Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Jul 1209:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EDT
Increase your score with a powerful GMAT course taught live online + 6 months of access to TTP OnDemand GMAT Masterclass included! Sundays July 12, 2026-October 1, 2026, 9:30am-12:30pm EST.
Jul 1211:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Join us in a GMAT practice session and solve 25 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.- Jul 06
08:00 AM PDT
-05:00 PM PDT
Compete to win some amazing Prizes such as Admissions Consulting Packages, Courses, and more. This is your Best Opportunity to improve your GMAT Score! Register to Participate 
Jul 0810:00 AM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Receive 2 FREE hours of tutoring when you enroll in a 655+ course
Jul 1010:00 AM IST
-11:00 PM IST
Start your journey with a fully customized action plan and work with a dedicated mentor to achieve a 735+ score.
Jul 1012:00 PM PDT
-11:59 PM PDT
50% off all study plans with code PROGRESS - Expires Monday 7/13
17 Jun 2026, 00:52
Kudos
Bookmarks
Advertisement: Ten years ago, the Cormond Hotel’s lobby was carpeted with Duratex carpet, and the lobby of the Bromley Hotel was carpeted with our competitor’s most durable carpet. Since then, thousands more people have stayed at the Cormond than at the Bromley, yet the carpet in the Bromley lobby has worn out, while the Cormond’s Duratex carpeting has years of wear left in it. Clearly, Duratex is more durable than any of our competitor’s carpets.
Surely a Debatable OA to some extent. Although it is a common adage in GMAT world : OG OAs are non debatable, it should not stop us from furthering our reasoning and sharpening our reasoning abilities...
Only B and D are contenders for OA, so let us take each one by one.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument of the advertisement?
B. In neither the Bromley nor the Cormond is the lobby used heavily by people who are not staying at the hotel.
Surely if Bromley had more outsiders using the lobby, it will negate the effect of more guest staying at Cormond, a reasoning that will weaken the argument. However, inacse we know that the numbers are comparable, it strengthens the argument that carpet used at Cormond is more durable.
D. At a third hotel, carpet of the same kind as that installed in the lobby of the Bromley ten years ago is being replaced after only five years of use.
Similar experience at another hotel will again strengthen the argument that carpet used at Bromley is not as durable as the one used at Cormond.
However, if we let our imagination/reasoning loose.... Although not mentioned, but the comparison of last ten years does tell us that the carpet at Bromley is still in use after ten years as no replacement is mentioned. However, we have the third hotel where it was replaced in five years. It surely questions the durability but also gets us thinking whether there is something more than durability to it. Same kind of carpet used at two different places gives us so much variation in its life, and this could actually be used as a weakener in some other question.
I would say both are strengtheners, and 'which is stronger of the two' would depend on the reasoning we take, a situation not often seen in official questions.
Surely a Debatable OA to some extent. Although it is a common adage in GMAT world : OG OAs are non debatable, it should not stop us from furthering our reasoning and sharpening our reasoning abilities...
Only B and D are contenders for OA, so let us take each one by one.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument of the advertisement?
B. In neither the Bromley nor the Cormond is the lobby used heavily by people who are not staying at the hotel.
Surely if Bromley had more outsiders using the lobby, it will negate the effect of more guest staying at Cormond, a reasoning that will weaken the argument. However, inacse we know that the numbers are comparable, it strengthens the argument that carpet used at Cormond is more durable.
D. At a third hotel, carpet of the same kind as that installed in the lobby of the Bromley ten years ago is being replaced after only five years of use.
Similar experience at another hotel will again strengthen the argument that carpet used at Bromley is not as durable as the one used at Cormond.
However, if we let our imagination/reasoning loose.... Although not mentioned, but the comparison of last ten years does tell us that the carpet at Bromley is still in use after ten years as no replacement is mentioned. However, we have the third hotel where it was replaced in five years. It surely questions the durability but also gets us thinking whether there is something more than durability to it. Same kind of carpet used at two different places gives us so much variation in its life, and this could actually be used as a weakener in some other question.
I would say both are strengtheners, and 'which is stronger of the two' would depend on the reasoning we take, a situation not often seen in official questions.
24 Jun 2026, 01:05
Kudos
Bookmarks
Your objection is exactly why B is attractive, and your reasoning is logically correct.
Let's quantify it.
Without B
Suppose:
Hotel | Guests | Non-guests | Total traffic
Cormond | 100,000 | 0 | 100,000
Bromley | 80,000 | 50,000 | 130,000
Now Bromley actually had more lobby traffic despite fewer guests.
In that scenario, the competitor carpet may have worn out simply because it got more use.
So yes, B removes a legitimate alternative explanation.
Why isn't B the winner then?
Because of how GMAT compares strengthen answers.
The question is not:
Does B strengthen?
It does.
The question is:
Does B strengthen MORE than D?
D gives a completely new piece of evidence:
The same competitor carpet failed in another hotel after only 5 years.
Now the competitor carpet's poor durability is no longer based on just Bromley.
That's often considered stronger than cleaning up one potential confounder.
The subtle issue with B
Read it carefully:
In neither hotel is the lobby used heavily by people who are not staying at the hotel.
This does not say:
The amount of non-guest traffic was equal.
It only says non-guest traffic wasn't heavy in either hotel.
Example:
Hotel | Guests | Non-guests
Cormond | 100,000 | 5,000
Bromley | 80,000 | 15,000
B is still true.
But Bromley still has relatively more extra traffic.
So B reduces the concern but doesn't completely eliminate it.
750-Scorer Comparison
B:
Let's quantify it.
Without B
Suppose:
Hotel | Guests | Non-guests | Total traffic
Cormond | 100,000 | 0 | 100,000
Bromley | 80,000 | 50,000 | 130,000
Now Bromley actually had more lobby traffic despite fewer guests.
In that scenario, the competitor carpet may have worn out simply because it got more use.
So yes, B removes a legitimate alternative explanation.
Why isn't B the winner then?
Because of how GMAT compares strengthen answers.
The question is not:
Does B strengthen?
It does.
The question is:
Does B strengthen MORE than D?
D gives a completely new piece of evidence:
The same competitor carpet failed in another hotel after only 5 years.
Now the competitor carpet's poor durability is no longer based on just Bromley.
That's often considered stronger than cleaning up one potential confounder.
The subtle issue with B
Read it carefully:
In neither hotel is the lobby used heavily by people who are not staying at the hotel.
This does not say:
The amount of non-guest traffic was equal.
It only says non-guest traffic wasn't heavy in either hotel.
Example:
Hotel | Guests | Non-guests
Cormond | 100,000 | 5,000
Bromley | 80,000 | 15,000
B is still true.
But Bromley still has relatively more extra traffic.
So B reduces the concern but doesn't completely eliminate it.
750-Scorer Comparison
B:
- Removes part of an alternative explanation.
- Indirect support.
D: - Adds another observation showing the competitor carpet wears out quickly.
- Direct evidence about durability.
GMAT usually prefers the answer that directly strengthens the conclusion itself over one that merely improves the quality of the comparison.
So your intuition is right:
B strengthens.
But among the five choices:
D strengthens more.
That's why many strong test-takers end up with B initially and have to do a final comparison between B and D. The official answer hinges on direct evidence about durability beating partial elimination of a confounder.
kshaurya
