Last visit was: 20 Nov 2025, 06:57 It is currently 20 Nov 2025, 06:57
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
Close
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
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   4   5   6 
655-705 Level|   Debatable OA|   Strengthen|                     
User avatar
aakritibirla11
User avatar
Joined: 10 Jan 2024
Last visit: 24 Apr 2025
Posts: 14
Own Kudos:
3
Given Kudos: 414
Location: India
Schools: NUS '27 ISB '27 (S) IESE '27 IE Tepper '27
GMAT Focus 1: 635 Q84 V81 DI79
GPA: 2.76
Schools: NUS '27 ISB '27 (S) IESE '27 IE Tepper '27
GMAT Focus 1: 635 Q84 V81 DI79
Posts: 14
Kudos: 3
A moderately large city is redesigning its central downtown area and 01 Dec 2024, 11:00
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Simplest explanation of why C v/s D:

C confirms that this method has worked for a similar type of city.
D just says that the method is "likely" to work. More importantly, D says "more people" will be attracted.

Remember the GOAL is the attract a specific type of people – workers + shoppers.

So, D is insufficient.
User avatar
hemanthPA
User avatar
Joined: 09 Mar 2023
Last visit: 18 Mar 2025
Posts: 50
Own Kudos:
36
Given Kudos: 11
Posts: 50
Kudos: 36
A moderately large city is redesigning its central downtown area and 03 Dec 2024, 08:01
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Great work but the question says " Which of the following would, if true, most strongly support the prediction "

so honestly a lot of the things you've put below is very contradictory

AnishPassi
I think a nuance of option D has been missed in many explanations. So while many of us have eliminated D, it is not for the right reasons.
Quote:
(D) If the proposed lane restrictions on drivers are rigorously enforced, more people will likely be attracted to downtown businesses than would otherwise be.
Most explanations eliminate D by stating that the option presents a conditional and that the added condition ('rigorously enforced') is an additional requirement that we cannot assume must be met.
In other words, the explanations go something along these lines:
1. We need to support the prediction that implementing lane restrictions will attract more people to downtown businesses.
2. (D) states: If lane restrictions are enforced rigorously, more people will be attracted to downtown businesses.
3. Since we do not know whether the restrictions will be rigorously enforced, this option is incorrect.

Or, put another way, a common explanation is:
1. The answer choice is of the form If X then Y.
2. Since we don’t know whether X will happen, we can’t say whether Y will happen.
Thus the option doesn’t support.

I have two issues with such reasoning.

1. My first issue: The question stem.
Quote:
Which of the following would, if true, most strongly support the prediction that the plan would achieve its goal?
What do we need to support?
The prediction.

What is the prediction?
That the plan would achieve its goal.

The prediction is not that the plan will be executed.
The prediction is not that the goal will be achieved.
The prediction is, I repeat, that the plan would achieve its goal.

Let’s say I make a prediction:

Cleaning our surroundings (plan) will make India a better travel destination (goal).

Am I making all of the following predictions:
1. We'll clean our surroundings.
2. India will become a better travel destination.
3. Cleaning our surroundings will make India a better travel destination.
?

I am not making the first two predictions.

Will we clean our surroundings? I don't know.
Will India become a better travel destination? I don't know.
But, I do predict that if we clean our surroundings, India will become a better travel destination.


Back to the question.

The correct answer doesn't need to support that 'the lane restrictions will be implemented' (plan).
The correct answer doesn't need to support that 'more workers and shoppers will be attracted to the downtown businesses' (goal).

The correct answer needs to support the prediction that 'implementing the lane restrictions will attract more workers and shoppers to downtown businesses' (the plan would achieve its goal).

Put another way, the correct answer needs to support the statement that 'if the lane restrictions are implemented, more workers and shoppers will be attracted to downtown businesses' (i.e., if the plan is implemented, the goal will be achieved).




2. My second issue: Understanding what the answer choice means.

Option D does not present a conditional in the sense that these posts explain. It presents a comparison. We must understand the comparison clearly.

The option includes the following phrase: "more people will likely be attracted to downtown businesses"

Question for you: more people than what?

Go ahead, think of an answer for this.

Is your answer: more people will likely be attracted to downtown businesses than are currently attracted to downtown businesses?

That understanding is incorrect.


What is the 'otherwise' situation?


If I say: If 'X' happens, more people will be attracted than would otherwise be.

What is the 'otherwise' situation? If 'X' doesn't happen, right?

i.e. If 'X' happens, more people will be attracted than would be the case if 'X' doesn't happen.


Let's expand that to the answer choice.

(D) If the proposed lane restrictions on drivers are rigorously enforced (If X happens), more people will likely be attracted to downtown businesses than would otherwise be (i.e., if X doesn't happen).

Which of the following interpretations of the answer choice is correct?

I. If lane restrictions are rigorously enforced, more people will be attracted to downtown businesses than would be the case if the lane restrictions were not enforced (i.e. compared with the current scenario). (wrong)
or,
II. If lane restrictions are rigorously enforced, more people will be attracted to downtown businesses than would be the case if the lane restrictions are not rigorously enforced. (i.e., a comparison between two hypothetical scenarios) (correct)

The first interpretation compares a situation in which lane restrictions are implemented and rigorously enforced, and a situation in which the restrictions are not even implemented (the present scenario).

The second interpretation compares a situation in which lane restrictions are rigorously enforced and a situation in which lane restrictions are not rigorously enforced.

I hope you notice now that the option actually means the second interpretation (II).



Now on to the reasoning.

Question: What would support the prediction that the plan would attract more people to downtown businesses?
Quote:
D. If the proposed lane restrictions on drivers are rigorously enforced, more people will likely be attracted to downtown businesses than would otherwise be.
Consider the following scenario: 10,000 people appreciate lane restrictions and would be interested to visit downtown if these restrictions were implemented. However, within that chunk, 4,000 people would only visit downtown if the restrictions are rigorously enforced. In other words, if lane restrictions are rigorously enforced, this entire chunk of the population would visit downtown. However, if the restrictions are not rigorously enforced, only a part of this population would visit downtown. This scenario is in line with option D.

But, how does this chunk of the population that appreciates lane restrictions relate to the total visitors to downtown? How many people would prefer to not have the lane restrictions to visit downtown? Do those 10,000 people represent more people than currently visit downtown? We have no idea.

Here's another example to explain this option:
Let's say in a country the voters are to decide between two parties: Marvel (incumbent) and DC.

Now, let's say we have to figure out whether DC would be better than Marvel. And, we're given that If DC governs well then more people would be happy than would be the case if DC does not govern well. Does this statement lead us to understand how DC would fare against Marvel? It doesn't. The comparison is within two DC situations.

Answer choice D follows a similar structure.

This answer choice has no impact on the argument.



Now, let's add option C to the mix.
Quote:
C. In other moderately sized cities where measures were taken to make downtowns more accessible for walkers and cyclists, downtown businesses began to thrive.
If in these other cities, similar measures led to the number of visitors going up from their initial numbers, aren't you relatively more convinced that these measures could lead to the number of visitors going beyond the current number in the city in question as well? Of course, there is no certainty. But we are not looking for something that would confirm the prediction. We're simply looking for support, not confirmation.

I often find students struggle with analogies in strengthen questions.

"If it worked for y, what's the guarantee that it'll work for x as well?" - a paraphrase of a question I often find GMAT takers wondering about.

Answer: There is no guarantee. However, we aren't looking for a guarantee. We are looking for support.

e.g.
Do you sometimes go through reviews on Amazon and other e-commerce sites before making your purchase? Why?

Even if a product has great reviews, what's the guarantee that you'd like it as well?

And the answer is the same. There is no guarantee. However, your belief in the product would increase after looking at positive reviews, no?

The same reasoning applies here. Remember 'support' or 'strengthen' does not mean 'confirm'.

In this question, option D is incorrect (it does not support at all), and option C is correct (it supports).



Here is an article (and a video) in which I discuss analogies in CR answer choices in more detail: https://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-handl ... 70572.html.­
Show more
User avatar
NEYR0N
User avatar
Joined: 12 Feb 2025
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 94
Own Kudos:
9
Given Kudos: 66
Posts: 94
Kudos: 9
A moderately large city is redesigning its central downtown area and 25 Aug 2025, 04:33
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I am requesting an experts reply as, the following is not covered in any answer:

Why are we not crossing D out as an alternative plan ? lane restrictions is not the same as reducing the number of lanes right ? hence, we don't care about d

thanks in advance
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 20 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,788
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,788
A moderately large city is redesigning its central downtown area and 03 Sep 2025, 07:09
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
INprimesItrust
I am requesting an experts reply as, the following is not covered in any answer:

Why are we not crossing D out as an alternative plan ? lane restrictions is not the same as reducing the number of lanes right ? hence, we don't care about d

thanks in advance
Show more
The plan would restrict access to some lanes (only bicycles and pedestrians, no automobiles and trucks). So reducing the number of lanes for automobiles and trucks would in fact qualify as a lane restriction.

Notice that (D) refers to the proposed lane restrictions. This indicates that the lane restrictions correspond to the proposed plan -- in other words, the plan that is under consideration.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
AbhishekP220108
User avatar
Joined: 04 Aug 2024
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 168
Own Kudos:
60
Given Kudos: 81
GMAT Focus 1: 555 Q81 V78 DI74
Products:
My Reviews
GMAT Focus 1: 555 Q81 V78 DI74
Posts: 168
Kudos: 60
A moderately large city is redesigning its central downtown area and 11 Sep 2025, 19:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thats a very detailed explanation, and many of the test takers will relate to the same issues as you discussed while solving.
AnishPassi
I think a nuance of option D has been missed in many explanations. So while many of us have eliminated D, it is not for the right reasons.

Most explanations eliminate D by stating that the option presents a conditional and that the added condition ('rigorously enforced') is an additional requirement that we cannot assume must be met.
In other words, the explanations go something along these lines:
1. We need to support the prediction that implementing lane restrictions will attract more people to downtown businesses.
2. (D) states: If lane restrictions are enforced rigorously, more people will be attracted to downtown businesses.
3. Since we do not know whether the restrictions will be rigorously enforced, this option is incorrect.

Or, put another way, a common explanation is:
1. The answer choice is of the form If X then Y.
2. Since we don’t know whether X will happen, we can’t say whether Y will happen.
Thus the option doesn’t support.

I have two issues with such reasoning.

1. My first issue: The question stem.

What do we need to support?
The prediction.

What is the prediction?
That the plan would achieve its goal.

The prediction is not that the plan will be executed.
The prediction is not that the goal will be achieved.
The prediction is, I repeat, that the plan would achieve its goal.

Let’s say I make a prediction:

Cleaning our surroundings (plan) will make India a better travel destination (goal).

Am I making all of the following predictions:
1. We'll clean our surroundings.
2. India will become a better travel destination.
3. Cleaning our surroundings will make India a better travel destination.
?

I am not making the first two predictions.

Will we clean our surroundings? I don't know.
Will India become a better travel destination? I don't know.
But, I do predict that if we clean our surroundings, India will become a better travel destination.


Back to the question.

The correct answer doesn't need to support that 'the lane restrictions will be implemented' (plan).
The correct answer doesn't need to support that 'more workers and shoppers will be attracted to the downtown businesses' (goal).

The correct answer needs to support the prediction that 'implementing the lane restrictions will attract more workers and shoppers to downtown businesses' (the plan would achieve its goal).

Put another way, the correct answer needs to support the statement that 'if the lane restrictions are implemented, more workers and shoppers will be attracted to downtown businesses' (i.e., if the plan is implemented, the goal will be achieved).




2. My second issue: Understanding what the answer choice means.

Option D does not present a conditional in the sense that these posts explain. It presents a comparison. We must understand the comparison clearly.

The option includes the following phrase: "more people will likely be attracted to downtown businesses"

Question for you: more people than what?

Go ahead, think of an answer for this.

Is your answer: more people will likely be attracted to downtown businesses than are currently attracted to downtown businesses?

That understanding is incorrect.


What is the 'otherwise' situation?


If I say: If 'X' happens, more people will be attracted than would otherwise be.

What is the 'otherwise' situation? If 'X' doesn't happen, right?

i.e. If 'X' happens, more people will be attracted than would be the case if 'X' doesn't happen.


Let's expand that to the answer choice.

(D) If the proposed lane restrictions on drivers are rigorously enforced (If X happens), more people will likely be attracted to downtown businesses than would otherwise be (i.e., if X doesn't happen).

Which of the following interpretations of the answer choice is correct?

I. If lane restrictions are rigorously enforced, more people will be attracted to downtown businesses than would be the case if the lane restrictions were not enforced (i.e. compared with the current scenario). (wrong)
or,
II. If lane restrictions are rigorously enforced, more people will be attracted to downtown businesses than would be the case if the lane restrictions are not rigorously enforced. (i.e., a comparison between two hypothetical scenarios) (correct)

The first interpretation compares a situation in which lane restrictions are implemented and rigorously enforced, and a situation in which the restrictions are not even implemented (the present scenario).

The second interpretation compares a situation in which lane restrictions are rigorously enforced and a situation in which lane restrictions are not rigorously enforced.

I hope you notice now that the option actually means the second interpretation (II).



Now on to the reasoning.

Question: What would support the prediction that the plan would attract more people to downtown businesses?

Consider the following scenario: 10,000 people appreciate lane restrictions and would be interested to visit downtown if these restrictions were implemented. However, within that chunk, 4,000 people would only visit downtown if the restrictions are rigorously enforced. In other words, if lane restrictions are rigorously enforced, this entire chunk of the population would visit downtown. However, if the restrictions are not rigorously enforced, only a part of this population would visit downtown. This scenario is in line with option D.

But, how does this chunk of the population that appreciates lane restrictions relate to the total visitors to downtown? How many people would prefer to not have the lane restrictions to visit downtown? Do those 10,000 people represent more people than currently visit downtown? We have no idea.

Here's another example to explain this option:
Let's say in a country the voters are to decide between two parties: Marvel (incumbent) and DC.

Now, let's say we have to figure out whether DC would be better than Marvel. And, we're given that If DC governs well then more people would be happy than would be the case if DC does not govern well. Does this statement lead us to understand how DC would fare against Marvel? It doesn't. The comparison is within two DC situations.

Answer choice D follows a similar structure.

This answer choice has no impact on the argument.



Now, let's add option C to the mix.

If in these other cities, similar measures led to the number of visitors going up from their initial numbers, aren't you relatively more convinced that these measures could lead to the number of visitors going beyond the current number in the city in question as well? Of course, there is no certainty. But we are not looking for something that would confirm the prediction. We're simply looking for support, not confirmation.

I often find students struggle with analogies in strengthen questions.

"If it worked for y, what's the guarantee that it'll work for x as well?" - a paraphrase of a question I often find GMAT takers wondering about.

Answer: There is no guarantee. However, we aren't looking for a guarantee. We are looking for support.

e.g.
Do you sometimes go through reviews on Amazon and other e-commerce sites before making your purchase? Why?

Even if a product has great reviews, what's the guarantee that you'd like it as well?

And the answer is the same. There is no guarantee. However, your belief in the product would increase after looking at positive reviews, no?

The same reasoning applies here. Remember 'support' or 'strengthen' does not mean 'confirm'.

In this question, option D is incorrect (it does not support at all), and option C is correct (it supports).



Here is an article (and a video) in which I discuss analogies in CR answer choices in more detail: https://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-handl ... 70572.html.­
Show more
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 20 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,112
Own Kudos:
32,888
 [1]
Given Kudos: 700
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,112
Kudos: 32,888
 [1]
A moderately large city is redesigning its central downtown area and 11 Sep 2025, 21:52
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
INprimesItrust
I am requesting an experts reply as, the following is not covered in any answer:

Why are we not crossing D out as an alternative plan ? lane restrictions is not the same as reducing the number of lanes right ? hence, we don't care about d

thanks in advance
Show more
Great question! You're showing good Critical Reasoning instincts by looking out for alternative plans - that's definitely a trap to avoid in "strengthen the plan" questions. However, option D is NOT actually presenting an alternative plan, and let me explain why.

Understanding the Original Plan:
The city's plan is to reduce automobile/truck lanes and increase bicycle/pedestrian lanes. That's the plan we need to support.

What Option D Actually Says:

Option D states: "If the proposed lane restrictions on drivers are rigorously enforced..."

Notice that D is talking about the same lane restrictions mentioned in the stimulus - it's discussing enforcement of the original plan, not proposing something different. An alternative plan would suggest doing something else entirely (like "building a new subway system" or "offering free parking downtown").

Why D is Wrong (The Real Reason):
D fails because it's circular reasoning. It essentially says "IF we enforce the plan well, THEN it will work" - but this doesn't give us any evidence that the plan will actually achieve its goal. It's just assuming success without providing support.

Compare this to option C, which gives us empirical evidence: similar cities tried similar measures and saw downtown businesses thrive. That's real support!

Quick Test for Alternative Plans:

Ask yourself: "Is this option suggesting we do something different from what's proposed?"
  • If YES → Alternative plan (eliminate it)
  • If NO → Not an alternative plan (evaluate it differently)

Option D discusses how to implement the existing plan (enforcement), not what else to do instead. That's why it's not an alternative plan.

Key Takeaway: In CR strengthen questions, watch out for both alternative plans AND circular/assumptive statements. Option D is the latter - it assumes the plan works rather than providing evidence that it will work.

You can get a structured, detailed explanation here. It will give you clear reasoning for how to break down this problem and where the incorrect options fail.
User avatar
lily123400
User avatar
Joined: 31 Mar 2025
Last visit: 13 Nov 2025
Posts: 34
Own Kudos:
15
 [1]
Given Kudos: 27
Posts: 34
Kudos: 15
 [1]
A moderately large city is redesigning its central downtown area and 25 Sep 2025, 05:51
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I was between C and D and picked D initially.
Upon a second glance, here's how I would dissect D:
1. if the plan is rigorously enforced: the condition doesn't talk about level of enforcement so we can assume that rigorous would be stronger than the original plan
2. likely be attracted to downtown: there is still a level of uncertainty since they are only likely to be attracted not for sure attracted even with the heavy condition of rigorous.

Compared to C:
1.businesses began to thrive: shown as a certainty when the city becomes more measurable.
So now looking back I see that C has more certainty in place than option D
User avatar
GMATQuizMaster
User avatar
Joined: 17 Jun 2025
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 37
Own Kudos:
18
Given Kudos: 3
Status:Prep Company
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 37
Kudos: 18
A moderately large city is redesigning its central downtown area and 06 Nov 2025, 03:49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Choice D states: "If the proposed lane restrictions are rigorously enforced, more people will likely be attracted to downtown businesses than would otherwise be."
  • This looks like it's saying the plan will succeed. But read carefully.
  • The trap in this one is the word "rigorously."
  • "Rigorously enforced...than would otherwise be" compares two versions of the plan: rigorous enforcement vs. loose enforcement. It does NOT compare the plan against doing nothing.
  • So even if rigorous enforcement brings 100 people and loose enforcement brings 80, both could still be less than the 150 who currently visit downtown. The plan fails in both cases, yet Choice D would still be true.
To strengthen the conclusion, we need information supporting the prediction that implementing the plan (at any enforcement level) will actually attract more people than the current situation by making the area easy to access and pleasant to move around in.

Choice C does this by showing that similar measures in other comparable cities led to thriving downtown businesses. The analogy works here because the cities, measures, and outcomes are directly relevant to our prediction.

Check this video solution for detailed analysis with error analysis guidance:

User avatar
joshuaa77
User avatar
Joined: 17 Jan 2025
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 12
Given Kudos: 13
Location: Canada
Schools: Booth '27
GPA: 3.7
Schools: Booth '27
Posts: 12
Kudos: 0
A moderately large city is redesigning its central downtown area and 07 Nov 2025, 12:09
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
[ltr]D is a tricky *complain* - we're saying that MORE people would be drawn only if the plan was RIGOROUSLY enforced. But what if was just normally enforced, which is probably the assumption behind the plan - then we don't know if it would achieve the goal.

On the other hand, other moderate sized cities have already seen success doesn’t prove anything, but adds some degree of strength. Although again, this is debatable given the many differences that could cause the plan to not have the same effect in our City. [/ltr]

Bunuel
A moderately large city is redesigning its central downtown area and is considering a plan that would reduce the number of lanes for automobiles and trucks and increase those for bicycles and pedestrians. The intent is to attract more workers and shoppers to downtown businesses by making downtown easier to reach and more pleasant to move around in.

Which of the following would, if true, most strongly support the prediction that the plan would achieve its goal?

(A) People who make a habit of walking or bicycling whenever feasible derive significant health benefits from doing so.
(B) Most people who prefer to shop at suburban malls instead of downtown urban areas do so because parking is easier and cheaper at the former.
(C) In other moderately sized cities where measures were taken to make downtowns more accessible for walkers and cyclists, downtown businesses began to thrive.
(D) If the proposed lane restrictions on drivers are rigorously enforced, more people will likely be attracted to downtown businesses than would otherwise be.
(E) Most people who own and frequently ride bicycles for recreational purposes live at a significant distance from downtown urban areas.


CR95631.01
OG2020 NEW QUESTION
Show more
   1   2   3   4   5   6 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
189 posts