In order to increase his speed and endurance, and thus improve his

Question

In order to increase his speed and endurance, and thus improve his running time in a marathon, John is looking to revise his running plan. Last year, John ran an average of four times per week. This year, John is looking to increase the distance he runs per week by at least 50 percent. Therefore, John plans to run at least six times a week this year.

Which of the following is required for this year’s running plan to achieve its aim?

(A) John’s plan for this year includes running a longer distance for each run as compared to each run last year.
(B) The risk of injury does not increase with either the distance run or the number of times someone runs per week.
(C) The two additional runs per week will be for a shorter distance than the average distance John ran per run last year.
(D) John plans to increase the distance he runs for his longest run each week by 50 percent compared to the distance he ran during his longest run each week last year.
(E) The average distance per run in John’s plan for this year is at least as long as the average distance John ran per run last year.

Jaghan · Answer

Conclusion:John plans to run at least six times a week this year, in order to increase the distance he runs per week by at least 50 percent.

Premise: Last year, John ran an average of four times per week. This year, to increase his speed and endurance, and thus improve his running time in a marathon, John is looking to increase the distance he runs per week by at least 50 percent.

Assumption: There are no problems with the plan. Running at least six times a week will result in at least a 50 percent increase in the distance John runs per week.

The question stem asks what is required for this year’s plan to achieve its aim, so this is an Assumption question. The argument uses a planning reasoning pattern, which can be identified because the passage contains a plan to run at least six times a week with a goal to increase the distance he runs per week by at least 50 percent.

The standard assumption of a planning reasoning pattern is that there are no problems with the plan. In other words, that the plan to run at least six times a week this year, will cause John to increase the distance he runs per week by at least 50 percent. Evaluate the answer choices, looking for one that matches this idea.

Choice A: No. A longer distance for each run is extreme language. It is only necessary that John run the same distance for each run on average in order for his total distance run to increase and thus allow the plan to work.

Choice B: No. This answer choice is out of scope. The mere risk of injury does not affect the number of times per week John will run, nor the distance he travels per week.

Choice C: No. Shorter distance is extreme language. Use the negation test. If The two additional runs per week will not be for a shorter distance than the average distance...per run last year, there is no problem with the plan. John will still be able to increase the distance he runs per week by at least 50 percent.

Choice D: No. Longest run is extreme language. Use the negation test. If John does not increase the distance he runs for his longest run each week by 50 percent, there is no problem with the plan. John will still be able to increase the distance he runs per week by at least 50 percent because the total distance he runs each week is dependent on all of his runs per week, not just the longest run.

Choice E: Correct. This choice is supported by the argument. Use the negation test. If The average distance per run...this year is not at least as long as the average distance...per run last year, then the plan will not work to increase the distance he runs per week by at least 50 percent.

The correct answer is choice E.

zhanbo · Answer

It took me 1:02 to decide on option (E).

Last year: 4 times / week
This year: 6 times / week
Goal: increase the distance he runs per week by at least 50 percent

(E) is quite self-evident. But let's also rule out other options.

(A) Not required. John can run exactly the same distance as last year and still accomplish his goal.
(B) Mostly out of scope. While one can argue that if the injury is too severe, John has to take a break in his training plan. That is too far-fetched. Let's just assume John will run despite any injury.
(C) If implemented, John may not accomplish his goal. 
(D) John does not have to do so. Meanwhile, even if he does so, he may still not accomplish his goal. Other runs matters.

HoneyLemon · Answer

yhh . It should be E. 
 Last year 
 if per day d in 1 time and per week it's 4d (as per ques) .
This year he plans to increase by 50 % . So total distance per week must be 4d (1.5 ) = 6d.

Now author is concluding John plans to run at least six times a week this year. So assumption is J must ran at least d distance in one time to achieve his goal. 
That's exactly is given in E .

Codebug4it · Answer

Answer:  Option E

Which of the following is required for this year’s running plan to achieve its aim?

We have to find the assumption here which helps in achieving the aim of the running.

(A)John’s plan for this year includes running a longer distance for each run as compared to each run last year.
 => The argument says John will run 6 days/week instead of 4 days/week, so it will not increase for each run rather on an average distance will be increased.

(B)The risk of injury does not increase with either the distance run or the number of times someone runs per week.
 => If the risk increases then chances are that the aim won't be achieved. This weakens the possibility.

(C)The two additional runs per week will be for a shorter distance than the average distance John ran per run last year.
 => Average distance remains the same for every week hence over the year as well it will not shorten.

(D)John plans to increase the distance he runs for his longest run each week by 50 percent compared to the distance he ran during his longest run each week last year.
 => Increasing distance each week will not allow to keep the average distance the same every week and it will not allow the plan to succeed.

(E)The average distance per run in John’s plan for this year is at least as long as the average distance John ran per run last year.
 => As the average distance remains the same which means consistency will be maintained this year and the extra distance will the endurance and improved running timing.

abhik1502 · Answer

I really doubt about the correctness of option E

Option E says that "average distance per run in John’s plan for this year" >= "average distance John ran per run last year"

So incase this year's is equal then it is obvious that John need to increase number of days to at least 6 to achieve a 50% gain.
But incase this year's is greater than last year's average then it is very likely possible that John might cover additional 50% of distance without increasing the number of days. In this case option E will not strenghten.

In my opinion answer options need to be reviewed and corrected.

AbhishekVenkata · Answer

The question states 'At least six runs per week' nowhere do we see that he cannot run more than one time in a day (ex: 12 runs per week) which would mean he doesn't have to increase the running distance per run to achieve his goal

Axwe7 · Answer

MartyMurray

Hey Marty,

Got a question between B) and E). I was stuck between the two and I'm aware that a good approach when confronted between two options is to try to negate each one to see which one works. Here's my attempt:

If we negate option B), so that the risk of injury DOES increase, then his aim of increasing his speed and endurance may be at harm. Thus, we require that the risk of injury doesn't increase under this new plan.

If we negate option E), then the math breaks down - which I understand completely too.

Appreciate your help!

AbhishekP220108 · Answer

Hi  Axwe7  Let me try to help

the conclusion-  John plans to run at least six times a week this year. On what basis?

Reason- Last year, John ran an average of four times per week. This year, John is looking to increase the distance he runs per week by at least 50 percent. 
 Why he need to do this? because to increase his speed and endurance, and thus improve his running time in a marathon, John is looking to revise his running plan

So basically, the author assumes that 4 times a week is constant for every week last year, because then only increasing the runs per week by >=50% will lead to 6 times a week. And E bridges this gap perfectly

Lets look why not B The risk of injury does not increase with either the distance run or the number of times someone runs per week.- the negated one will say The risk of injury does increase with either the distance run or the number of times someone runs per week.- fine the risk of injury increases, but there can be no injury in case of 6 runs per week, because we have no info after what number of runs the injury increases. Also, we dont know about the distance, what if the distance covered is under required parameter. So there are too many assumptions involved, which are also not taken into consideration in an argument

Hope this helps

guddo · Answer

In order to increase his speed and endurance, and thus improve his running time in a marathon, John is looking to revise his running plan. Last year, John ran an average of four times per week. This year, John is looking to increase the distance he runs per week by at least 50 percent. Therefore, John plans to run at least six times a week this year. 
 
Which of the following is required for this year’s running plan to achieve its aim?

John’s immediate aim in the argument is to increase his total weekly distance by at least 50 percent. Last year he ran 4 times per week. This year he plans to run at least 6 times per week, which is also a 50 percent increase in frequency. For that plan to achieve the target, his average distance per run this year cannot be lower than it was last year.  Otherwise, even with 6 runs, his total weekly distance might increase by less than 50 percent.

(A) John’s plan for this year includes running a longer distance for each run as compared to each run last year.

This is too strong. He does not need each run to be longer. He only needs the average distance per run not to drop below last year’s average.

(B) The risk of injury does not increase with either the distance run or the number of times someone runs per week.

This is not required for the stated aim. Injury risk matters for safety, but the argument’s aim is about increasing weekly distance.

(C) The two additional runs per week will be for a shorter distance than the average distance John ran per run last year.

This is not required. The extra runs could be shorter, equal, or longer. Nothing here must be true.

(D) John plans to increase the distance he runs for his longest run each week by 50 percent compared to the distance he ran during his longest run each week last year.

This is not required. The target concerns total weekly distance, not the longest single run.

(E) The average distance per run in John’s plan for this year is at least as long as the average distance John ran per run last year.

This is correct.  If he increases frequency from 4 runs to 6 runs, then keeping the average distance per run at least the same gives him at least a 50 percent increase in total weekly distance.  Without this, the plan might fail to reach the target.

Answer: (E)

In order to increase his speed and endurance, and thus improve his

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

In order to increase his speed and endurance, and thus improve his

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards