# 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:** 13\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Cugel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cugel/32/1199_2.png) [@Cugel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cugel)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/21 "2005-06-09T12:45:27Z")
> [@seosamh](#): > > But when _spoken_, you would always say that he’s taken “four for seventy-six”. Even in Australia and NZ. You’d still write the short bowling figures 4/76, though. And I guess in non-Australian cricketing circles the expression “one-fuh” or “two-fuh”, usually to mean a wicket (or two) has been lost, but it’s only early days in the innings, isn’t in use. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/22 "2005-06-09T12:57:04Z")
> [@Dahnlor](#): > > 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. This is a\* fielder’s choice\* and is a time at bat. The infielder elected to throw out the batter rather than try to get the runner out. ---
**Author:** ![Quercus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/7ab992/32.png) [@Quercus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quercus)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2005, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/23 "2005-06-09T13:37:57Z")
> [@](#): > > This is a fielder’s choice and is a time at bat. The infielder elected to throw out the batter rather than try to get the runner out. I think you’ve got that backwards: a fielder’s choice is when the fielder elects to throw out another runner rather than the batter. So the batter reaches first safely, but an out is recorded. This is considered an at-bat, but not a base hit. If the fielder throws out the batter at first (and it’s not an intentional sacrifice bunt), you don’t need to do anything special scoring-wise: it’s an at-bat, but not a base hit, because the batter was out. ---
**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, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/24 "2005-06-09T14:36:06Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > You also forgot when a player is injured at the plate and the count goes to his replacement. That’s true enough, but that player doesn’t get anything for that appearance - no at bat, no walk, and so on. It’s just as if he’d been disappeared. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2005, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/25 "2005-06-10T01:42:56Z")
> [@](#): > > 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.) The OP’s usage is also commonly used in any sport in the US to refer to a team’s record. One might say, for instance, that a very good team is ten for twelve, or the like. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2005, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/26 "2005-06-10T03:05:16Z")
> [@Quercus](#): > > I think you’ve got that backwards: a fielder’s choice is when the fielder elects to throw out another runner rather than the batter. So the batter reaches first safely, but an out is recorded. > This is considered an at-bat, but not a base hit. > > If the fielder throws out the batter at first (and it’s not an intentional sacrifice bunt), you don’t need to do anything special scoring-wise: it’s an at-bat, but not a base hit, because the batter was out. Backwards it had I. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2005, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/27 "2005-06-10T03:59:11Z")
> [@Manduck](#): > > 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 note that errors aren’t mentioned. It’s an at-bat, and it’s one of the dumbest scoring rules baseball has. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2005, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/28 "2005-06-10T04:04:31Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > It’s an at-bat, and it’s one of the dumbest scoring rules baseball has. Excuse me? It should absolutely be an at bat. The batter would have been out had not an error been made. Why in the world should he not be charged an at bat for it? ---
**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 10, 2005, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/29 "2005-06-10T04:21:09Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > Excuse me? It should absolutely be an at bat. The batter would have been out had not an error been made. Why in the world should he not be charged an at bat for it? Because it made me wrong on that point. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![seosamh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce7236/32.png) [@seosamh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/seosamh)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2005, 12:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/30 "2005-06-10T12:17:13Z")
> [@Cugel](#): > > You’d still write the short bowling figures 4/76, though. … true, but if you give the full analysis, the runs always come before the wickets. ---
**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 10, 2005, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/31 "2005-06-10T13:19:54Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > The OP’s usage is also commonly used in any sport in the US to refer to a team’s record. One might say, for instance, that a very good team is ten for twelve, or the like. That would be highly unusual in football. I’ve never heard any NFL (or NCAA, for that matter) team’s record ever referenced in a manner other than “_wins_ and _losses_”. For example, my hapless Giants went 6 and 10, not 6 for 16. Even in streaks football doesn’t use the “for” construction. It’s either “x in a row” or “x of the last y” games. I can’t speak to the other sports regarding record notation. ---
**Author:** ![LindyHopper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@LindyHopper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LindyHopper)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2005, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/32 "2005-06-10T17:30:07Z")
> [@anson2995](#): > > 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.) It’s not; they use it in basketball, too. When a player attempts 10 shots and makes 4 of them, they’re “4 for 10”. ---
**Author:** ![Omniscient](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omniscient/32/3290_2.png) [@Omniscient](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omniscient)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2005, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524/33 "2005-06-10T18:04:40Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > The OP’s usage is also commonly used in any sport in the US to refer to a team’s record. One might say, for instance, that a very good team is ten for twelve, or the like. I’m also going to debunk this one. I’ve never heard this used. People with say the team is 32 and 28 (32 wins, 28 losses), occasionally 32 up, 28 down. In the context of a hot or cold streak you’ll hear “they’ve won 10 of 12”, but never “going 10 for 12”. Back to the OP, I will note that saying a batter was 3 _of_ 6 isn’t exactly uncommon. Which of course would probably be more grammically correct, or at least more intuitive. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-sporting-idiom-3-for-6-etc/307524.md?page=1)