Dear All

I have chosen A; Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.

My understanding and rationale was that older group drove same as the younger group and hence argument stands fine.

Going through a few threads, noticed some other interpretation of statement A.

Please can anyone confirm if my interpretation is correct ?

In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 percent of drivers ages 21-24 were in serious accidents. By contrast, only 3 percent of licensed drivers 65 and older were involved in serious accidents. These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.

(B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.

(C) Drivers 65 and older are less likely than are drivers 24 and younger to drive during weather conditions that greatly increase the risk of accidents.

(D) The difference between the accident rate of drivers under 21 and of those ages 21-24 is attributable to the greater driving experience of those in the older group.

(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.

main point by negation:
high experience and habit of caution will not make >65 older people safer then younger people
given that a) 3% injured in >65 group which is the lowest in the statistics of licensed drivers

pre-think
1. old people dont drive their own cars, rather young drivers do it for them
2. old people dont drive frequntly as young people do
3. old people drive less distance than young peope do

look at the options:
(A) Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.
it matches the pre-think above.

(B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.
this is what mentioned in the passage. hence its just para-phase. hence incorrect

(C) Drivers 65 and older are less likely than are drivers 24 and younger to drive during weather conditions that greatly increase the risk of accidents.
if old guy more likely to drive in bad weather, then chance of accidents will go high not low. hence it is just the opposite.

(D) The difference between the accident rate of drivers under 21 and of those ages 21-24 is attributable to the greater driving experience of those in the older group.
this is some stupid logic. 16%-11% = 5% attributed to exp of old guy ??. incorrect

(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.
it says there is no age group which has lower than 3% accident rate. even if there is an age group with lower than
3%, it can be >75,>85, <50,<30. not a concrete statement. hence incorrect

for most of types of cr questions, such as, weaken, assumption, evaluate, flaw question, we need to know how to criticize/attack the argument. the main point on cr gmat tests us is how to attack an argument. inference question is like reading question.

though we do not learn and remember argument patterns, we can learn how to attack arguments . learn how to attack an argument , do not learn the argument pattern.

this argument is based on statistics. one typical way to attack statistic argument is to show that the statistics is not representative. this is very basic, but we need to do some statistic argument to be able to attack statistics.

how to attack this argument.

if the police dislike the young drivers, they fine them more. so, the rate of accident dose not show that the younger drive less carefully and the argument is broken

second way. if the older drivers give money to police , so, police dose not fine the older drivers. in this case the rate of accident dose not show that the older driver drive more carefully and the argument broke.

third way. if the older drivers drive less, the rate of accident dose not show that the older drivers drive more carefully and the arugment broke.
this is the answer choice A.