Step Two: Identify every additional tear
Don’t count yet.
Simply locate them.
Step Three: Determine whether each tear goes through one layer or multiple layers
This is the crucial part.
Step Four: Check the back
Look for openings that are hidden from the front.
Step Five: Decide what your definition of “hole” is
Are you counting visible openings?
Or passages through the entire garment?
Step Six: Add them together
Now you have a defensible answer.
Why Different People Get Different Answers
Suppose an image shows several tears.
One person might say:
“There are eight holes.”
Another might say:
“There are ten.”
Someone else might insist:
“There are twelve.”
That doesn’t necessarily mean one person cannot count.
It may mean they are using different definitions.
For example, one person might count a tear through both layers as one hole.
Another might count the opening on the front and the opening on the back separately.
Both approaches can be explained logically.
The Topology Perspective
This is where the puzzle becomes surprisingly mathematical.
Topology is a branch of mathematics concerned with properties that remain meaningful when shapes are stretched or deformed.
A classic example is the comparison between a coffee mug and a doughnut.
They can be considered equivalent in topology because each has one major hole.
A shirt, however, is a more complicated object.
Its openings connect the inside and outside of the garment.
If you cut additional passages into it, its topological structure changes.
This doesn’t necessarily mean the puzzle has a single mathematical answer, because the exact geometry of the pictured garment matters.
But topology helps explain why “counting holes” is more complicated than simply counting visible circles.
A Hole Is Not Always a Circle
Another reason people struggle with the puzzle is that they unconsciously expect a hole to look circular.
But holes can have almost any shape.
A rip can be:
- Long
- Narrow
- Jagged
- Rectangular
- Irregular
- Connected to another opening
A large tear can still function as an opening.
So don’t search only for perfectly enclosed shapes.
Look for breaks in the material.
Tears Versus Holes
There is also a linguistic argument.
Some people might say a tear in fabric isn’t a “hole.”
They might reserve the word hole for a deliberate opening.
But in ordinary speech, we commonly call a tear in clothing a hole.
Someone might say:
“There’s a hole in my shirt.”
even when the opening was caused by ripping rather than cutting.
Therefore, for most versions of the puzzle, treating the tears as holes is reasonable.
What If a Tear Connects to the Edge?
Here’s another complication.
Suppose you cut a circular hole in a shirt.
That’s clearly an enclosed opening.
Now imagine extending the cut until it reaches the edge of the fabric.
Is it still a hole?
In everyday language, you might call it a tear.
From a topological perspective, the structure has changed.
This demonstrates that counting “holes” depends partly on how the openings are shaped and connected.
The Hidden-Hole Trick
One of the most common tricks in these puzzles is hiding an opening behind the obvious ones.
For example, a tear on the front may reveal the background.
If you can see the background through it, the opening clearly passes through at least one layer.
But if the background is visible through a sleeve or through a tear that continues around the garment, you may have to consider additional openings.
The puzzle rewards people who look for what is not immediately visible.
Why 99% Is Probably an Exaggeration
The phrase “99% of people are wrong” is classic viral-puzzle language.
It creates a challenge.
Nobody wants to be part of the 99%.
That makes people stop scrolling.
The exact percentage is rarely supported by a genuine scientific survey.
It is usually rhetorical.
The purpose is to make the puzzle feel more difficult and irresistible.
This is an important lesson about online headlines.
Claims like:
- “99% get this wrong”
- “Only geniuses can solve this”
- “Can you beat the test?”
- “Nobody notices the hidden detail”
are often designed primarily to generate engagement.
They should not automatically be treated as statistical facts.
The Psychology of the Challenge
Why does “99% get this wrong” work?
Because it activates several psychological instincts.
First, it creates competition.
Can I do better than other people?
Second, it creates uncertainty.
Maybe the obvious answer is wrong.
Third, it creates curiosity.
What am I missing?
Fourth, it creates identity pressure.
Am I one of the people who can solve it?
Together, these factors make simple visual puzzles surprisingly engaging.
Why Smart People Can Still Miss It
These puzzles aren’t necessarily tests of intelligence.
A highly intelligent person may quickly answer four.
Someone else may carefully inspect the image and reach a more complicated answer.
The difference isn’t necessarily intelligence.
It may be attention.
In fact, people who are used to solving problems quickly can sometimes be more vulnerable to familiar-object shortcuts.
They recognize the object immediately and move on.
The “Obvious Answer” Trap
Many visual puzzles deliberately present an obvious answer first.
Your brain says:
Four.
Then the puzzle asks you to reconsider.
This creates a conflict between intuition and inspection.
The lesson is useful beyond puzzles.
In real life, the first explanation isn’t always the correct one.
When a situation seems obvious, sometimes the best response is to look again.
How to Improve Visual Reasoning
You can actually practice this skill.
When looking at a complex image:
Slow down
Don’t answer immediately.
Scan systematically
Move from left to right, then top to bottom.
Look at edges
Important details often appear around boundaries.
Consider hidden surfaces
Ask what might exist behind the visible area.
Question assumptions
If something seems obvious, ask why.
Explain your reasoning
An answer is stronger when you can explain how you reached it.
These techniques are useful in puzzles, technical work, reading maps, analyzing diagrams, and even everyday problem-solving.
Why the Shirt Puzzle Feels Like a Trick
The puzzle works because the object is familiar.
If the picture showed a strange geometric shape, people would naturally inspect it carefully.
But because it shows a shirt, the brain already knows what it expects to see.
The puzzle exploits that familiarity.
It’s essentially asking:
Can you stop recognizing and start analyzing?
What Would Happen With a Pair of Pants?
Imagine the same puzzle involving trousers.
You might immediately count:
- Waist opening
- Two leg openings
Then you might notice tears.
But what about pockets?
Are pockets holes?
That question demonstrates how quickly definitions become complicated.
A pocket has an opening, but it is not necessarily a hole through the garment.
So even everyday objects contain ambiguous structures.
