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

 It is currently 17 Oct 2019, 14:28

### 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

# Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Status: Prevent and prepare. Not repent and repair!!
Joined: 13 Feb 2010
Posts: 173
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.75
WE: Sales (Telecommunications)
Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 28 Oct 2012, 03:13
2
9
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

61% (01:20) correct 39% (01:21) wrong based on 608 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City shows that all winning candidates have canvassed for at least 100 hours. In fact candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won. Out of all the candidates contesting in the upcoming elections in Gangnam City, Candidate A has canvassed for 120 hours, Candidate B has canvassed for 150 hours, and Candidate C has canvassed for 90 hours.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions is most strongly supported by them?
(A) Candidate B will most likely win the election
(B) Candidate C will most likely lose the election
(C) The winner of the election will either be Candidate A or Candidate B
(D) The results of an election cannot be solely dependent on how many hours a candidate canvasses for.
(E) If no other Candidate has canvassed for more than 150 hours, then Candidate B will win the election.

_________________
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+

Originally posted by rajathpanta on 25 Oct 2012, 04:02.
Last edited by rajathpanta on 28 Oct 2012, 03:13, edited 1 time in total.
##### Most Helpful Community Reply
VP
Joined: 02 Jul 2012
Posts: 1105
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Oct 2012, 04:15
5
rajathpanta wrote:
Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City shows that all winning candidates have canvassed for at least 100 hours. In fact candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won. Out of all the candidates contesting in the upcoming elections in Gangnam City, Candidate A has canvassed for 120 hours, Candidate B has canvassed for 150 hours, and Candidate C has canvassed for 90 hours.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions is most strongly supported by them?
(A) Candidate B will most likely win the election
(B) Candidate C will most likely lose the election
(C) The winner of the election will either be Candidate A or Candidate B
(D) The results of an election cannot be solely dependent on how many hours a candidate canvasses for.
(E) If no other Candidate has canvassed for more than 150 hours, then Candidate B will win the election.

OA is given as C. However, to me B looks like a better option. The argument never says that A, B and C are the only candidates contesting the election. The argument also clearly says "candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won". Moreover, B is a milder statement compared with C. So to me B looks like a better answer choice. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

Kudos Please... If my post helped.
_________________
Did you find this post helpful?... Please let me know through the Kudos button.

Thanks To The Almighty - My GMAT Debrief

GMAT Reading Comprehension: 7 Most Common Passage Types
##### General Discussion
Director
Status: Done with formalities.. and back..
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 563
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Schools: Olin - Wash U - Class of 2015
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Oct 2012, 04:26
MacFauz wrote:
rajathpanta wrote:
Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City shows that all winning candidates have canvassed for at least 100 hours. In fact candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won. Out of all the candidates contesting in the upcoming elections in Gangnam City, Candidate A has canvassed for 120 hours, Candidate B has canvassed for 150 hours, and Candidate C has canvassed for 90 hours.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions is most strongly supported by them?
(A) Candidate B will most likely win the election
(B) Candidate C will most likely lose the election
(C) The winner of the election will either be Candidate A or Candidate B
(D) The results of an election cannot be solely dependent on how many hours a candidate canvasses for.
(E) If no other Candidate has canvassed for more than 150 hours, then Candidate B will win the election.

OA is given as C. However, to me B looks like a better option. The argument never says that A, B and C are the only candidates contesting the election. The argument also clearly says "candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won". Moreover, B is a milder statement compared with C. So to me B looks like a better answer choice. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

Kudos Please... If my post helped.

Totally agreed.
Ans B makes more sense. There could be other candidates in the race and likelihood of A or B to win election is not supported by argument. However C with less than 100 hours of campaign may lose the election. Since same has been historically proved.
Ans should be B.
_________________
Lets Kudos!!!
Black Friday Debrief
GMAT Tutor
Status: Private GMAT Tutor
Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Posts: 142
Location: India
Concentration: Economics, Finance
Schools: IIMA (A)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V47
Re: Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Oct 2012, 04:32
2
MacFauz wrote:
rajathpanta wrote:
Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City shows that all winning candidates have canvassed for at least 100 hours. In fact candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won. Out of all the candidates contesting in the upcoming elections in Gangnam City, Candidate A has canvassed for 120 hours, Candidate B has canvassed for 150 hours, and Candidate C has canvassed for 90 hours.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions is most strongly supported by them?
(A) Candidate B will most likely win the election
(B) Candidate C will most likely lose the election
(C) The winner of the election will either be Candidate A or Candidate B
(D) The results of an election cannot be solely dependent on how many hours a candidate canvasses for.
(E) If no other Candidate has canvassed for more than 150 hours, then Candidate B will win the election.

OA is given as C. However, to me B looks like a better option. The argument never says that A, B and C are the only candidates contesting the election. The argument also clearly says "candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won". Moreover, B is a milder statement compared with C. So to me B looks like a better answer choice. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

Kudos Please... If my post helped.

I completely agree that it should be option B, not C. Option C makes two assumptions, not supported by the passage:

First assumption is that only A, B and C are contesting the election.

Second assumption is that the history is a perfect indicator of the future. In other words, if something has not happened in the past, it will never happen in the future also. I say this assumption is made because C is entirely left out of contention for a winner, which, in other words, means that C cannot win. Using past data, we can say that C is less likely to win but we cannot say that "C cannot win".

Given that both of these assumptions are not supported by the passage, correct option should be B.

Cheers,
CJ
_________________
Intern
Joined: 13 Oct 2012
Posts: 17
Re: Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Oct 2012, 21:20
rajathpanta wrote:
Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City shows that all winning candidates have canvassed for at least 100 hours. In fact candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won. Out of all the candidates contesting in the upcoming elections in Gangnam City, Candidate A has canvassed for 120 hours, Candidate B has canvassed for 150 hours, and Candidate C has canvassed for 90 hours.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions is most strongly supported by them?
(A) Candidate B will most likely win the election
(B) Candidate C will most likely lose the election
(C) The winner of the election will either be Candidate A or Candidate B
(D) The results of an election cannot be solely dependent on how many hours a candidate canvasses for.
(E) If no other Candidate has canvassed for more than 150 hours, then Candidate B will win the election.

It is B indeed, simply because the final result could even be a tie between A and B but going by past trends C will most likely lose.
Intern
Joined: 11 Oct 2012
Posts: 37
Re: Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Oct 2012, 08:44
1
rajathpanta wrote:
Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City shows that all winning candidates have canvassed for at least 100 hours. In fact candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won. Out of all the candidates contesting in the upcoming elections in Gangnam City, Candidate A has canvassed for 120 hours, Candidate B has canvassed for 150 hours, and Candidate C has canvassed for 90 hours.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions is most strongly supported by them?
(A) Candidate B will most likely win the election
(B) Candidate C will most likely lose the election
(C) The winner of the election will either be Candidate A or Candidate B
(D) The results of an election cannot be solely dependent on how many hours a candidate canvasses for.
(E) If no other Candidate has canvassed for more than 150 hours, then Candidate B will win the election.

I took C and my reasoning for it was that the stem seems to suggest very strongly that someone who does not canvass for 100 hours will win (notice how it speaks in absolutes, such as "ALL winning candidates have canvassed for at least 100 hours"; "...canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have NEVER EVER won". Therefore, in my opinion, the author is very strongly implying that unless you canvass for 100 hours, you won't win and out of all of the candidates, only A and B have canvassed for 100+ hours, therefore ONLY they have a shot at winning. The fact that there are other candidates involved is irrelevant because they are the only ones who have canvassed for 100 hours, so they are the only ones that will win. B doesn't take a strong enough stand based on the author's language, so IMO, it loses to C. The fact that the stem makes us assume the statements as true (i.e. that unless you have 100 hours, you WILL lose), there is simply no chance in hell that candidate C will lose, so "most likely" doesn't cut it. If B said, "Candidate C will lose" then it would be correct.
_________________
Please give kudos if you found my post useful, I give kudos back
VP
Joined: 02 Jul 2012
Posts: 1105
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Oct 2012, 09:02
2
brooksbrahs wrote:
rajathpanta wrote:
Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City shows that all winning candidates have canvassed for at least 100 hours. In fact candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won. Out of all the candidates contesting in the upcoming elections in Gangnam City, Candidate A has canvassed for 120 hours, Candidate B has canvassed for 150 hours, and Candidate C has canvassed for 90 hours.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions is most strongly supported by them?
(A) Candidate B will most likely win the election
(B) Candidate C will most likely lose the election
(C) The winner of the election will either be Candidate A or Candidate B
(D) The results of an election cannot be solely dependent on how many hours a candidate canvasses for.
(E) If no other Candidate has canvassed for more than 150 hours, then Candidate B will win the election.

I took C and my reasoning for it was that the stem seems to suggest very strongly that someone who does not canvass for 100 hours will win (notice how it speaks in absolutes, such as "ALL winning candidates have canvassed for at least 100 hours"; "...canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have NEVER EVER won". Therefore, in my opinion, the author is very strongly implying that unless you canvass for 100 hours, you won't win and out of all of the candidates, only A and B have canvassed for 100+ hours, therefore ONLY they have a shot at winning. The fact that there are other candidates involved is irrelevant because they are the only ones who have canvassed for 100 hours, so they are the only ones that will win. B doesn't take a strong enough stand based on the author's language, so IMO, it loses to C. The fact that the stem makes us assume the statements as true (i.e. that unless you have 100 hours, you WILL lose), there is simply no chance in hell that candidate C will lose, so "most likely" doesn't cut it. If B said, "Candidate C will lose" then it would be correct.

You should notice that the argument does not say ONLY A & B. Also the fact that C takes too strong a stand is what makes it wrong when compared with B. " candidate C will lose" would also be incorrect. In finding conclusion more often than not it is a safer pick to choose the milder statement. The author only says that candidates who have canvassed for less than 100 hours have never won. He does not say that such a candidate can never win. The author does not imply that unless you canvass for 100 hours you wont win. Rather he only says that if you do not canvass for 100 hours, the chances for you to win are lesser than your chances if you had canvassed for 100 hours. And on a general note, to repeat myself, in finding conclusion, more often than not it is better to go with the mildest statement.

Kudos Please... If my post helped.
_________________
Did you find this post helpful?... Please let me know through the Kudos button.

Thanks To The Almighty - My GMAT Debrief

GMAT Reading Comprehension: 7 Most Common Passage Types
Manager
Status: Prevent and prepare. Not repent and repair!!
Joined: 13 Feb 2010
Posts: 173
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.75
WE: Sales (Telecommunications)
Re: Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Oct 2012, 03:12
1
Correcting the OA. thanks for the replies!
_________________
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+
Senior Manager
Status: Always try to face your worst fear because nothing GOOD comes easy. You must be UNCOMFORTABLE to get to your COMFORT ZONE
Joined: 15 Aug 2014
Posts: 269
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V25
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 May 2016, 02:33
rajathpanta wrote:
Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City shows that all winning candidates have canvassed for at least 100 hours. In fact candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won. Out of all the candidates contesting in the upcoming elections in Gangnam City, Candidate A has canvassed for 120 hours, Candidate B has canvassed for 150 hours, and Candidate C has canvassed for 90 hours.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions is most strongly supported by them?
(A) Candidate B will most likely win the election
(B) Candidate C will most likely lose the election
(C) The winner of the election will either be Candidate A or Candidate B
(D) The results of an election cannot be solely dependent on how many hours a candidate canvasses for.
(E) If no other Candidate has canvassed for more than 150 hours, then Candidate B will win the election.

Can someone explain why option 'E' is incorrect!
_________________
"When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you’ll be successful.” - Eric Thomas

I need to work on timing badly!!
GMAT Tutor
Status: Private GMAT Tutor
Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Posts: 142
Location: India
Concentration: Economics, Finance
Schools: IIMA (A)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V47
Re: Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 May 2016, 02:39
1
sairam95 wrote:
rajathpanta wrote:
Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City shows that all winning candidates have canvassed for at least 100 hours. In fact candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won. Out of all the candidates contesting in the upcoming elections in Gangnam City, Candidate A has canvassed for 120 hours, Candidate B has canvassed for 150 hours, and Candidate C has canvassed for 90 hours.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions is most strongly supported by them?
(A) Candidate B will most likely win the election
(B) Candidate C will most likely lose the election
(C) The winner of the election will either be Candidate A or Candidate B
(D) The results of an election cannot be solely dependent on how many hours a candidate canvasses for.
(E) If no other Candidate has canvassed for more than 150 hours, then Candidate B will win the election.

Can someone explain why option 'E' is incorrect!

Are we given that the candidate with the highest number of hours canvassed will win?

CJ
_________________
Senior Manager
Status: Always try to face your worst fear because nothing GOOD comes easy. You must be UNCOMFORTABLE to get to your COMFORT ZONE
Joined: 15 Aug 2014
Posts: 269
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V25
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 May 2016, 02:43
chiranjeev12 wrote:
sairam95 wrote:
rajathpanta wrote:
Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City shows that all winning candidates have canvassed for at least 100 hours. In fact candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won. Out of all the candidates contesting in the upcoming elections in Gangnam City, Candidate A has canvassed for 120 hours, Candidate B has canvassed for 150 hours, and Candidate C has canvassed for 90 hours.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions is most strongly supported by them?
(A) Candidate B will most likely win the election
(B) Candidate C will most likely lose the election
(C) The winner of the election will either be Candidate A or Candidate B
(D) The results of an election cannot be solely dependent on how many hours a candidate canvasses for.
(E) If no other Candidate has canvassed for more than 150 hours, then Candidate B will win the election.

Can someone explain why option 'E' is incorrect!

Are we given that the candidate with the highest number of hours canvassed will win?

CJ

yes correct.. "candidate with the highest number of hours canvassed will win" is not stated by the Stimulus..
thanks chiranjeev12

+1 for you
_________________
"When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you’ll be successful.” - Eric Thomas

I need to work on timing badly!!
Intern
Joined: 26 Apr 2018
Posts: 14
Re: Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Aug 2018, 05:22
MacFauz wrote:
rajathpanta wrote:
Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City shows that all winning candidates have canvassed for at least 100 hours. In fact candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won. Out of all the candidates contesting in the upcoming elections in Gangnam City, Candidate A has canvassed for 120 hours, Candidate B has canvassed for 150 hours, and Candidate C has canvassed for 90 hours.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions is most strongly supported by them?
(A) Candidate B will most likely win the election
(B) Candidate C will most likely lose the election
(C) The winner of the election will either be Candidate A or Candidate B
(D) The results of an election cannot be solely dependent on how many hours a candidate canvasses for.
(E) If no other Candidate has canvassed for more than 150 hours, then Candidate B will win the election.

OA is given as C. However, to me B looks like a better option. The argument never says that A, B and C are the only candidates contesting the election. The argument also clearly says "candidates who have canvassed for fewer than 100 hours have never ever won". Moreover, B is a milder statement compared with C. So to me B looks like a better answer choice. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

Kudos Please... If my post helped.

But if C has contested for less than 100 hours , he will sure shot lose the election, there should not be most likely to this. Adding most likely means he has a higher chance of losing and a very low chance of winning, which is incorrect as per statistics.
Re: Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City   [#permalink] 09 Aug 2018, 05:22
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Historical data for all the elections held in Gangnam City

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

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