Five women are to be seated around a table. Then five men : DS Archive
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 18 Jan 2017, 21:47

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Five women are to be seated around a table. Then five men

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2003
Posts: 91
Location: Moscow
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Five women are to be seated around a table. Then five men [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Aug 2003, 00:05
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

This topic is locked. If you want to discuss this question please re-post it in the respective forum.

Five women are to be seated around a table. Then five men are to be assigned positions next to a woman. In how many ways can couples thus be arranged, if only the relative order around the table is of importance?
SVP
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
Posts: 1603
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Aug 2003, 02:06
if only the relative order around the table is of importance...

I assume that we do not need to eliminate a rotation factor
5!*5!
GMAT Instructor
Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 770
Location: New York NY 10024
Schools: Haas, MFE; Anderson, MBA; USC, MSEE
Followers: 25

Kudos [?]: 205 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Aug 2003, 14:15
stolyar wrote:
if only the relative order around the table is of importance...

I assume that we do not need to eliminate a rotation factor
5!*5!

First, if "only the relative order around the table is of importance" then you must surely eliminate the rotation factors.

Second, even if your assumption was correct, your answer would be wrong. You have only considered the number of permutations should the women be in the odd (or even) position and the men in the other, even (or odd) positions. You need to multiply this by 2 in order to get them all.

Then if you need to eliminate the rotations, divide by 10. You will end up with 5! x 4!, the same result you would get if you were to pick one person as an anchor.
_________________

Best,

AkamaiBrah
Former Senior Instructor, Manhattan GMAT and VeritasPrep
Vice President, Midtown NYC Investment Bank, Structured Finance IT
MFE, Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley, Class of 2005
MBA, Anderson School of Management, UCLA, Class of 1993

Manager
Joined: 25 Apr 2003
Posts: 227
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 115 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Aug 2003, 21:57
4! *5! is right when we need to place men and women ALTERNATELY around the table. However, the question as is worded is not perhaps clear on this account and only says that every man should be beside a woman. Therefore a circular combo like ...wwwmmwmmwm... will also be ok . Are we missing something Aka ?
Manager
Joined: 25 Apr 2003
Posts: 227
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 115 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

09 Aug 2003, 01:09
No Stolyar - You ARE our angel ! Please revert on the question I had posed.
GMAT Instructor
Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 770
Location: New York NY 10024
Schools: Haas, MFE; Anderson, MBA; USC, MSEE
Followers: 25

Kudos [?]: 205 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

09 Aug 2003, 02:51
anupag wrote:
4! *5! is right when we need to place men and women ALTERNATELY around the table. However, the question as is worded is not perhaps clear on this account and only says that every man should be beside a woman. Therefore a circular combo like ...wwwmmwmmwm... will also be ok . Are we missing something Aka ?

You are right, that is a possibility. There are so many typos that I tend to assume more that the question poses at times.
_________________

Best,

AkamaiBrah
Former Senior Instructor, Manhattan GMAT and VeritasPrep
Vice President, Midtown NYC Investment Bank, Structured Finance IT
MFE, Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley, Class of 2005
MBA, Anderson School of Management, UCLA, Class of 1993

Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2003
Posts: 146
Location: India
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

09 Aug 2003, 05:00
AkamaiBrah wrote:
anupag wrote:
4! *5! is right when we need to place men and women ALTERNATELY around the table. However, the question as is worded is not perhaps clear on this account and only says that every man should be beside a woman. Therefore a circular combo like ...wwwmmwmmwm... will also be ok . Are we missing something Aka ?

You are right, that is a possibility. There are so many typos that I tend to assume more that the question poses at times.

There are five couples to be seated. Fix one. Then the rest can be arranged in 4! ways around the table. Each couple itself can be arranged in 2! ways.

Therefore the answer is 4!*2!=48 ways.

Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2003
Posts: 146
Location: India
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

18 Aug 2003, 20:29
anupag wrote:
4! *5! is right when we need to place men and women ALTERNATELY around the table. However, the question as is worded is not perhaps clear on this account and only says that every man should be beside a woman. Therefore a circular combo like ...wwwmmwmmwm... will also be ok . Are we missing something Aka ?

KL, are you sure this is the solution? I ask because anupag's point is still unanswered - "....a circular combo like ...wwwmmwmmwm... will also be ok ...."
Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2003
Posts: 91
Location: Moscow
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2003, 09:02
Well... the book says it is 5!*4!
Display posts from previous: Sort by