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.
May 1408:30 AM PDT
-09:30 AM PDT
Most GMAT test-takers are intimidated by the hardest GMAT Verbal questions. In this session, Target Test Prep GMAT instructor Erika Tyler-John, a 100th percentile GMAT scorer, will show you how top scorers break down challenging Verbal questions..
May 1212:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Make the most of your break with the most realistic GMAT™ prep. Take up to $700 off select products.- May 13
08:30 AM PDT
-09:30 AM PDT
In Episode 4 of our GMAT Ninja CR series, we tackle the most intimidating CR question type: Boldface & "Legalese" questions. If you've ever stared at an answer choice that reads, "The first is a consideration introduced to counter a position that... - Jun 10
06:00 AM PDT
-06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..
11 Apr 2019, 01:26
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hey guys!
I have question regarding an overall DS Strategy.
So I have read multiple timesaver know, that the two given statements in a DS question cannot contradict each other.
Let’s say a DS Question asks us whether x > 0?
If statement (1) establishes that this is allways true (Sufficient), Statement (2) cannot establish that this statement is allways wrong. So statement (2) could only also prove that the question is allways correct, or be insufficient.
Meaning a DS question like this would never exist:
Is x > 0 ?
(1) x+1 > 1
(2) x - 1 < -1
Because the two statements contradict each other.
My Question now is the following.
If I can somehow say a statement (1) is allways TRUE, isn’t one scenario for statement (2) in which the question is FALSE sufficient to prove that the solution is A?
The logic behind it being that statement (2) will not prove that the question is allways FALSE, as this would then contradict statement (1).
Because we have established that Statement (1) is correct (B, C and E are out) and that statement (2) alone cannot be sufficient without contradicting statement (1) (D is out as well) the answer has to be A.
This seems a little to good to be true as it would greatly reduce the workload for the statement (2) in many cases.
Am I missing something?
I hope I could express what I mean.
Should this topic already be discussed some place else, sorry for the repost and thank you for posting the Link to that post
Thanks guys!
Posted from my mobile device
I have question regarding an overall DS Strategy.
So I have read multiple timesaver know, that the two given statements in a DS question cannot contradict each other.
Let’s say a DS Question asks us whether x > 0?
If statement (1) establishes that this is allways true (Sufficient), Statement (2) cannot establish that this statement is allways wrong. So statement (2) could only also prove that the question is allways correct, or be insufficient.
Meaning a DS question like this would never exist:
Is x > 0 ?
(1) x+1 > 1
(2) x - 1 < -1
Because the two statements contradict each other.
My Question now is the following.
If I can somehow say a statement (1) is allways TRUE, isn’t one scenario for statement (2) in which the question is FALSE sufficient to prove that the solution is A?
The logic behind it being that statement (2) will not prove that the question is allways FALSE, as this would then contradict statement (1).
Because we have established that Statement (1) is correct (B, C and E are out) and that statement (2) alone cannot be sufficient without contradicting statement (1) (D is out as well) the answer has to be A.
This seems a little to good to be true as it would greatly reduce the workload for the statement (2) in many cases.
Am I missing something?
I hope I could express what I mean.
Should this topic already be discussed some place else, sorry for the repost and thank you for posting the Link to that post
Thanks guys!
Posted from my mobile device
11 Apr 2019, 07:05
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi GMATDamon,
You actually bring up a really cool point, and I agree with what you are saying.
Take this example here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/is-x-y-1-x-y ... 35241.html
We are being asked "Is |x| = |y| ?"
Looking at statement (2), we can see that x = -y, and thus, using statement (2), we can say that YES |x| WILL ALWAYS EQUAL |y|, right?
Now looking at statement (1), which reads x - y = 6.
You may be tempted to say that whatever values you use for x and y, the answer will always be NO. However, since we are 100% certain that statement (2) is sufficient, there must be values of x and y such that statement (1) produces a NO answer and a YES answer.
(If you were wondering what those values are, when x = 3 and y = -3, we have answer of YES, and when x = 6 and y = 0, among others, we have an answer of NO.)
So, we can tell that statement (1) must be insufficient just by determining that there are values of x and y such the statement (1) produces a NO answer.
So although this method of solving a DS question works for only a small percentage of DS questions, it’s pretty cool to take the above approach, when applicable.
You actually bring up a really cool point, and I agree with what you are saying.
Take this example here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/is-x-y-1-x-y ... 35241.html
We are being asked "Is |x| = |y| ?"
Looking at statement (2), we can see that x = -y, and thus, using statement (2), we can say that YES |x| WILL ALWAYS EQUAL |y|, right?
Now looking at statement (1), which reads x - y = 6.
You may be tempted to say that whatever values you use for x and y, the answer will always be NO. However, since we are 100% certain that statement (2) is sufficient, there must be values of x and y such that statement (1) produces a NO answer and a YES answer.
(If you were wondering what those values are, when x = 3 and y = -3, we have answer of YES, and when x = 6 and y = 0, among others, we have an answer of NO.)
So, we can tell that statement (1) must be insufficient just by determining that there are values of x and y such the statement (1) produces a NO answer.
So although this method of solving a DS question works for only a small percentage of DS questions, it’s pretty cool to take the above approach, when applicable.
Hi GmatDamon,
Welcome to gmatclub!
Is x > 0 ?
(1) x+1 > 1
x>0
Sufficient: YES, x>0. This is sufficient to answer the question
AD
(2) x - 1 < -1
x<0
Sufficient: NO, x is NOT >0. This is sufficient to answer the question
D
However, you will not see such a question on gmat as statements (1) and (2) contradict to each other. Read here:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/data-suffici ... 30500.html
https://www.gmathacks.com/data-sufficien ... other.html
Welcome to gmatclub!
Is x > 0 ?
(1) x+1 > 1
x>0
Sufficient: YES, x>0. This is sufficient to answer the question
AD
(2) x - 1 < -1
x<0
Sufficient: NO, x is NOT >0. This is sufficient to answer the question
D
However, you will not see such a question on gmat as statements (1) and (2) contradict to each other. Read here:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/data-suffici ... 30500.html
https://www.gmathacks.com/data-sufficien ... other.html
