premise: A man in a pink shirt is stealing an old couples bike, the possibility he is a loan shark collecting his dues are high.
hypothesis: A couple is having there bike stolen.
explanation_1: Sentence two is restating that the couple is having their bike stolen.
explanation_2: A couples is having their bike stolen.
explanation_3: The couple can only have bike stolen if the man is stealing the couple's bike.
premise_logic: exists e1 p1 s1 s2 s3 x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x9.(n_due(x9) & of(x9,x5) & n_male(x5) & n_male(x5) & n_possibility(x5) & Theme(s3,x5) & a_high(s3) & exists p2 e2 x6 x7 x8.((x5 = x6) & Theme(e2,x9) & Actor(e2,x8) & v_collect(e2) & (x6 = x8) & n_shark(x6) & of(x6,x7) & n_loan(x7)) & that(x5,p1) & Theme(e1,x3) & Actor(e1,x1) & v_steal(e1) & n_bike(x3) & of(x3,x4) & n_couple(x4) & a_old(s2) & Theme(s2,x3) & in(x1,x2) & n_shirt(x2) & a_pink(s1) & Theme(s1,x2) & n_man(x1))
hypothesis_logic: exists e1 e2 s1 x1 x2 x3.(a_there(s1) & Manner(e2,s1) & Theme(e2,x2) & Actor(e2,x1) & v_have(e2) & Theme(e1,x3) & v_steal(e1) & (x2 = x3) & n_bike(x2) & n_couple(x1))