A certain baseball team has just completed its season. In stadiums tha

Question

A certain baseball team has just completed its season. In stadiums that seat 20,000 or fewer people, the team averaged 1 home run per game; in stadiums that seat between 20,000 and 40,000 people, the team averaged 2 home runs per game; and, in stadiums that seat 40,000 or more people, the team averaged 3 home runs per game. Obviously, the excitement of playing in front of large crowds motivated the team to hit more home runs.

Assuming that all stadiums during the season were filled to capacity, which of the following, if true, most undermines the argument above?

(A) The team’s leading home run hitter hit more home runs in mid-sized stadiums than in large stadiums.

(B) The fans in the larger stadiums often cheered against the team.

(C) The team averaged only 2 home runs per game when playing in the league’s largest stadium.

(D) In order to create seating for the additional fans, the outfield walls in the larger stadiums were constructed closer to home base.

(E) The team’s announcer cited crowd noise as a major motivator for the team.

omidsa · Accepted Answer

I believe this is not fair question for international students especially those who don't know about baseball rules. Inside the question there is an assumption that HOME RUN score could be gain by a team when ball goes out side of the fence into crowds. Just after watching MONEY BALL movie i got the meaning of HOME RUN and when I checked the argument again it was so simple.

KarishmaB · Answer

I guess you are clear why (D) weakens the conclusion. Because the outfield walls are closer i.e. the distance to be covered is less, therefore, the batters hit more home runs.
Now, as for your question why (E) is not correct - there are two reasons - the team announcer cited crowd noise as a motivator but it doesn't make his statement true. The only thing we have to take to be true is that the announcer cited this. Whether it actually is true i.e. whether actually crowd noise is a motivator or not, we don't know. 
Also, (E) actually supports the conclusion, if at all. The conclusion says that excitement of playing in front of large crowds motivates the team and (E) says that the noise the large crowd creates motivates the team. They are related, aren't they - larger the crowd, more the noise, more the excitement.

I would like to explain the first reason a little more:

Say there is an argument where the conclusion is "the politicians are corrupt because they are not paid well" and you need to strengthen it. 
Let's say one of the options says, "my friend said that politicians are corrupt because they are not paid well"
This isn't what you are looking for. Just because someone else said it too, doesn't make it stronger. It is again someone's opinion. You are looking for facts that can strengthen the conclusion.

Bunuel · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

On average, the team hit more home runs playing in front of larger crowds than in front of smaller crowds. The argument attributes this statistic to the motivation that comes from playing in front of larger crowds. In order to undermine this conclusion, look for another reason to explain why more home runs were hit in front of larger crowds.

(A) The argument makes a claim about the collective behavior of the team. This collective claim does not preclude certain individuals from hitting fewer home runs in larger stadiums.

(B) The claim made in the argument is based on the size of the crowd in each stadium. For whom the fans cheered is irrelevant to the argument.

(C) Similar to answer choice A, this choice cites one specific example of contradictory information, while the argument is based on the average behavior of the team throughout the entire season. The does not strongly undermine that, on average, the team was motivated by larger crowds.

(D) CORRECT.  This choice explains that the larger stadiums actually have different dimensions from the smaller stadiums. In order to accommodate a larger number of fans, the outfield walls are closer to the batters. Thus, it is very possible that the greater number of home runs is due to the fact that the ball does not have to travel as far in larger stadiums.

(E) The announcer’s opinion is not relevant to the argument, and, even if it were, this choice would strengthen the argument.

tuanquang269 · Answer

“home run” -- a ball hit across the field of play and over the opposing fence, called the outfield wall --

The field of play is closer, so the players are easier to hit home run.

Choice D is correct one.

tuanquang269 · Answer

The conclusion of the argument: The excitement of playing in front of LARGE CROWDS motivate the team to hit MORE HOME RUNS

Choice (E) stated the opinion of the team ANNOUNCER that the crowd noise motivate the team hit more => this choice actually strengthen the conclusion of the argument, not undermine

Choice (D) states another reason why the team hit more when the audiences increase. Not by the excitement of the audiences, but by the different distance of the stadiums that can stand with different number of audiences.

crackHSW · Answer

@omidsa Yeah a bit difficult if you dont know what an outerwall and home run is in the base ball game. Can someone explain how to eliminate C?

KarishmaB · Answer

Actually, they have given enough information for international students. Otherwise, they wouldn't have explained "home run".

“home run” -- a ball hit  across the field of play  and  over the opposing fence , called the outfield wall --

GMAT does not assume that you know the terminology used in every sport but they do expect you to be able to figure out after they explain the terminology.

KarishmaB · Answer

They are talking about averages. Every element in the set needn't comply. Just because one stadium - the largest one - averaged 2 instead of 3 home runs, the conclusion is not weakened. Also, it doesn't tell us largest in what way - no of people or area of field of play etc.

IndianExpress · Answer

Just trying to think 'critically' regarding the point raised omidsa. Though the question does explain what a homerun is, it would be much easier for American candidates to grasp the point (as they already know it) while others have spend a little bit extra time and energy on it...............again, just trying to be devil's advocate, I understand there would always be cultural advantages / disadvantages as far as specific questions are concerned.

KarishmaB · Answer

Agreed - it would be far easier for someone who already knows what a homerun is. Someone who has never caught a glimpse of baseball may have to imagine 'field of play' and 'opposing fence' etc. It would certainly take more time and effort but it will still be do-able and hence acceptable.

Also, GMAT is an international exam and they are very thorough in their procedures. I am sure you know that they put some 'trial questions' in the exam which are not scored. These are for future exams. If they see too much of regional bias in a particular question, they do not include it in their tests. Say, if most Americans who get 700 answer this question correctly but most Asians who get 700 answer it incorrectly, then they know that it is not a question appropriate for an international exam. GMAC is extremely particular about the validity of their questions and hence we don't need to worry about whether GMAT is fair to everyone.

Also, I am sure Americans can compain about how GMAT is not 'fair' - the environment that Asians grow in gives high exposure to Mathematics in the education system and hence great Quant scores. 
Asians can complain about how GMAT is not 'fair' - English is Americans' first language so they tend to do better in Verbal etc etc

Overall, I think it is a pretty level playing field for everyone. Hence, we should rather invest our time and effort into 'thinking critically' about the various concepts that will be tested.

mourinhogmat1 · Answer

I totally missed what a Batter meant. I was thinking like a pastry Batter. I was wondering maybe there are stands where they sell batter. It probably doesn't make sense but still got me to eliminate the answer choice because it was absurd. So, I eliminated the choice.

Too bad this question didn't explain what a Batter or a Pitcher is. In the cricketing world they call a person hitting a ball a Batsman, not a Batter.

Too bad this question didn't explain what a Batter or a Pitcher is. In the cricketing world they call a person hitting a ball a Batsman, not a Batter.

sidhu09 · Answer

Given:
Team is more successful in larger venues. 
It is assumed that the excitement of playing in front of large audience has motivated to hit more home runs.

A) The team's leading home run hitter hit more home runs in mid-sized stadiums than in large stadiums. -  Gives out no precise information on the link between home runs and crowd - Incorrect  
B)The fans in the larger stadiums often cheered against the team. -  It is possible that team is motivated to prove the audience wrong and hit more home runs - Incorrect 
C) The team averaged only 2 home runs per game when playing in the league’s largest stadium. -  The number is still larger than the one hit in smaler stadium. Supports the assumption - Incorrect 
D) In order to create seating for the additional fans, the outfield walls in the larger stadiums were constructed closer to where the batter stands. -  Since the outfield wall has been constructed closer to where batter stands, it would have been easier for the batter to hit more home runs - Correct 
E) The team’s announcer cited crowd noise as a major motivator for the team. -  The assumption provided in the passage states the same - Incorrect

piyatiwari · Answer

D) is right.

In order to create seating for the additional fans, the outfield walls in the larger stadiums were constructed closer
to home base.
>>> This means that in the stadium which could seat 40K people, 40K seats were actually not filled. The walls were brought closer to the base.

Hence, score is not proportional to the number of people in audience.

methevoid · Answer

Pre phrasing the answer helped me out in this question.

Premises suggest clearly that the team was hitting more home runs whenever it played in stadiums that had "Larger capacity to seat the audience"

Conclusion States that - "the excitement of playing in front of large crowds motivated the team to hit more home runs"

In order to weaken this reasoning - I thought of following options before checking the AC's

1) team was playing a weaker team in all those games where they hit Home runs

2) either the grounds were smaller where the team was playing

and then after Reading the AC's i could pick {D} easily.

{D} provides the reasoning that since home base was made smaller to seat more audience, Team was able to Hit more Home-runs in stadiums which were largely crowded. 
Thus refuting the conclusion that the baseball team was playing better just because there were large crowds.

MarkSullivan · Answer

Some great responses to this question already, so I just wanted to chime in with a little general context. The assumption made here  eliminates alternatives . Be on the lookout for this category of assumption any time the Conclusion provides an explanation for some phenomenon:

Premise:  The team hits  more homeruns  in stadiums with  larger capacity . ( This is a phenomenon that has been observed.)

Conclusion:  The excitement of a  larger crowd  causes the team to hit  more homeruns . ( This is an explanation of the phenomenon. )

The first question you should ask when you see this structure is " are there any other explanations? "

The correct answer to a  Find the Assumption  or  Strengthen the Conclusion  question should  eliminate the alternatives . The correct answer to an  Evaluate the Argument  question should ask if there are alternatives. And the correct answer to a  Weaken the Conclusion  question should provide at least one such alternative – (D) does the trick in this problem.

Try to place assumptions into categories such as this one. It makes brainstorming much easier!

Cheers,
Mark

vfqrk23 · Answer

Do I correctly understand that this is a question from a baseball fan?
This question presupposes that one has to know some specific details about baseball.
For example I didn't know that different baseball stadiums (in one particular league) may have different field sizes. So for me D sounds like spectators were sitting a bit closer to the field on the bigger stadiums. Not that fields on those stadiums were smaller than those of smaller stadiums.
What is the probability that such biased questions will appear on the real GMAT?

Kurtosis · Answer

Conclusion: Larger the crowd, more is the motivation to hit more home runs

A. The team’s leading home run hitter hit more home runs in mid-sized stadiums than in large stadiums. - Incorrect - Does not weaken

B. The fans in the larger stadiums often cheered against the team. - Incorrect - Strengthens the conclusion

C. The team averaged only 2 home runs per game when playing in the league’s largest stadium. - Incorrect - Does not weaken

D. In order to create seating for the additional fans, the outfield walls in the larger stadiums were constructed closer to home base. - Correct - Increase in seating resulted in smaller ground area. So it was easier to score more home.

E. The team’s announcer cited crowd noise as a major motivator for the team. - Incorrect

Answer: D

Wonderwoman31 · Answer

nightblade354  Why isn't A correct ( Is it because there isn't any additional information in it). Also, test taker might not have knowledge of baseball.

I was all time confused between A and D

nightblade354 · Answer

Wonderwoman31 ,

Let's break it down:

A certain baseball team has just completed its season. In stadiums that seat 20,000 or fewer people, the team averaged 1 home run per game; in stadiums that seat between 20,000 and 40,000 people, the team averaged 2 home runs per game; and, in stadiums that seat 40,000 or more people, the team averaged 3 home runs per game. Obviously, the excitement of playing in front of large crowds motivated the team to hit more home runs.

Assuming that all stadiums during the season were filled to capacity, which of the following, if true, most undermines the argument above?

(A) The team’s leading home run hitter hit more home runs in mid-sized stadiums than in large stadiums. --  So the team's leading home run hitter hit more in smaller stadiums. So what? We are talking about the  TEAM . The team hits more. What if the lead hitter had 31 home runs and every other player on the team had 30? This wouldn't weaken our argument. It would just mean that one player (1 out of 9) hit less home runs in bigger stadiums.

(D) In order to create seating for the additional fans, the outfield walls in the larger stadiums were constructed closer to home base. --  If bigger stadiums have smaller fields, then home runs are easier to hit. This clearly weakens the argument. If I have to hit a 400 foot home run at a small stadium versus a 300 foot home run at a bigger stadium, then it is more than likely that the crowd does not motivate me to hit more home runs. It is assuming a condition for causation and that assumption (bigger crowds --> more home runs) is wrong for this argument.

Does this help?

A certain baseball team has just completed its season. In stadiums tha

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

A certain baseball team has just completed its season. In stadiums tha

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards