# Riddle I have no idea: "One for the front / Two for the back ..."

One for the front
Two for the back
You will never need three.
What is this?

I thought it might be personality.

• Just to clarify, I thought it might be personality. is not part of the riddle right? :P Oct 22, 2015 at 13:46
• To add more to DrunkWolf's question, does this mean you don't know the answer? Oct 22, 2015 at 13:51
• Rolled back because I'm unsure whether the edit removes important information, and would rather leave it to OP to decide.
– user20
Oct 22, 2015 at 19:38

## 4 Answers

The answer is:

Mirror

(one to see your front; two to see your back; you never need three)

• Oct 22, 2015 at 14:29
• thekaleidoscopebook.com/thescopebook/scope-resources/… Oct 22, 2015 at 19:14
• There've been more than a few times when trying to look at something in an awkward location that I've wished for a 3rd hand to hold another one. Oct 22, 2015 at 20:08
• A definite counter-example! There are other ways to make retroreflectors, but three mirrors is really neat. That's not to say that this isn't the answer. Nov 21, 2015 at 1:08

It's the letter 'o'.
At the front of 'one', at the back of 'two' and none in 'three'.

• Clever, but I think it would be "you'll never need it for three" - the way it's written now, it makes no sense.
– Deusovi
Oct 23, 2015 at 13:14

This is

a tricycle. 1 wheel in front, two in back. You would never need three wheels in either position.

• What do they call those things that have 2 wheels in the front and 1 in the back? Oct 22, 2015 at 19:43
• @JohnOdom en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricycle according to wikipedia it's called a tadpole tricycle. The more common example I references being called a delta tricycle. Oct 22, 2015 at 19:52

Potential answer:

http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-definition-of/number-one <-- see the first example, don't need a 3.

• Might be a good idea to edit that information into your answer. Currently it's link-only. Oct 23, 2015 at 9:04
• I think the answerer is shy of incorporating the explicit answer into the question because it is, hm, not really decent =)
– syck
Oct 23, 2015 at 14:54
• Yeah I thought at first it probably wasn't the intended answer anyway but now I'm starting to think it may be. I'll delinkify it if that turns out to be the case =) Oct 26, 2015 at 8:48