Yeah that might be right. My correction assumes that Lynn’s definition is correct, which would not be if your interpretation is right. Also, in that case the use of the last ‘in the top 10’ would be redundant and the part that makes it confusing, and it should be ‘debut her first ten top 10 Hot 100 hits in the top 10’.
Lynn’s definition explicitly separates records that are ever in the top 10 and those that debut in the top 10, and says that Rodrigo’s are both.
“Debut her first ten top 10 Hot 100 hits in the top 10” translates to exactly that. If the last “in the top 10” were missing, that would mean only that the records were in the top 10 at some point, and “debuts” would be out of place.
Yeah, the statement is all kinds of confusing, but the math translation is surprisingly accurate despite being more dense — which is kind of the joke. It’s quite impressive.
Yeah that might be right. My correction assumes that Lynn’s definition is correct, which would not be if your interpretation is right. Also, in that case the use of the last ‘in the top 10’ would be redundant and the part that makes it confusing, and it should be ‘debut her first ten top 10 Hot 100 hits
in the top 10’.deleted by creator
Lynn’s definition explicitly separates records that are ever in the top 10 and those that debut in the top 10, and says that Rodrigo’s are both.
“Debut her first ten top 10 Hot 100 hits in the top 10” translates to exactly that. If the last “in the top 10” were missing, that would mean only that the records were in the top 10 at some point, and “debuts” would be out of place.
Yes, I’ve read it with more attention, now well rested and after my morning coffee, and you are correct.
Yeah, the statement is all kinds of confusing, but the math translation is surprisingly accurate despite being more dense — which is kind of the joke. It’s quite impressive.