sacrifice fly, is walked, is hit by a pitch, or is given first base on interference. Everything else is a charged at bat. All I do is collect base hits and drive in runs. 🆒 I though there was more to it than that. You make the rule look so easy. ---
**Author:** ![Cunctator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/43a26b/32.png) [@Cunctator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cunctator)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/9 "2005-06-09T02:04:29Z")
> [@TheLoadedDog](#): > > Yes. For example, “India is three for a hundred and six”, means that side has scored 106 runs and has lost three men. And just to confuse the issue further, Australians would say “3 for 106”. Others (UK, NZ) would say “106 for 3”. ---
**Author:** ![Cliffy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cliffy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cliffy)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/10 "2005-06-09T02:04:42Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > Not at all. A player is not charged with an at bat if he hits a sacrifice bunt or sacrifice fly, is walked, is hit by a pitch, or is given first base on interference. Everything else is a charged at bat. You forgot when he steals first on a dropped third strike. 🙂 –Cliffy ---
**Author:** ![Loopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loopus/32/15343_2.png) [@Loopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopus)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/11 "2005-06-09T02:12:19Z")
> [@Cliffy](#): > > You forgot when he steals first on a dropped third strike. 🙂 > > –Cliffy Isn’t the batter charged with both an at bat and a strikeout when that happens? ---
**Author:** ![anson2995](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c77e96/32.png) [@anson2995](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/anson2995)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/12 "2005-06-09T02:34:49Z")
> [@Loopus](#): > > Isn’t the batter charged with both an at bat and a strikeout when that happens? Yes, it is considered a time at bat. But just to be clear, when a batter advances to first base on a strikeout, it is not a stolen base. It is a strikeout plus either a wild pitch or passed ball. As to the OP’s question, I don’t think this particular usage is unique to baseball. (not sure it’s really an idiom, either.) ---
**Author:** ![Dahnlor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dahnlor/32/533_2.png) [@Dahnlor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dahnlor)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/13 "2005-06-09T03:35:06Z")
An at-bat is also not charged if the batter reaches base on an error. Sacrifices are only counted on fly balls and bunts, if a batter grounds out but advances the runner(s), it is not a sacrifice and an at-bat is charged. So, if you have a runner on third base: Batter bunts or flies out, runner scores = batter earns a sacrifice and an RBI, and no at-bat is charged Batter swings and grounds out, runner scores = batter does not earn a sacrifice, is charged an at-bat, but does earn an RBI Batter swings, fielder drops ball and runner scores = batter is not charged for neither an at-bat nor an RBI ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/14 "2005-06-09T03:47:31Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > Not at all. A player is not charged with an at bat if he hits a sacrifice bunt or sacrifice fly, is walked, is hit by a pitch, or is given first base on interference. Everything else is a charged at bat. You also forgot when a player is injured at the plate and the count goes to his replacement. ---
**Author:** ![Manduck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manduck/32/256_2.png) [@Manduck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Manduck)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/15 "2005-06-09T04:34:24Z")
> [@Dahnlor](#): > > An at-bat is also not charged if the batter reaches base on an error. No, that is an at-bat. The definition is in [rule 10.02](http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/official_info/official_rules/official_scorer_10.jsp) (scroll down a bit). It says > [@](#): > > The official score report prescribed by the league president shall make provisions for entering the information listed below, in a form convenient for the compilation of permanent statistical records: (a) The following records for each batter and runner: (1) Number of times he batted, except that no time at bat shall be charged against a player when (i) He hits a sacrifice bunt or sacrifice fly (ii) He is awarded first base on four called balls (iii) He is hit by a pitched ball (iv) He is awarded first base because of interference or obstruction. note that errors aren’t mentioned. ---
**Author:** ![Hung\_Mung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a88e4f/32.png) [@Hung\_Mung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hung_Mung)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/16 "2005-06-09T05:15:44Z")
The same phrase is used in football when dealing with QB and kicker completion/attempt ratios, but more often, it seems, with kickers. i.e. “Morten Andersen is 12 for 15 on the season…”, meaning he’s made 12 out of 15 attempts. Your ears get used to it after a while, I suppose. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Pearse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/richard_pearse/32/13144_2.png) [@Richard\_Pearse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Pearse)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/17 "2005-06-09T05:55:20Z")
> [@Cunctator](#): > > And just to confuse the issue further, Australians would say “3 for 106”. Others (UK, NZ) would say “106 for 3”. Yes. The non-Australian way makes more sense to me. You HAVE 106 runs for the COST of 3 wickets, therefore you are 106 for 3. If you were the bowling side you would have 3 wickets for the cost of 106 runs. I’m not making any attempt to change the Aussie way though, that’s how they do it, and I just have to live with it. It can get pretty confusing when the runs are less than 10. E.g. “Australia are 3 for 5”\*, it’s not clear which are the wickets and which are the runs and the telecast may not necessarily be Australian so no clues there. \*Of course it’s pretty rare for Australia to do this poorly at cricket, it may be more realistic to exchange “Australia” for “England” in the example. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/18 "2005-06-09T05:59:31Z")
> [@Hung Mung](#): > > The same phrase is used in football when dealing with QB and kicker completion/attempt ratios, but more often, it seems, with kickers. > i.e. “Morten Andersen is 12 for 15 on the season…”, meaning he’s made 12 out of 15 attempts. Your ears get used to it after a while, I suppose. Yeah, I’d say that’s the American style for saying someone has been successful number of times in [Y] attempts. “Shaq is 3 for 17 from the line tonight…” ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 10:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/19 "2005-06-09T10:24:43Z")
It’s also used in casinos to inflate the numbers on the felt. Consider a bet that pays 2 to 1. Meaning, you bet $1, and if you win, you get your dollar back plus double ($2) in winnings. Now the casino can elect to denote this payout scheme in one of two ways: 2 to 1 3 for 1 Take a wild guess which they prefer to use. ---
**Author:** ![seosamh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce7236/32.png) [@seosamh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/seosamh)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 11:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/20 "2005-06-09T11:00:52Z")
Thanks, all. Just to confuse matters even further on the cricket front, as noted above a team’s score is either runs-for-wickets (356 for 8) or, Down Under, wickets for runs (8 for 356). But a bowler’s performance is usually written like this: Overs bowled (an over is a stint of 6 balls) - maidens (overs off which no runs were scored) - runs conceded - wickets taken, e.g. 15-2-76-4. But when _spoken_, you would always say that he’s taken “four for seventy-six”. Even in Australia and NZ. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524.md?page=2)