[Lottery Larry]

Well, this isn't what I intended for my 6Kth post, but some would think it's appropriate:

[ QUOTE ]
I would agree that usage frequently dictates the meaning of words.

Here, there is an issue of precision. The board is 9 9 8 8 2. A player at showdown announces I have the nuts.

Now, with the rigid use of the term, every reasonably bright person at the table knows what the declarer has (assuming the declarer is accurate).

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly- he has a hand that won't be beaten by anyone else- thus, "the nuts"

To argue that he is causing a precision faux pas by not stating one of the two nut-type hands that he could hold here... is lame beyond words.

[ QUOTE ]
With the willy nilly voodoo use of the term, everybody is left guessing. "Oh, you have 9 9? Crap, it's a fouled deck then because I have 9 8."

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's what I'd be assuming about the villan's hand, if I held 98 here.

[ QUOTE ]
It gets back to being able to identify the nuts given a board. One should be able to identify the nuts and unbeatable hands given a finished board.

[/ QUOTE ]

You seem to be one of the few who would have a lot of consternation and confusion, facing this statement and situation. Respectfully, maybe you are the problem?


[ QUOTE ]
All "nuts" are unbeatable hands; all unbeatable hands are not "nuts".

[/ QUOTE ]

........ eh, never mind.


[ QUOTE ]
There is a compelling argument (precision) however to try and curb this usage.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, not really compelling at all... for most of us.