GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 27 Jan 2020, 03:35

### 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

# I saw Barbara at the race track, and she told me that on the same hor

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior RC Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 4909
GPA: 3.39
I saw Barbara at the race track, and she told me that on the same hor  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Nov 2017, 11:30
1
4
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

33% (01:53) correct 67% (02:02) wrong based on 196 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

I saw Barbara at the race track, and she told me that on the same horse race she made two win bets. She said she bet \$10 on Boofer Bear to win at even money, and \$5 on Copper Cane to win at odds of 10 to 1. After the race, she went back to the parimutuel window. So one or the other of those two horses must have won the race.

Which of the following is NOT an unstated premise of the reasoning above?

(A) The only bets Barbara made on the race were her win bets on Boofer Bear and Copper Cane.
(B) In the race in question, Boofer Bear and Copper Cane did not finish in a dead heat.
(C) Barbara did not return to the parimutuel window after the race for some reason other than cashing a winning ticket.
(D) Barbara’s representation of the bets that she had placed was accurate.
(E) Barbara believed that it was more likely that Boofer Bear would win than Copper Cane.

Source: Master GMAT
Difficulty Level: 750

_________________
Senior RC Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 4909
GPA: 3.39
Re: I saw Barbara at the race track, and she told me that on the same hor  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 May 2019, 16:37
1
Official Explanation

Difficulty Level: 750

This question asks you to identify hidden assumptions embedded in the speaker’s argument. Examine each statement.

(A) is an assumption of the argument. Barbara told the speaker about two bets, and the speaker assumes those were the only two she made. (She could have made additional wagers.)

(B) is also an assumption of the argument. The speaker concludes that one or the other horse must have won, but that conclusion depends on the assumption that they did not both win.

(C) is also an assumption of the argument. The speaker implicitly assumes that the only reason Barbara would return to the parimutuel window is to cash a winning ticket, as opposed to placing another bet.

(D) is also a hidden assumption, similar to (A).

(E), however, is not an assumption. Barbara could very well have believed that Copper Cane was more likely to win—indeed, she stood to win more money with that result even though her bet was smaller because of the longer odds.

Hope it helps
GmatMinion wrote:
Can you please explain the logic for picking E over B in this one?

_________________
Director
Joined: 14 Nov 2014
Posts: 584
Location: India
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.76
Re: I saw Barbara at the race track, and she told me that on the same hor  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 14 Nov 2017, 20:15
I saw Barbara at the race track, and she told me that on the same horse race she made two win bets. She said she bet \$10 on Boofer Bear to win at even money, and \$5 on Copper Cane to win at odds of 10 to 1. After the race, she went back to the parimutuel window. So one or the other of those two horses must have won the race. Which of the following is NOT an unstated premise of the reasoning above?

(A) The only bets Barbara made on the race were her win bets on Boofer Bear and Copper Cane.
(B) In the race in question, Boofer Bear and Copper Cane did not finish in a dead heat.
(C) Barbara did not return to the parimutuel window after the race for some reason other than cashing a winning ticket.
(D) Barbara’s representation of the bets that she had placed was accurate.
(E) Barbara believed that it was more likely that Boofer Bear would win than Copper Cane.

Master GMAT

will go with E here...rest all seems to be assumption

Originally posted by sobby on 14 Nov 2017, 08:25.
Last edited by sobby on 14 Nov 2017, 20:15, edited 1 time in total.
Intern
Joined: 09 Oct 2016
Posts: 28
Location: India
Re: I saw Barbara at the race track, and she told me that on the same hor  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2017, 19:53
sobby wrote:
I saw Barbara at the race track, and she told me that on the same horse race she made two win bets. She said she bet \$10 on Boofer Bear to win at even money, and \$5 on Copper Cane to win at odds of 10 to 1. After the race, she went back to the parimutuel window. So one or the other of those two horses must have won the race. Which of the following is NOT an unstated premise of the reasoning above?

(A) The only bets Barbara made on the race were her win bets on Boofer Bear and Copper Cane.
(B) In the race in question, Boofer Bear and Copper Cane did not finish in a dead heat.
(C) Barbara did not return to the parimutuel window after the race for some reason other than cashing a winning ticket.
(D) Barbara’s representation of the bets that she had placed was accurate.
(E) Barbara believed that it was more likely that Boofer Bear would win than Copper Cane.

Master GMAT

will go with C here..if she have gone to window for other reason the argument will not stand ...

I think the question stem wants to know which of the following is not an assumption. Since, (C) I feel is an assumption, it'd be incorrect. IMO (E).
Director
Joined: 14 Nov 2014
Posts: 584
Location: India
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.76
Re: I saw Barbara at the race track, and she told me that on the same hor  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2017, 20:14
avinsethi wrote:
sobby wrote:
I saw Barbara at the race track, and she told me that on the same horse race she made two win bets. She said she bet \$10 on Boofer Bear to win at even money, and \$5 on Copper Cane to win at odds of 10 to 1. After the race, she went back to the parimutuel window. So one or the other of those two horses must have won the race. Which of the following is NOT an unstated premise of the reasoning above?

(A) The only bets Barbara made on the race were her win bets on Boofer Bear and Copper Cane.
(B) In the race in question, Boofer Bear and Copper Cane did not finish in a dead heat.
(C) Barbara did not return to the parimutuel window after the race for some reason other than cashing a winning ticket.
(D) Barbara’s representation of the bets that she had placed was accurate.
(E) Barbara believed that it was more likely that Boofer Bear would win than Copper Cane.

Master GMAT

will go with C here..if she have gone to window for other reason the argument will not stand ...

I think the question stem wants to know which of the following is not an assumption. Since, (C) I feel is an assumption, it'd be incorrect. IMO (E).

yes ,missed the question stem ...thanks for highlighting
Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2018
Posts: 168
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V44
Re: I saw Barbara at the race track, and she told me that on the same hor  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 May 2019, 06:25
Can you please explain the logic for picking E over B in this one?
Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2018
Posts: 168
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V44
Re: I saw Barbara at the race track, and she told me that on the same hor  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 May 2019, 22:06
Official Explanation

Difficulty Level: 750

This question asks you to identify hidden assumptions embedded in the speaker’s argument. Examine each statement.

(A) is an assumption of the argument. Barbara told the speaker about two bets, and the speaker assumes those were the only two she made. (She could have made additional wagers.)

(B) is also an assumption of the argument. The speaker concludes that one or the other horse must have won, but that conclusion depends on the assumption that they did not both win.

(C) is also an assumption of the argument. The speaker implicitly assumes that the only reason Barbara would return to the parimutuel window is to cash a winning ticket, as opposed to placing another bet.

(D) is also a hidden assumption, similar to (A).

(E), however, is not an assumption. Barbara could very well have believed that Copper Cane was more likely to win—indeed, she stood to win more money with that result even though her bet was smaller because of the longer odds.

Hope it helps
GmatMinion wrote:
Can you please explain the logic for picking E over B in this one?

However, here are my questions:
B) Is it possible for two horses to win the same race?

My reason for picking B is:
The author is assuming that the two horses finish in a dead heat. Well, they can easily be the #first and the #last horses and Barbara would still make her money.

E) Barbara placed bets on both of them. Maybe she was playing safe on the horse she placed an 'even' bet on, just to recover her money safely and hence believed it to be the horse with a greater chance of winning. Whereas placing a bet with odds so high is more out of desperation (or belief) than calculated risk.
I mean, E can go either way but I feel B is a better pick.

Re: I saw Barbara at the race track, and she told me that on the same hor   [#permalink] 24 May 2019, 22:06
Display posts from previous: Sort by