Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

 It is currently 24 Oct 2016, 17:12

### 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

# Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 863
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 183 [0], given: 0

Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Dec 2004, 07:37
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

89% (02:37) correct 11% (01:09) wrong based on 40 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

46. Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, if follows that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce.
Any of the following, if introduced into the argument as an additional premise, makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT:
A. Collard greens have more nutritional value than kale
B. Spinach has more nutritional value than lettuce
C. Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greens
D. Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional value
E. Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional value

Highlight below
OA is (A)

I don't understand this problem because there seems no correct answer. This is my approach:
Kale = K
Spinach = S
Collard greens = G
Lettuce = L
K > S
G > L
-> K>L
According to the answer choices:
(A) G>K : not illogical since
G > K > S > L
(B) S > L: not illogical since
K>S>L
(C) S>G: not illogical since
K>S>G>L
(D) S=G: not illogical since
K>S=G>L
(E) K=G: not illogical since
K=G>L

This is question 46 in OG. Can someone please verify if the text has no typo?
Director
Joined: 07 Nov 2004
Posts: 689
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 137 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

21 Dec 2004, 08:20
qhoc, there is no typo in the text and the OA is A.

Question says that all the choices make it logically correct EXCEPT one.

In exception question remember that the right answer choice does not need to have the exact opposite effect, in this case incorrect. If it is ambiguous then that is your answer choice. Same logic applies if the question had said all choices "Strengthen" except one. Here the exception need not necessarily weaken the conclusion, it can either weaken or add no value to conclusion.

That said, for this question the stem says
K>S; G>L => K>L
For this to be absolutely true, the different options could be
1) S>G => K>S>G>L
2) S=G => K>S,G>L
3) S>L => K>S>L
4) K=G => K,G>L

Lets look at (A). It says G>K; we know from the stem G>L
From this we cannot conclude that K>L as we do not know the relation between K & L.
G>K could imply G>K>L or G>L>K or G>(K=L)

So, choice A adds no value to the conlusion, it does not strenthen the conclusion.

Hope this helped...
Director
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 863
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 183 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

21 Dec 2004, 09:55
(A) still shows a possibility for it to be logical right? But if I do POE, then (A) should be one
Director
Joined: 07 Nov 2004
Posts: 689
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 137 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

21 Dec 2004, 11:22
qhoc, A does not make the argument logically correct. So, it cannot be eliminated. As I mentioned before you cannot tell if K>L or not from A. So it does not satisfy the question. Think of this as a DS question in quant, you do not pick a statement if it has more that one value. This is very similar, A does not give you the answer and is hence Insufficient.
Manager
Joined: 25 Oct 2004
Posts: 96
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

21 Dec 2004, 19:18
I also picked A.

K>S
G>L it follows that K>L

Hence K> G > L

"But since collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, if follows that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce. "
is the key

So, K has to be > G to say with certainty. Choice A does not fit here. Hence A is correct.
Manager
Status: Time to apply!
Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Posts: 220
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 2: 660 Q50 V29
GMAT 3: 690 Q49 V34
GPA: 3.2
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 166

Re: Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jul 2012, 08:18
Also refer to kale-has-more-nutritional-value-than-spinach-but-since-134852.html
_________________

Didn't give up !!! Still Trying!!

Senior Manager
Status: Math is psycho-logical
Joined: 07 Apr 2014
Posts: 443
Location: Netherlands
GMAT Date: 02-11-2015
WE: Psychology and Counseling (Other)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 169

Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Feb 2015, 06:09
Haha, I also chose the wrong one (I chose C) for the reason that I disregarded larger than or equal to.
Larger or equal will be >=
Larger than >
Smaller than <

k is kale
s is spinach
g is collard greens

******************

1) I will first give the information we have, and then explain what the answer options mean:

k > s
g > l --> k > l

2) We are looking for the ILLOGICAL one. So, only one will be llogical and we have to "find the illogical".

3) From the information given we can create the following relationships:
a. k >= g.....FROM k > s, k > l and g > l BECAUSE for sure k > l and for sure g > l, SO k > l but could also be k = g.
b. l < g........FROM the reverse of the given above
c. s ~ l........BECAUSE we only know that both s and l are s,l < k. So, could be whatever or equal, just less than k.
e. s > l............BECAUSE of the same reason above
f. s < l............BECAUSE of the same reason above

A) Collard greens have more nutritional value than kale:
g > k ILLOGICAL, we found already that k >= g, so k < g is ILLOGICAL. We can stop here, but let's see.

B) Spinach has more nutritional value than lettuce.
s > l LOGICAL, as we found in e above

C) Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greens.
s > g LOGICAL, as we found above that k > g and s > k, so combining these inequalities k > s > g.

D) Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional value.
s = g LOGICAL, as we know that k >= g and k > s, so s < k, but s could be equal to g, since we don't have another relationship linking the two. Probably the inequality would be like this k >= g >= s, because k has to be greater than s, so s AND greater or equal to g. Otherwise k > s >= g does not make much sense, because it is as if s >=g and not k >=g.

E) Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional value.
k = g, LOGICAL, as we found that k >= g, so both are possible.

A long explanation I know, but it is always more difficult to explain than see it... For sure very difficult to get this one right, even if the correct answer is A, which makes it necessity to perform all these calculations. I just did it to test the argument..
Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since   [#permalink] 05 Feb 2015, 06:09
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Radon-210 is more radioactive than Technetium-99. Since Promethium-61 2 04 Sep 2015, 04:14
14 Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since 7 23 Jun 2012, 21:17
It is C since train is more convenient than plane 1 07 May 2012, 13:35
7 Fred has greater lung capacity than George. Since Harold has 5 20 May 2010, 05:47
Bill earns more commission than does Sandra. But since 8 18 Aug 2009, 09:08
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.