GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 23 Jul 2018, 03:07

### 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

# CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

MBA Section Director
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 5135
Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jan 2016, 09:10
6
12
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

70% (01:11) correct 30% (01:21) wrong based on 769 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of players in the league have become concerned with the number of flagrant fouls occurring during league games. This past season, the number of flagrant fouls was double the number from the season before. League officials plan to reduce the number of such fouls during the coming season by implementing mandatory suspensions for players who commit flagrant fouls. Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the officials’ plan will be effective?

A. Most serious injuries occurring during league games are a direct result of flagrant fouls.

B. League referees have been trained to recognize flagrant fouls and to report incidents involving such fouls.

C. Parents of players in the league are in support of mandatory suspensions for flagrant fouls.

D. A similar league suspends players for committing flagrant fouls; this league has a relatively low incidence of flagrant fouls when compared with the Youth Hockey League.

E. Most players in the league strive to be selected for the All-Star team, and league rules state that no player with a record of suspension shall be selected for the All-Star team.

_________________
Intern
Joined: 02 Oct 2015
Posts: 22
Location: Nigeria
Schools: HEC '18, IE '19, ESADE '18
GPA: 3.2
Re: CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jan 2016, 17:23
3
[quote="souvik101990"]Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of players in the league have become concerned with the number of flagrant fouls occurring during league games. This past season, the number of flagrant fouls was double the number from the season before. League officials plan to reduce the number of such fouls during the coming season by implementing mandatory suspensions for players who commit flagrant fouls. Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the officials’ plan will be effective?

A. Most serious injuries occurring during league games are a direct result of flagrant fouls. In my opinion,this is off totally..We are asked if the officials plan will be effective..This option does not give us any strong reason to believe that the plan will actually be effective..it talks about most serious injuries occurring during league games as a result of flagrant fouls..This is off.

B. League referees have been trained to recognize flagrant fouls and to report incidents involving such fouls.We are told that league officials here have been trained to recognize flagrant fouls and to report incidents involving such fouls..This is also off in my view as it does not give us any reason to believe that the plan will be effective

C. Parents of players in the league are in support of mandatory suspensions for flagrant fouls.Irrelevant to the problem of knowing whether the plan will be effective or not

D. A similar league suspends players for committing flagrant fouls; this league has a relatively low incidence of flagrant fouls when compared with the Youth Hockey League.This analogous assumption does not mean that the same plan will be effective here.Just because it happened in another league does not mean that the same result will also occur here

E. Most players in the league strive to be selected for the All-Star team, and league rules state that no player with a record of suspension shall be selected for the All-Star team.This is the correct answer..the threat of not making the all star team due to a record of suspension will act as a sufficient deterrent to players committing flagrant fouls..They have something to lose and thus will have that in the back of their mind that there is a cost for any record of suspension

PLEASE LEAVE A KUDOS IF YOU LIKE THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION!!!!A KUDOS WILL BE VERY MUCH APPRECIATED!!!THANK YOU
Manager
Joined: 25 Sep 2015
Posts: 133
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q48 V37
GPA: 3.26
Re: CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2016, 11:10
souvik101990 wrote:
Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of players in the league have become concerned with the number of flagrant fouls occurring during league games. This past season, the number of flagrant fouls was double the number from the season before. League officials plan to reduce the number of such fouls during the coming season by implementing mandatory suspensions for players who commit flagrant fouls. Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the officials’ plan will be effective?

A. Most serious injuries occurring during league games are a direct result of flagrant fouls.

B. League referees have been trained to recognize flagrant fouls and to report incidents involving such fouls.

C. Parents of players in the league are in support of mandatory suspensions for flagrant fouls.

D. A similar league suspends players for committing flagrant fouls; this league has a relatively low incidence of flagrant fouls when compared with the Youth Hockey League.

E. Most players in the league strive to be selected for the All-Star team, and league rules state that no player with a record of suspension shall be selected for the All-Star team.

I fell for the trap. Question states 'best' evidence.

A B C are out for obvious reasons.
D is a good choice. But, the 'best' one is E.

Fouls are to be avoided by suspension rules.
D. Some other team does it and it 'has' lower fouls. It does not say that suspension caused it to lower the 'fouls'.
E. Suspension rules discourages fouls because, all star needs no records of suspension.
Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2016
Posts: 57
Re: CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Sep 2016, 09:19
E talks about most players and that could be 51% or 90%. This does not clearly says that the idea of suspension will work.

But when such activity happens in other team that is having similar fouls and suspensions have decreased the fouls will clarify whether idea of suspension will work.
It is also a weak contender whether successful idea that worked in some other team will work here, but there is almost all possibility that it works because it is related to similar foul, similar players and same game.

Need more clarity why E is better.
Manager
Joined: 23 Jan 2016
Posts: 213
Location: India
GPA: 3.2
Re: CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Feb 2017, 12:27
ok. now what if the referee is untrained and is unable to recognize a flagrant foul. then there wouldnt be a point in having the rule would it?

B makes sense because it fixes a potential loophole in the argument. Please advise on why it is wrong.
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3195
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Feb 2017, 05:00
1
OreoShake wrote:
ok. now what if the referee is untrained and is unable to recognize a flagrant foul. then there wouldnt be a point in having the rule would it?

B makes sense because it fixes a potential loophole in the argument. Please advise on why it is wrong.

The argument is about whether the fouls will be made in the first place. If the rules are stringent as stated in option E, the fouls will not be made. It is of lesser importance whether the referee can identify whether the foul has been made or not - if the rule as stated in E is not there, identifying the foul would not help deter the number of fouls, and on the other hand if the rule is there, fouls will not be made. Thus the role of referee competence is less than the role of having such a rule in reducing the number of fouls.
Intern
Joined: 11 Feb 2017
Posts: 24
Location: India
Schools: SPJ PGPM"17
GMAT 1: 600 Q48 V25
GPA: 3.57
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Re: CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 May 2017, 06:39
E is correct Answer. Explanation below

A. This option does not give us any strong reason to believe that the plan will actually be effective. It talks about most serious injuries occurring during league games as a result of flagrant fouls.

B. This is also off in my view as it does not give us any reason to believe that the plan will be effective

C. Parents of players in the league are in support of mandatory suspensions for flagrant fouls. Irrelevant to the problem of knowing whether the plan will be effective or not

D. Just because it happened in another league does not mean that the same result will also occur here

E. This is the correct answer. the threat of not making the all star team due to a record of suspension will act as a sufficient deterrent to players committing flagrant fouls. It will have that in the back of their mind that there is a cost for any record of suspension
Intern
Joined: 30 May 2017
Posts: 16
CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Aug 2017, 07:03
I chose D and according to experts the reason why its not the answer is that established analogy can not be justified. But I came across a similar question and the unjustified analogy is OA i.e A . can anyone please help? Totally confused after this

Advocate: Millions of plastic shopping bags are discarded every day in the United States. Plastic bags present a problem for the environment because they do not readily decompose, but will remain intact for thousands of years. Policy makers agree that the best solution to the problem is to convince people to bring their own shopping bags so that they do not need disposable plastic bags. Therefore, the U.S. government should implement a tax on disposable plastic bags because this will have the desired effect of dramatically decreasing the number of plastic bags discarded each day in the United States.

Which of the following provides the strongest reason to believe that the plan to levy a tax on disposable plastic bags will be successful in greatly reducing the number of plastic bags being discarded?

(A) A similar tax in several European countries resulted in a 90% decrease in the number of plastic bags used by consumers each year.

(B) Current incentives, such as crediting customers 5 or 10 cents for each reusable bag, have resulted in only a small decrease in the number of plastic bags discarded.

(C) Some customers are very concerned about the environmental impacts of plastic bags and will bring reusable bags without any financial incentive.

(D) The bill has substantial support with the Congressional delegations of many states and with the current administration.

(E) The bill could be implemented and the tax collected using a very simple addition to the programming of electronic cash registers.
Intern
Joined: 30 May 2017
Posts: 16
Re: CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Aug 2017, 07:06
I chose D and according to experts the reason why its not the answer is that established analogy can not be justified. But I came across a similar question and the unjustified analogy is OA i.e A . can anyone please help? Totally confused after this

Advocate: Millions of plastic shopping bags are discarded every day in the United States. Plastic bags present a problem for the environment because they do not readily decompose, but will remain intact for thousands of years. Policy makers agree that the best solution to the problem is to convince people to bring their own shopping bags so that they do not need disposable plastic bags. Therefore, the U.S. government should implement a tax on disposable plastic bags because this will have the desired effect of dramatically decreasing the number of plastic bags discarded each day in the United States.

Which of the following provides the strongest reason to believe that the plan to levy a tax on disposable plastic bags will be successful in greatly reducing the number of plastic bags being discarded?

(A) A similar tax in several European countries resulted in a 90% decrease in the number of plastic bags used by consumers each year.

(B) Current incentives, such as crediting customers 5 or 10 cents for each reusable bag, have resulted in only a small decrease in the number of plastic bags discarded.

(C) Some customers are very concerned about the environmental impacts of plastic bags and will bring reusable bags without any financial incentive.

(D) The bill has substantial support with the Congressional delegations of many states and with the current administration.

(E) The bill could be implemented and the tax collected using a very simple addition to the programming of electronic cash registers.
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1847
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2017, 00:47
1
aksh5900 wrote:
I chose D and according to experts the reason why its not the answer is that established analogy can not be justified. But I came across a similar question and the unjustified analogy is OA i.e A . can anyone please help? Totally confused after this

There is a key difference between answer choice (D) in this question and answer choice (A) in the other thread:

Quote:
(A) A similar tax in several European countries resulted in a 90% decrease in the number of plastic bags used by consumers each year.

In the other question, choice (A) specifically states that the similar tax RESULTED IN a 90% decrease. In other words, the statement tells us that the tax CAUSED the decrease in the number of plastic bags.

Quote:
D. A similar league suspends players for committing flagrant fouls; this league has a relatively low incidence of flagrant fouls when compared with the Youth Hockey League.

However, in choice (D) of this question, we do not know that suspending players for committing flagrant fouls CAUSES the relatively low incidence of flagrant fouls. There could be a number of other reasons that the other league has a relatively low incidence of flagrant fouls.

In the hockey question, choice (D) might provide evidence that the officials’ plan will be effective, but choice (E) provides much stronger evidence. Since we are looking for the best evidence, (E) is a better answer.
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for \$29.99 | Time management on verbal

Intern
Joined: 20 Dec 2017
Posts: 9
Re: CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 May 2018, 23:44
1
The key to this question's answer is to avoid the Shell answers like option D. In most of strengthening CR, one of the option choices will be there which compares the current argument's conclusion with other scenario's conclusion. We need to straight away eliminate it to get the right answer. Thus avoiding one of the GMAT CR traps.

Another Example for practice :
https://gmatclub.com/forum/cr-revision- ... 12026.html

Please give KUDOS if you just got enlighten!
Manager
Status: On the journey of achieving
Affiliations: Senior Manager, CA by profession, CFA(USA) Level 2
Joined: 06 Feb 2016
Posts: 94
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Finance
GMAT 1: 560 Q44 V21
GPA: 3.82
WE: Other (Commercial Banking)
Re: CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 May 2018, 19:15
Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of players in the league have become concerned with the number of flagrant fouls occurring during league games. This past season, the number of flagrant fouls was double the number from the season before. League officials plan to reduce the number of such fouls during the coming season by implementing mandatory suspensions for players who commit flagrant fouls. Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the officials’ plan will be effective?

A. Most serious injuries occurring during league games are a direct result of flagrant fouls.- Out of Scope again as this answer choice does not speaks about effectiveness of plan. It just mentions about the cause of most serious injuries occuring

B. League referees have been trained to recognize flagrant fouls and to report incidents involving such fouls. -Irrelevant as it does not matters whether referees can identify such flagrant fouls or not. This will not assure that the plan shall be effective.

C. Parents of players in the league are in support of mandatory suspensions for flagrant fouls. - Out of Scope as this does not makes plan effective

D. A similar league suspends players for committing flagrant fouls; this league has a relatively low incidence of flagrant fouls when compared with the Youth Hockey League. - Not relevant as even though similar league suspends players for committing flagrant fouls and may have low incidence of flagrant fouls this does not assures that similar plan if implemented here shall be effective

E. Most players in the league strive to be selected for the All-Star team, and league rules state that no player with a record of suspension shall be selected for the All-Star team - CORRECT as players would tend to do less flagrant fouls as they would have fear of suspension and those doing more flagrant fouls shall not be selected for All Star Team
_________________

Never Settle for something less than what you deserve...........

I've failed over and over and over again in my life and that is why I succeed--Michael Jordan
Kudos drives a person to better himself every single time. So Pls give it generously
Wont give up till i hit a 700+

Manager
Joined: 04 Feb 2016
Posts: 71
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Marketing
GPA: 3.7
WE: Sales (Computer Software)
CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2018, 12:52
I think B and E make sense.
The answer is E here as, even if B is true, that doesn't provide players and incentive not to commit such fouls in the future. Hence, E.

B is irrelevant from the perspective that the plan is to reduce injuries not implement the rule.

Tx,
_________________

GMAT1 650 Q48 V32.

Intern
Joined: 03 Feb 2018
Posts: 35
Re: CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jul 2018, 06:18
souvik101990 wrote:
Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of players in the league have become concerned with the number of flagrant fouls occurring during league games. This past season, the number of flagrant fouls was double the number from the season before. League officials plan to reduce the number of such fouls during the coming season by implementing mandatory suspensions for players who commit flagrant fouls. Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the officials’ plan will be effective?

A. Most serious injuries occurring during league games are a direct result of flagrant fouls.

B. League referees have been trained to recognize flagrant fouls and to report incidents involving such fouls.

C. Parents of players in the league are in support of mandatory suspensions for flagrant fouls.

D. A similar league suspends players for committing flagrant fouls; this league has a relatively low incidence of flagrant fouls when compared with the Youth Hockey League.

E. Most players in the league strive to be selected for the All-Star team, and league rules state that no player with a record of suspension shall be selected for the All-Star team.

suppose if option e is not given, can in that case b be the correct choice
Re: CR Revision: Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of &nbs [#permalink] 18 Jul 2018, 06:18
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Events & Promotions

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne 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®.