Your analogy implies that context is NOT important when focusing on an single item. When you choose to select one item out of a field of three and you don’t say it’s from a field of three, you are implying a one to one relationship that doesn’t exist, instead of a one to three ratio. Example: Bill has ten opponents. He emails his Dad the list of the ten competitors and tells his Dad that he thinks he can beat Fred, Sam and Dave easily and hopes to be up against one of them in the finals. All three have an equal chance of making it into the finals. Sam beats Fred and Dave. Sam goes to the finals. When it’s down to Sam and Bill, a judge accuses Bill of rigging the game because he found the email he sent to his Dad. You said Sam should be your opponent and now he is. You rigged the outcome!
Really? Is that what happened? I don’t think so.