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.

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was
[#permalink]

Show Tags

29 Mar 2017, 06:01

2

4

00:00

A

B

C

D

E

Difficulty:

75% (hard)

Question Stats:

56% (02:53) correct 44% (03:06) wrong based on 116 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was six years older than Raoul was. If all three are still living in five years, which of the following must be true about their ages five years from now?

I. Monica is older than Jim. II. Raoul is six years younger than Monica III. The combined ages of Jim and Raoul are more than Monica's age.

A. I only B. II only C. I and II D. I and III E. II and III

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was
[#permalink]

Show Tags

Updated on: 30 Mar 2017, 09:36

Bunuel wrote:

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was six years older than Raoul was. If all three are still living in five years, which of the following must be true about their ages five years from now?

I. Monica is older than Jim. II. Raoul is six years younger than Monica III. The combined ages of Jim and Raoul are more than Monica's age.

A. I only B. II only C. I and II D. I and III E. II and III

Case 1:- Let present age of raoul =6yrs then 5 yrs back his age =1 yrs then jim =3*Roaul= 3 yrs... but monica's age was then =1+6=7 yrs

Case 2:- Let present age of raoul =25yrs then 5 yrs back his age =20 yrs then jim =3*Roaul= 60yrs... but monica's age was then =20+6=26yrs

(1) From case1 --> monica is older than jim From case2-----> monica is younger than jim Not true

(2)true for both cases

(3) true for case 2 False for case 1 not true

Ans B

Originally posted by rohit8865 on 29 Mar 2017, 09:55.
Last edited by rohit8865 on 30 Mar 2017, 09:36, edited 1 time in total.

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was
[#permalink]

Show Tags

29 Mar 2017, 10:12

Bunuel wrote:

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was six years older than Raoul was. If all three are still living in five years, which of the following must be true about their ages five years from now?

I. Monica is older than Jim. II. Raoul is six years younger than Monica III. The combined ages of Jim and Raoul are more than Monica's age.

A. I only B. II only C. I and II D. I and III E. II and III

Let the present ages of Jim, Raoul and Monica be J, R and M respectively.

5 years ago, we will have the following equations as per the question: (J-5)=3(R-5) which can be simplified to => J=3R-10 ....................[A] and, M=R+6 ...................................................................................

As per [A] ,the minimum value of R should be minimum 4 for J to be alive. Case 1: When R=4, J=2 and M=10 Case 2: When R=20, J=40 and M=26

Therefore, the answer should be II ---> B [b] Hi Bunuel, please correct me if I am wrong in my assumption regarding the question. _________________

Re: Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was
[#permalink]

Show Tags

29 Mar 2017, 10:25

gmatexam439 wrote:

Bunuel wrote:

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was six years older than Raoul was. If all three are still living in five years, which of the following must be true about their ages five years from now?

I. Monica is older than Jim. II. Raoul is six years younger than Monica III. The combined ages of Jim and Raoul are more than Monica's age.

A. I only B. II only C. I and II D. I and III E. II and III

Let the present ages of Jim, Raoul and Monica be J, R and M respectively.

5 years ago, we will have the following equations as per the question: (J-5)=3(R-5) which can be simplified to => J=3R-10 ....................[A] and, M=R+6 ...................................................................................

As per [A] ,the minimum value of R should be minimum 4for J to be alive. Case 1: When R=4, J=2 and M=10 Case 2: When R=20, J=40 and M=26

Therefore, the answer should be II ---> B [b] Hi Bunuel, please correct me if I am wrong in my assumption regarding the question.

Hope bunuel too respond....

but for now the highlighted part is not correct.... R should be minimum of 5 Yrs ...

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was
[#permalink]

Show Tags

29 Mar 2017, 10:37

rohit8865 wrote:

gmatexam439 wrote:

Bunuel wrote:

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was six years older than Raoul was. If all three are still living in five years, which of the following must be true about their ages five years from now?

I. Monica is older than Jim. II. Raoul is six years younger than Monica III. The combined ages of Jim and Raoul are more than Monica's age.

A. I only B. II only C. I and II D. I and III E. II and III

Let the present ages of Jim, Raoul and Monica be J, R and M respectively.

5 years ago, we will have the following equations as per the question: (J-5)=3(R-5) which can be simplified to => J=3R-10 ....................[A] and, M=R+6 ...................................................................................

As per [A] ,the minimum value of R should be minimum 4for J to be alive. Case 1: When R=4, J=2 and M=10 Case 2: When R=20, J=40 and M=26

Therefore, the answer should be II ---> B [b] Hi Bunuel, please correct me if I am wrong in my assumption regarding the question.

Hope bunuel too respond....

but for now the highlighted part is not correct.... R should be minimum of 5 Yrs ...

I am sorry my silly mistake ... but I think it should 6 and not 5 because if R=5, J will be 0 five years ago which is not as per our assumption .... therefore if R>=6, then case1: When R=6, J=8 and M=12 case2: as per above post;

Therefore answer should be E and not C. _________________

Re: Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was
[#permalink]

Show Tags

30 Mar 2017, 12:44

Bunuel wrote:

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was six years older than Raoul was. If all three are still living in five years, which of the following must be true about their ages five years from now?

I. Monica is older than Jim. II. Raoul is six years younger than Monica III. The combined ages of Jim and Raoul are more than Monica's age.

A. I only B. II only C. I and II D. I and III E. II and III

Let CURRENT ages of Jim=j, Raoul=r, and Monica=m

Five Years ago: Jim=j-5, Raoul=r-5, and Monica=m-5

Set up equations: j-5=3(r-5)...........j+10=3r m-5=r-5+6........m=r+6

Because we have only 2 equations in 3 variables, there is open cases. So we need to be careful to choose numbers that cover multiple cases.

Plug in numbers: case 1: r=7, j=11, m=13, After 5 Yeas: r=12, j=16, m=18

case 2: r=10, j=20, m=16, After 5 Years: r=15, j=25, m=21

Checking Numeral I as it is most frequent.

From case 1: m>j

From case 2: m<j

Not always true...........Eliminate A,C & D

To save time, check Numeral III not II. Because if you do II and get correct then you will move to III. But we do III first, you will eliminate one choice in one step.

Re: Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was
[#permalink]

Show Tags

04 Apr 2017, 15:04

1

1

Bunuel wrote:

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was six years older than Raoul was. If all three are still living in five years, which of the following must be true about their ages five years from now?

I. Monica is older than Jim. II. Raoul is six years younger than Monica III. The combined ages of Jim and Raoul are more than Monica's age.

A. I only B. II only C. I and II D. I and III E. II and III

We can let Jim’s age today = J, Raoul’s age today = R, and Monica’s age today = M.

Let’s set up their ages 5 years ago: Jim was (J - 5), Rauol was (R - 5), and Monica was (M - 5).

Since five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was:

(J - 5) = 3(R - 5)

J - 5 = 3R - 15

J = 3R - 10

Since five years ago Monica was six years older than Raoul was:

(M - 5) = (R - 5) + 6

M - 5 = R + 1

M = R + 6

Notice that Raoul is the youngest of the three people, and Raoul must be more than 5 years old since only then can we talk about their ages 5 years ago.

Let’s now test each Roman numeral:

I. Monica is older than Jim.

We can represent Monica's age in 5 years as M + 5, or R + 6 + 5 = R + 11.

We can represent Jim’s age in 5 years as J + 5, or 3R - 10 + 5 = 3R - 5.

Is M + 5 > J + 5 ?

Is R + 11 > 3R - 5 ?

Is 16 > 2R ?

Is 8 > R ?

Is R < 8?

We know that R > 5, however, we can’t determine whether R < 8. Thus, we cannot determine whether Monica is older than Jim.

II. Raoul is six years younger than Monica

Since M = R + 6, in 5 years Raoul will still be 6 years younger than Monica. Roman numeral II is true.

III. The combined ages of Jim and Raoul are more than Monica's age.

We already see that in 5 years, Monica’s age will be R + 11, Jim’s age will be 3R - 5, and Raoul’s age will be R + 5. We can create the following inequality:

Is 3R - 5 + R + 5 > R + 11 ?

Is 4R > R + 11 ?

Is 3R > 11 ?

Is R > 11/3 ?

We know that R > 5, so R > 11/3. Thus Roman numeral III is true.

Answer: E
_________________

Scott Woodbury-Stewart Founder and CEO

GMAT Quant Self-Study Course 500+ lessons 3000+ practice problems 800+ HD solutions

Re: Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was
[#permalink]

Show Tags

03 Apr 2018, 07:16

Top Contributor

1

Bunuel wrote:

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was six years older than Raoul was. If all three are still living in five years, which of the following must be true about their ages five years from now?

I. Monica is older than Jim. II. Raoul is six years younger than Monica III. The combined ages of Jim and Raoul are more than Monica's age.

A. I only B. II only C. I and II D. I and III E. II and III

Let R = Raoul's PRESENT age So, R - 5 = Raoul's age 5 YEARS AGO

Five years ago .... Monica was six years older than Raoul was. So, (R - 5) + 6 = Monica's age 5 YEARS AGO In other words, R + 1 = Monica's age 5 YEARS AGO

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was So, 3(R - 5) = Jim's age 5 YEARS AGO

IMPORTANT: In order for us to know the information about Raoul's age 5 years ago, it must be the case that Raoul's PRESENT age is greater than 5. Otherwise, Raoul wouldn't have been alive 5 years ago

To find the ages 5 years in the FUTURE, we must take these ages for 5 years ago and add 10 years.

So, (R - 5) + 10 = Raoul's age 5 YEARS IN THE FUTURE R + 1 + 10 = Monica's age 5 YEARS IN THE FUTURE 3(R - 5) + 10 = Jim's age 5 YEARS IN THE FUTURE

SIMPLIFY to get: R + 5 = Raoul's age 5 YEARS IN THE FUTURE R + 11 = Monica's age 5 YEARS IN THE FUTURE 3R - 5 = Jim's age 5 YEARS IN THE FUTURE

Now, let's examine the statements:

I. Monica is older than Jim. MUST it be the case that R + 11 is greater than 3R - 5? No. If R = 10, then R + 11 = 21 and 3R - 5 = 25 So, if R = 10, Monica is NOT older than Jim (5 years from now) So, statement 1 need not be true.

We can ELIMINATE answer choices A, C and D

IMPORTANT: Notice that the remaining answer choices (B and E) both say that statement II is correct. So, we need not check statement II, since it MUST be correct.

III. The combined ages of Jim and Raoul are more than Monica's age.

Is it true that (3R - 5) + (R + 5) > (R + 11)? Let's simplify to get: 4R > R + 11 Subtract R from both sides to get: 3R > 11 Divide both sides by 3 to get: R > 11/3 MUST this be TRUE? Yes. It must be true, because we earlier concluded that it must be the case that R is greater than 5 So statement III must be true.

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was
[#permalink]

Show Tags

18 Sep 2018, 14:09

I tried this way and got E. Don't know if it's good to do it this way though, please tell me if I made a mistake in my logic or setup!

1) Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul \(J=3x\) and\(R=x\) 2) Monica was six years older than Raoul was \(M = x+6\)

If all three are still living in five years, which of the following must be true about their ages five years from now? So the question is asking, what is true about their age NOW+5, given the limitation that x≥5 because Raoul can't be <0(we know x is a positive number because it's age). Since I set up the relationship to x 5 years in the past I have to add +10 years to get their age NOW+5. But, you can just calculate NOW by adding +5 and get the same result because all the relationships should hold regardless.

I. Monica is older than Jim. \(M > J ?\) \(x+6+5>3(x+5)?\) \(5+11 > 3(5+5)?\) \(16 > 30?\) NO

II. Raoul is six years younger than Monica \(R = M-6?\) \(x+5 = x+6+5?\) \(5+5 = 5+6+5\) \(R=10 M=16\) YES

III. The combined ages of Jim and Raoul are more than Monica's age. \(J+R>M?\) \(3(x+5) + x+5 > x+5+6?\) \(3x+15+x+5 > x+11?\) \(15+15+10 > 5+11?\) \(40 > 16?\) YES

So, answer is E. II and III Time 3:38

gmatclubot

Five years ago Jim was three times as old as Raoul was and Monica was &nbs
[#permalink]
18 Sep 2018, 14:09