|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Jun 2010
Posts: 305
Schools: Chicago Booth Class of 2013
Followers: 19
Kudos [?]:
115
[2] , given: 194
|
2
This post received
KUDOS
Question Stats:
31% (02:11) correct
68% (01:12) wrong based on 0 sessions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Status: Time to step up the tempo
Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Posts: 420
Location: Milky way
Schools: ISB, Tepper - CMU, Chicago Booth, LSB
Followers: 6
Kudos [?]:
75
[1] , given: 50
|
1
This post received
KUDOS
Financier wrote: Answer should be C. Reason: Options: A -- Out of scope. B -- New information introduced and it may or may not weaken the argument. C -- Good candidate since the line of reasoning proposed by the consortium is broken with a parallel example. D -- Out of scope. E -- Out of scope. C wins.
_________________
 Support GMAT Club by putting a GMAT Club badge on your blog 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Jun 2010
Posts: 305
Schools: Chicago Booth Class of 2013
Followers: 19
Kudos [?]:
115
[0], given: 194
|
ezhilkumarank wrote: Financier wrote: Answer should be C. Reason: Options: A -- Out of scope. B -- New information introduced and it may or may not weaken the argument. C -- Good candidate since the line of reasoning proposed by the consortium is broken with a parallel example. D -- Out of scope. E -- Out of scope. C wins. Yes, you are right. OA is "C". But I ruled out "C" on the basis that differencies between two games may outweight the similarities between them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Status: Time to step up the tempo
Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Posts: 420
Location: Milky way
Schools: ISB, Tepper - CMU, Chicago Booth, LSB
Followers: 6
Kudos [?]:
75
[0], given: 50
|
I guess we should stick as close to the stimulus/argument and options at hand. Yes, in the real world there might be various factors coming into play but for this question we need to eliminate all those except for the most common sense assumptions/factors.
_________________
Support GMAT Club by putting a GMAT Club badge on your blog
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Posts: 188
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
21
[0], given: 5
|
ezhilkumarank wrote: Financier wrote: Answer should be C. Reason: Options: A -- Out of scope. B -- New information introduced and it may or may not weaken the argument. C -- Good candidate since the line of reasoning proposed by the consortium is broken with a parallel example. D -- Out of scope. E -- Out of scope. C wins. Good question ... great explanation
_________________
Please give me kudos, if you like the above post.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Moderator
Status: doing good things...
Joined: 02 Jul 2009
Posts: 1232
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
GMAT 1: Q V
GMAT 2: 690 Q49 V35
GPA: 3.77
WE: Corporate Finance (Other)
Followers: 125
Kudos [?]:
416
[0], given: 521
|
My take is A. Reasoning is: Premise 1: People enjoy plyaing chess when they have equal intellectual abilities. A-Premise2: It is hard to find suitable opponent. B-conclusion: Thus, few people play chess. (becasue of premise2). A->B in this argument. We have to find either something other than influences B, or demonstrate that the relationship is reversed. actually B->A So, I see A valid because price of a set of chess is the other factor that influences people to play less chess. Those who like to play intellectual games like chess, actually choose other games, because a set of chess is expensive. Why in C we compare chess and tenis? Here is an unsupported assumption that even if the games are different the trends in all the games are similar.This may not be true. Why C?
_________________
Follow me, if you find my explanations useful.
Audaces fortuna juvat!
Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Instructor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 973
Location: Toronto
Followers: 167
Kudos [?]:
443
[2] , given: 3
|
2
This post received
KUDOS
I agree with pkit above; if the answer is C, this is a bad question. Sure, tennis and chess may both be more fun if you play against someone of equal ability. That doesn't mean that it's just as easy to find a suitable chess opponent as it is to find a suitable tennis opponent, and that's the key question here; it may be that all beginning tennis players are roughly equal in ability, or that tennis was already so popular that finding an appropriate opponent is easy. If C told us that it was hard to find a suitable tennis opponent, and yet tennis was still becoming increasingly popular, then C might be a good answer, but as it stands, it doesn't do much to 'undermine' the consortium's opinion, since it doesn't compare tennis and chess on the correct grounds. Answer A does provide an alternative explanation for the unpopularity of chess - it's expensive. So it's a perfectly good answer. I'd add that this does seem like one of those poorly constructed prep company questions, and doesn't have much in common with real GMAT CR, so it isn't worth spending time on.
_________________
Nov 2011: After years of development, I am now making my advanced Quant books and high-level problem sets available for sale. Contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com for details.
Private GMAT Tutor based in Toronto
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Moderator
Status: doing good things...
Joined: 02 Jul 2009
Posts: 1232
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
GMAT 1: Q V
GMAT 2: 690 Q49 V35
GPA: 3.77
WE: Corporate Finance (Other)
Followers: 125
Kudos [?]:
416
[1] , given: 521
|
1
This post received
KUDOS
IanStewart wrote: I agree with pkit above; if the answer is C, this is a bad question. Sure, tennis and chess may both be more fun if you play against someone of equal ability. That doesn't mean that it's just as easy to find a suitable chess opponent as it is to find a suitable tennis opponent, and that's the key question here; it may be that all beginning tennis players are roughly equal in ability, or that tennis was already so popular that finding an appropriate opponent is easy. If C told us that it was hard to find a suitable tennis opponent, and yet tennis was still becoming increasingly popular, then C might be a good answer, but as it stands, it doesn't do much to 'undermine' the consortium's opinion, since it doesn't compare tennis and chess on the correct grounds.
Answer A does provide an alternative explanation for the unpopularity of chess - it's expensive. So it's a perfectly good answer.
I'd add that this does seem like one of those poorly constructed prep company questions, and doesn't have much in common with real GMAT CR, so it isn't worth spending time on. Thank you a lot Ian for helping us!
_________________
Follow me, if you find my explanations useful.
Audaces fortuna juvat!
Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Jun 2010
Posts: 305
Schools: Chicago Booth Class of 2013
Followers: 19
Kudos [?]:
115
[0], given: 194
|
IanStewart wrote: I agree with pkit above; if the answer is C, this is a bad question. Sure, tennis and chess may both be more fun if you play against someone of equal ability. That doesn't mean that it's just as easy to find a suitable chess opponent as it is to find a suitable tennis opponent, and that's the key question here; it may be that all beginning tennis players are roughly equal in ability, or that tennis was already so popular that finding an appropriate opponent is easy. If C told us that it was hard to find a suitable tennis opponent, and yet tennis was still becoming increasingly popular, then C might be a good answer, but as it stands, it doesn't do much to 'undermine' the consortium's opinion, since it doesn't compare tennis and chess on the correct grounds.
Answer A does provide an alternative explanation for the unpopularity of chess - it's expensive. So it's a perfectly good answer.
I'd add that this does seem like one of those poorly constructed prep company questions, and doesn't have much in common with real GMAT CR, so it isn't worth spending time on. Thanks Ian! I've burned all official verbal material and want more practice, that's why I study such terrible stuff 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 17 Apr 2010
Posts: 115
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
33
[0], given: 12
|
its clearly C
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Status: ISB, Hyderabad
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 177
WE 1: 4 years Software Product Development
WE 2: 3 years ERP Consulting
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
18
[1] , given: 15
|
1
This post received
KUDOS
IanStewart wrote: I agree with pkit above; if the answer is C, this is a bad question. Sure, tennis and chess may both be more fun if you play against someone of equal ability. That doesn't mean that it's just as easy to find a suitable chess opponent as it is to find a suitable tennis opponent, and that's the key question here; it may be that all beginning tennis players are roughly equal in ability, or that tennis was already so popular that finding an appropriate opponent is easy. If C told us that it was hard to find a suitable tennis opponent, and yet tennis was still becoming increasingly popular, then C might be a good answer, but as it stands, it doesn't do much to 'undermine' the consortium's opinion, since it doesn't compare tennis and chess on the correct grounds.
Answer A does provide an alternative explanation for the unpopularity of chess - it's expensive. So it's a perfectly good answer.
I'd add that this does seem like one of those poorly constructed prep company questions, and doesn't have much in common with real GMAT CR, so it isn't worth spending time on. Totally Agree with IanStewart and pkit. I think A is a perfect answer. I was trying to find a loop hole in my logic to see how I could C be an answer. Honestly I had created an explanation as well. But the post from IanStewart and pkit made me realise at times the OA may not be correct and one needs to be confident on his own techniques. +1 to pkit on this one.
_________________
-AD
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 35
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 1
|
B relies upon an example of two competitive opponents playing one another. This implies that kids should always be able to find a challenging opponent, albeit a computer opponent, of comparable ability to play. This would weaken the argument if the conclusion did not state the difficulty of two persons to find competitive opponents.
Therefore, C seems to be the best option, although certainly not a perfect choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
