>But it's perfectly correct to read it as there being only two different amounts: one final, chosen amount for each of two cards. Well reading only the Indepen

>But it's perfectly correct to read it as there being only two different amounts: one final, chosen amount for each of two cards. Well reading only the Independent article it was not so straightforward. There are two cards and three values, as written in the original paper, it is only funny (to me) in Italian we have a saying, that goes more or less like: You did like the one that said that the four evangelists were three: Lucas and Matthew.