nvnv
Hey guys, quick Q to why (2) is insufficient. If i were to draw a triangle from P-S and S-Q i'd be able to calculate x still. The angle in Ps corner would be 60, since all the angles in the corners would have to add up to 180. From there i could easily calculate the angle of S. So why would that make (2) not sufficient on its own? Appreciate your help

Hi nvnv,
When dealing with pictures of shapes in DS questions, we CANNOT assume that the picture is 'drawn to scale.' Thus, while ST and SR might be the same length (meaning that angles r and t are equal), it's possible that one of those sides is longer than the other (meaning that angles r and t are NOT equal). In that same way, if you drew some new line segments (re: PS and SQ), we wouldn't know how those side lengths actually relate to one another either (and by extension, the angle measurements of the new triangle PSQ could change). This is ultimately why Fact 2 is Insufficient.
If you worked through the calculations that you mentioned in your post, what result would you come up with?
GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
Contact Rich at: [email protected]