|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Posts: 318
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
13
[0], given: 1
|
Guidebook Writer: have visited hotels throughout the country [#permalink]
 30 Jun 2009, 23:58
Question Stats:
48% (01:00) correct
51% (01:14) wrong based on 13 sessions
Guidebook Writer: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have noticed that in those built before 1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward. Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer’s argument? A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores. B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930. C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930. D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished. E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930. I dont know the answer, Kindly explain along with the right answer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 163
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
14
[0], given: 11
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
21 Jul 2009, 02:17
A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores.
- Irrelevant
B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.
- Possible. Diffentiate between the 2 structures but no direct relationship with the caprpentary until we argue that carpentry was damanged by accomodatine more guests blah. Disregard
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.
- Doesnt weaken infact strengthen.
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
-This gives us the idea that the old buildings have good carpentry since all other similarly aged buildings would have fall into misuse and demolished due to bad carpentry. Since the comparison is not fair in nature, it weakens the author's original argument.
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930.
- Doesnt weaken infact strengthen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 05 Jun 2009
Posts: 853
WE 1: 7years (Financial Services - Consultant, BA)
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
125
[0], given: 106
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
21 Jul 2009, 07:01
OA is D as I remember. D seems appropriate too.
_________________
Consider kudos for the good post ... 
My debrief : journey-670-to-720-q50-v36-long-85083.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 03 Jun 2009
Posts: 806
Location: New Delhi
WE 1: 5.5 yrs in IT
Followers: 46
Kudos [?]:
279
[0], given: 56
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
21 Jul 2009, 08:24
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 07 Sep 2010
Posts: 45
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 8
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
08 Sep 2010, 07:36
i am still unable to understand how the answer is D....
Please explain in a little detail...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 17 Nov 2009
Posts: 239
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 17
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
08 Sep 2010, 08:11
vaivish1723 wrote: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have noticed that in those built before 1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward. Conclusion :Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer’s argument?
A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores.Irreverent as the author compares just hotels
B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930. We do not care about accommodation but about skill
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.Irrelevant- How can materials have anything to do. If at all it supports the authors conclusion that even though the same tools were used older buildings were better made
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished. The very reason that the author could visit these hotels is because the quality of carpentry was good and it withstood the test of time
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930.Irrelevant
I dont know the answer, Kindly explain along with the right answer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 17 Nov 2009
Posts: 239
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 17
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
08 Sep 2010, 08:12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 17 Nov 2009
Posts: 239
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 17
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
08 Sep 2010, 08:13
Here is another link.. donot find it too helpful but can explain some answer choices
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 08 Feb 2010
Posts: 144
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
14 Sep 2010, 06:21
Please explain bit confused
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 06 Aug 2010
Posts: 229
Location: Boston
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
50
[3] , given: 5
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
14 Sep 2010, 06:59
3
This post received
KUDOS
vaivish1723 wrote: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have noticed that in those built before 1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward. Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer’s argument?
We want to weaken the argument that carpenters before 1930 were better than carpenters after 1930.
A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores. The writer isn't comparing hotels to other buildings - irrelevant.
B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930. Irrelevant
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930. STRENGTHENS the argument - if both sets of carpenters have the same quality tools, then the pre-1930's carpenters were probably doing better work with those tools
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished. Makes sense - it's not that every single hotel built before 1930 was better than the ones built after, but instead that the VERY BEST hotels are still around, while the lesser ones have long since been demolished. The proportion of badly built hotels before 1930 could have been much higher than it is now, but all of the bad ones have been demolished and replaced with modern buildings, so the writer is only seeing the best of the best that were built.
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930. Would strengthen the argument - carpenters train less now than they used to.
I dont know the answer, Kindly explain along with the right answer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Posts: 336
Location: USA
WE 1: Engineering
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
34
[0], given: 0
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
14 Sep 2010, 07:25
vaivish, malik, nishant - try using POE and you will narrow down to 1~2 choices. Irrelevant A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores. Irrelevant. Some ppl might try to relate it - more guests - > more damage. If less damage means better work /quality (but this is stretching it too far in GMAT) B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930. Strengthens coz is material is same, then workmanship has to be better. C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930. D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished. Irrelevant E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930. Now go back to D. Building still there - > original carpentry is good quality - > it is not the workmanship, but the quality of material. Hence, weakens the claim of high quality of workmanship by the author.
_________________
All things are possible to those who believe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 147
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
13
[0], given: 29
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
03 Oct 2010, 08:16
adishail wrote:
Now go back to D. Building still there - > original carpentry is good quality - > it is not the workmanship, but the quality of material. Hence, weakens the claim of high quality of workmanship by the author.
Where does it specify about quality of material? It just says that building is still there because of good work done by workers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Status: ==GMAT Ninja==
Joined: 08 Jan 2011
Posts: 251
Schools: ISB, IIMA ,SP Jain , XLRI
WE 1: Aditya Birla Group (sales)
WE 2: Saint Gobain Group (sales)
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
39
[0], given: 46
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
26 Jun 2011, 03:41
vaivish1723 wrote: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have noticed that in those built before 1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward. Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer’s argument?
A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores.
B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930.
I dont know the answer, Kindly explain along with the right answer I got it wrong i was confused by E however now i have to take it as D after reading the explanation 
_________________
WarLocK
_____________________________________________________________________________
The War is oNNNNNNNNNNNNN for 720+
see my Test exp here http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-test-experience-111610.html
do not hesitate me giving kudos if you like my post. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Status: Prep started for the n-th time
Joined: 29 Aug 2010
Posts: 709
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
73
[0], given: 37
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
26 Jun 2011, 04:05
D it is.
D tells us Writer visited only those before-1930-hotels that had better quality of carpentary. Otherwise those hotels would have not in use as hotels at all. Hence it weakens writer's claim
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Status: ==GMAT Ninja==
Joined: 08 Jan 2011
Posts: 251
Schools: ISB, IIMA ,SP Jain , XLRI
WE 1: Aditya Birla Group (sales)
WE 2: Saint Gobain Group (sales)
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
39
[0], given: 46
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
26 Jun 2011, 04:09
crick20002002 wrote: D it is.
D tells us Writer visited only those before-1930-hotels that had better quality of carpentary. Otherwise those hotels would have not in use as hotels at all. Hence it weakens writer's claim Excellent man nice and different explanation kudos to you
_________________
WarLocK
_____________________________________________________________________________
The War is oNNNNNNNNNNNNN for 720+
see my Test exp here http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-test-experience-111610.html
do not hesitate me giving kudos if you like my post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 14 Apr 2011
Posts: 21
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
27 Jun 2011, 20:21
The essence of the argument is that better quality hotels is a result of working with more skill, care, and effort prior to 1930. So we need to find a case that refutes this claim. Look for the option disproving that all buildings in this era were of good quality.
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
If this is true, then we can't say that all hotels were quality hotels prior to 1930 because there could be thousands built at this time that were of poor qualilty which fell into disuse and were demolished. So it correctly weakens the argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Status: MBAing!!!!
Joined: 24 Jun 2011
Posts: 314
Location: United States (FL)
Concentration: Finance, Real Estate
Schools: Wharton '14 (D), CBS '14 (WL), Ross '14 (WL), Haas '14 (D), Johnson '14 (A), McCombs '14, Kenan-Flagler '14 (M), Madison (A), Consortium (D), Consortium (A), Consortium (M), Consortium, Consortium (A), Consortium (WL)
GPA: 3.65
WE: Project Management (Real Estate)
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
41
[0], given: 56
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
25 Oct 2011, 12:52
I picked D...this is representativeness problem....only the best hotels built before 1930 are still functioning, the rest were demolished. The writer is comparing all contemporary hotels to the best of the 1930's. Not a fare comparison and does not reflect the change in workmanship of carpenters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 18 Jun 2010
Posts: 152
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
10
[0], given: 2
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout [#permalink]
25 Oct 2011, 21:26
+1 for D
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Posts: 58
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
10
[0], given: 18
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have [#permalink]
06 Mar 2012, 00:54
vaivish1723 wrote: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have noticed that in those built before 1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward. Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer’s argument?
A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores.
B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930.
I dont know the answer, Kindly explain along with the right answer choice D is correct. only building remaining from 1930 are those that have superior carpentry work , and hence are not representative of all the building during 1930. So comparison btw the carpentry of building of 1930 to present day one's get weakened
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 21 Sep 2010
Posts: 19
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have [#permalink]
02 Jun 2012, 12:01
The only reason I can select D is because all other options are either irrelevant or strengthening the argument. So its only by elimination. I see no explanation valid enough for D to be an option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have
[#permalink]
02 Jun 2012, 12:01
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
