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 Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

Tony: I play the Big Bucks lottery - that is thee one where [#permalink]
13 May 2011, 16:36

00:00

A

B

C

D

E

Difficulty:

5% (low)

Question Stats:

41% (01:51) correct
59% (02:35) wrong based on 17 sessions

Tony: I play the Big Bucks lottery - that is thee one where you pick five numbers and all the players who have picked five numbers drawn at the end of the week share the money pot. But it's best to play only after there have been a few weeks with no winnders, because the money pot increases each week that there is no winner.

Baggs: No, you are more likely to win the lottery when the money pot is small, because that's when the fewest other people are playing.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a mistake in the reasoning of one of the two players?

A. Tony holds that the chances of anyone's winning are unaffected by the number of times that person plays.

B. Baggs holds that the chances of tony's winning are affected by the number of other people playing.

C. Tony holds that the chances of anyone's winning are unaffected by the size of the pot.

D. Baggs holds that the chances of Tony's winning in a given week are unaffected by whether anyone has won the week before.

E. Tony holds that the chances of there being a winner go up if no one has won the lottery for quite a while.

I am confusing about such problems, I don't knwo where I should start to think about since there is no conclusion in this problem. How can I find the flaw in this argument? I chose A.

Re: Lottery-winning chances [#permalink]
13 May 2011, 19:29

The important thing for this question is to not go outside the scope of information given. All of the answer choices contain flawed reasoning, but we only know one of them has been expressed.

Tony's argument: Play when there have been few winners, as pot is larger Bagg's argument: Play when pot is small, more likely to win when less people playing

Tony's argument is not flawed. Based on the information he has provided, if there have been no winners, then the pot will be larger.

Bagg's argument is flawed. The number of people playing does not affect the odds of winning.

A) Tony does not hold this. He doesn't mention the number of times people play. B) Baggs has said exactly this, and it is flawed reasoning. C) Tony has not said this. It may very well be true, and tony may or may not have factored this into his preference. We don't know. D) Baggs has not said this. E) Tony has not said his chances improve, just that the pot gets bigger.

Re: Lottery-winning chances [#permalink]
13 May 2011, 20:22

yvonne0923 wrote:

Tony: I play the Big Bucks lottery - that is thee one where you pick five numbers and all the players who have picked five numbers drawn at the end of the week share the money pot. But it's best to play only after there have been a few weeks with no winnders, because the money pot increases each week that there is no winner.

Baggs: No, you are more likely to win the lottery when the money pot is small, because that's when the fewest other people are playing.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a mistake in the reasoning of one of the two players?

A. Tony holds that the chances of anyone's winning are unaffected by the number of times that person plays. -- not mentioned.

B. Baggs holds that the chances of tony's winning are affected by the number of other people playing. OA

C. Tony holds that the chances of anyone's winning are unaffected by the size of the pot. -- not mentioned.

D. Baggs holds that the chances of Tony's winning in a given week are unaffected by whether anyone has won the week before. -- not mentioned.

E. Tony holds that the chances of there being a winner go up if no one has won the lottery for quite a while. -- not intended in tony's argument.

B is clean.

I am confusing about such problems, I don't knwo where I should start to think about since there is no conclusion in this problem. How can I find the flaw in this argument? I chose A.

Re: Lottery-winning chances [#permalink]
14 May 2011, 21:15

pike wrote:

The important thing for this question is to not go outside the scope of information given. All of the answer choices contain flawed reasoning, but we only know one of them has been expressed.

Tony's argument: Play when there have been few winners, as pot is larger Bagg's argument: Play when pot is small, more likely to win when less people playing

Tony's argument is not flawed. Based on the information he has provided, if there have been no winners, then the pot will be larger.

Bagg's argument is flawed. The number of people playing does not affect the odds of winning.

A) Tony does not hold this. He doesn't mention the number of times people play. B) Baggs has said exactly this, and it is flawed reasoning. C) Tony has not said this. It may very well be true, and tony may or may not have factored this into his preference. We don't know. D) Baggs has not said this. E) Tony has not said his chances improve, just that the pot gets bigger.

B.

Thanks for clarification!

_________________

Yvonne Hao

gmatclubot

Re: Lottery-winning chances
[#permalink]
14 May 2011, 21:15