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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

It appears that you are browsing the GMAT Club forum unregistered!

Signing up is free, quick, and confidential.
Join other 500,000 members and get the full benefits of GMAT Club

Registration gives you:

Tests

Take 11 tests and quizzes from GMAT Club and leading GMAT prep companies such as Manhattan GMAT,
Knewton, and others. All are free for GMAT Club members.

Applicant Stats

View detailed applicant stats such as GPA, GMAT score, work experience, location, application
status, and more

Books/Downloads

Download thousands of study notes,
question collections, GMAT Club’s
Grammar and Math books.
All are free!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

There is a well known inequality, called the "triangle inequality", which states that for any non-zero real numbers x and y, \(|x+y|\leq|x|+|y|\). Equality holds if and only if either x and y are both positive, or x and y are both negative. If x and y have opposite signs, the inequality is strict.

In our case, we can denote by \(x = a - b, y = a - 2b\), and the given inequality becomes \(|x+y|<|x|+|y|\). So, the question is asking whether x and y are of opposite signs, or \(a - b\) and \(a - 2b\) are of opposite signs.

Then, we can see that neither (1) nor (2) alone is sufficient. For (1) and (2) together: \(x = a - b = a - 3 < 0, y =a - 2b = a - 6 < 0\), so the given inequality doesn't hold (definite answer is NO), therefore sufficient.

Answer C
_________________

PhD in Applied Mathematics Love GMAT Quant questions and running.

Last edited by EvaJager on 01 Aug 2012, 09:25, edited 1 time in total.

There is a well known inequality, called the "triangle inequality", which states that for any non-zero real numbers x and y, \(|x+y|\leq|x|+|y|\). Equality holds if and only if either x and y are both positive, or x and y are both negative. If x and y have opposite signs, the inequality is strict.

In our case, we can denote by \(x = a - b, y = a - 2b\), and the given inequality becomes \(|x+y|<|x|+|y|\). So, the question is asking whether x and y are of opposite signs, or \(a - b\) and \(a - 2b\) are of opposite signs.

Then, we can see that neither (1) nor (2) alone is sufficient. For (1) and (2) together: \(x = a - b = a - 3 < 0, y =a - 2b = a - 6 < 0\), so the given inequality doesn't hold (definite answer is NO), therefore sufficient.

Answer C

That was a great explanation. Mods is not a strong point for me. It would be helpful if you can share some more tips and tricks on mods.

also please explain: If x and y have opposite signs, the inequality is strict.

There is a well known inequality, called the "triangle inequality", which states that for any non-zero real numbers x and y, \(|x+y|\leq|x|+|y|\). Equality holds if and only if either x and y are both positive, or x and y are both negative. If x and y have opposite signs, the inequality is strict.

In our case, we can denote by \(x = a - b, y = a - 2b\), and the given inequality becomes \(|x+y|<|x|+|y|\). So, the question is asking whether x and y are of opposite signs, or \(a - b\) and \(a - 2b\) are of opposite signs.

Then, we can see that neither (1) nor (2) alone is sufficient. For (1) and (2) together: \(x = a - b = a - 3 < 0, y =a - 2b = a - 6 < 0\), so the given inequality doesn't hold (definite answer is NO), therefore sufficient.

Answer C

That was a great explanation. Mods is not a strong point for me. It would be helpful if you can share some more tips and tricks on mods.

also please explain: If x and y have opposite signs, the inequality is strict.

Strict inequality means < , equality cannot hold. For example |2+(-3)| < |2| + |-3| as 1 < 2 + 3.
_________________

PhD in Applied Mathematics Love GMAT Quant questions and running.

I am confused at this point...For (1) and (2) together: x = a - b = a - 3 < 0, y =a - 2b = a - 6 < 0, so the given inequality doesn't hold (definite answer is NO), therefore sufficient. Now b= 3 and a<b. Consider case 1: a=4 a - 3 = 4-3=-1 and a - 6 = 4-6 = -2 i.e. -1 and -2 which is +ve Consider case 1: a=2 a - 2 = 4-2= 2 and a - 6 = 2-6 = -4 i.e. 2 and -4 which is -ve Hence the correct answer is E and not C..

There is a well known inequality, called the "triangle inequality", which states that for any non-zero real numbers x and y, \(|x+y|\leq|x|+|y|\). Equality holds if and only if either x and y are both positive, or x and y are both negative. If x and y have opposite signs, the inequality is strict.

In our case, we can denote by \(x = a - b, y = a - 2b\), and the given inequality becomes \(|x+y|<|x|+|y|\). So, the question is asking whether x and y are of opposite signs, or \(a - b\) and \(a - 2b\) are of opposite signs.

Then, we can see that neither (1) nor (2) alone is sufficient. For (1) and (2) together: \(x = a - b = a - 3 < 0, y =a - 2b = a - 6 < 0\), so the given inequality doesn't hold (definite answer is NO), therefore sufficient.

Answer C

Hi Eva

I am not sure on the solution mentioned above.

For statement 2 we have a< b, ie a-b <0 and similarly a-2b <0 . Therefore both X and Y are negative. In that case the inequality meets the condition. So shouldnt the answer be b

There is a well known inequality, called the "triangle inequality", which states that for any non-zero real numbers x and y, \(|x+y|\leq|x|+|y|\). Equality holds if and only if either x and y are both positive, or x and y are both negative. If x and y have opposite signs, the inequality is strict.

In our case, we can denote by \(x = a - b, y = a - 2b\), and the given inequality becomes \(|x+y|<|x|+|y|\). So, the question is asking whether x and y are of opposite signs, or \(a - b\) and \(a - 2b\) are of opposite signs.

Then, we can see that neither (1) nor (2) alone is sufficient. For (1) and (2) together: \(x = a - b = a - 3 < 0, y =a - 2b = a - 6 < 0\), so the given inequality doesn't hold (definite answer is NO), therefore sufficient.

Answer C

Hi Eva

I am not sure on the solution mentioned above.

For statement 2 we have a< b, ie a-b <0 and similarly a-2b <0 . Therefore both X and Y are negative. In that case the inequality meets the condition. So shouldnt the answer be b

a < b doesn't necessarily imply that a < 2b. For example a = -4 < -3 = b, but a = -4 > 2(-3) = -6 = 2b.
_________________

PhD in Applied Mathematics Love GMAT Quant questions and running.

There is a well known inequality, called the "triangle inequality", which states that for any non-zero real numbers x and y, \(|x+y|\leq|x|+|y|\). Equality holds if and only if either x and y are both positive, or x and y are both negative. If x and y have opposite signs, the inequality is strict.

In our case, we can denote by \(x = a - b, y = a - 2b\), and the given inequality becomes \(|x+y|<|x|+|y|\). So, the question is asking whether x and y are of opposite signs, or \(a - b\) and \(a - 2b\) are of opposite signs.

Then, we can see that neither (1) nor (2) alone is sufficient. For (1) and (2) together: \(x = a - b = a - 3 < 0, y =a - 2b = a - 6 < 0\), so the given inequality doesn't hold (definite answer is NO), therefore sufficient.

Answer C

hi mate,

here is my approach please correct me if im wrong,

the in-equality only holds good if they are opposite sign, s1: b = 3 or one variable in const. but we can't predict anything with this so we need another values too so S1: NS

s2: a< b, even here we have many possibilities so s2 NS now s1 and s2 combined :

we still don't know about a, as we can only determine B and a is still unknown , we can't drive any particular values .. we say NO,

3<a<4.5: -(2a-9) < (a-3) + -(a-6) -2a+9 < a-3 + -a+6 -2a < -6 a>3 INVALID (a may fall within the range of 3<a<4.5 but it may be greater than it as well.

4.5<a<6: (2a-9) < (a-3) + -(a-6) 2a-9 < a-3 + -a+6 2a < 12 a < 6 INVALID 9 a may fall within the range of 4.5<a<6 but it may be less than it as well)

I know the above solution is incorrect but I cannot seem to figure out why. Can someone please explain?

Thanks!

Those two parts are not correct. Example for 3<a<4.5 you get a>3, so this could be a valid solution.

Just because \(a\) COULD fall in the range, this makes that given range a possible valid solution (for a=3.5 for example). \(|2a - 3b| < |a - b| + |a - 2b|\) for a=3.5 and b=3 you get \(|7-9|<|3.5-3|+|3.5-6|\) or \(2<3\) => valid
_________________

It is beyond a doubt that all our knowledge that begins with experience.

Interesting. I think I've had trouble with a few other problems with this very concept. Thanks for the pointer. Just to be clear, these would only be invalid if a (or whatever variable) fell entirely outside of the given range? (i.e. 2<a<3 and a>10 Would 2<a<3 and a<10 be valid?)

I take it that's why we need II. in addition to I. to solve this problem?

3<a<4.5: -(2a-9) < (a-3) + -(a-6) -2a+9 < a-3 + -a+6 -2a < -6 a>3 INVALID (a may fall within the range of 3<a<4.5 but it may be greater than it as well.

4.5<a<6: (2a-9) < (a-3) + -(a-6) 2a-9 < a-3 + -a+6 2a < 12 a < 6 INVALID 9 a may fall within the range of 4.5<a<6 but it may be less than it as well)

I know the above solution is incorrect but I cannot seem to figure out why. Can someone please explain?

Thanks!

Those two parts are not correct. Example for 3<a<4.5 you get a>3, so this could be a valid solution.

Just because \(a\) COULD fall in the range, this makes that given range a possible valid solution (for a=3.5 for example). \(|2a - 3b| < |a - b| + |a - 2b|\) for a=3.5 and b=3 you get \(|7-9|<|3.5-3|+|3.5-6|\) or \(2<3\) => valid

With it the situation changes to: 3<a<4.5: -(2a-9) < (a-3) + -(a-6) -2a+9 < a-3 + -a+6 -2a < -6 a>3 INVALID (a may fall within the range of 3<a<4.5 but it may be greater than it as well.

With \(b>a\), \(a>3\) => \(b>a>3\) so \(b>3\). But \(b =3\), so it's NOT more than 3=> Invalid

4.5<a<6: (2a-9) < (a-3) + -(a-6) 2a-9 < a-3 + -a+6 2a < 12 a < 6 INVALID 9 a may fall within the range of 4.5<a<6 but it may be less than it as well)

With \(b>a\), \(a>4.5\) so this means that \(b>4.5\) as well. But \(b =3\), so it's NOT more than 4.5 => Invalid
_________________

It is beyond a doubt that all our knowledge that begins with experience.

In my revised solution (edited from the one above) I used a<b and b=3 so doesn't that mean a<3?

Zarrolou wrote:

Yes of course we need 2 a<b.

With it the situation changes to: 3<a<4.5: -(2a-9) < (a-3) + -(a-6) -2a+9 < a-3 + -a+6 -2a < -6 a>3 INVALID (a may fall within the range of 3<a<4.5 but it may be greater than it as well.

With \(b>a\), \(a>3\) => \(b>a>3\) so \(b>3\). But \(b =3\), so it's NOT more than 3=> Invalid

4.5<a<6: (2a-9) < (a-3) + -(a-6) 2a-9 < a-3 + -a+6 2a < 12 a < 6 INVALID 9 a may fall within the range of 4.5<a<6 but it may be less than it as well)

With \(b>a\), \(a>4.5\) so this means that \(b>4.5\) as well. But \(b =3\), so it's NOT more than 4.5 => Invalid

In my revised solution (edited from the one above) I used a<b and b=3 so doesn't that mean a<3?

Zarrolou wrote:

Yes of course we need 2 a<b.

With it the situation changes to: 3<a<4.5: -(2a-9) < (a-3) + -(a-6) -2a+9 < a-3 + -a+6 -2a < -6 a>3 INVALID (a may fall within the range of 3<a<4.5 but it may be greater than it as well.

With \(b>a\), \(a>3\) => \(b>a>3\) so \(b>3\). But \(b =3\), so it's NOT more than 3=> Invalid

4.5<a<6: (2a-9) < (a-3) + -(a-6) 2a-9 < a-3 + -a+6 2a < 12 a < 6 INVALID 9 a may fall within the range of 4.5<a<6 but it may be less than it as well)

With \(b>a\), \(a>4.5\) so this means that \(b>4.5\) as well. But \(b =3\), so it's NOT more than 4.5 => Invalid

Yes, good catch! I overlook that, so the analysis can be reduced to just the case \(a<3\)
_________________

It is beyond a doubt that all our knowledge that begins with experience.

Haha! I got one right for once! Thank you very much for all of your help - I would be completely lost on these 700+ questions without it!

Zarrolou wrote:

WholeLottaLove wrote:

In my revised solution (edited from the one above) I used a<b and b=3 so doesn't that mean a<3?

Zarrolou wrote:

Yes of course we need 2 a<b.

With it the situation changes to: 3<a<4.5: -(2a-9) < (a-3) + -(a-6) -2a+9 < a-3 + -a+6 -2a < -6 a>3 INVALID (a may fall within the range of 3<a<4.5 but it may be greater than it as well.

With \(b>a\), \(a>3\) => \(b>a>3\) so \(b>3\). But \(b =3\), so it's NOT more than 3=> Invalid

4.5<a<6: (2a-9) < (a-3) + -(a-6) 2a-9 < a-3 + -a+6 2a < 12 a < 6 INVALID 9 a may fall within the range of 4.5<a<6 but it may be less than it as well)

With \(b>a\), \(a>4.5\) so this means that \(b>4.5\) as well. But \(b =3\), so it's NOT more than 4.5 => Invalid

Yes, good catch! I overlook that, so the analysis can be reduced to just the case \(a<3\)

Reviewing this question, I found a problem with my reasoning.

Looking above to my solution I found that there were valid ranges of a for 3<a<4.5 and 4.5<a<6. The problem is, every single value of a I plug into the statement |2a-9| < |a-3| + |a-6| (after plugging in for b) makes the inequality true. Normally I would say that #1 is sufficient but obviously it is not. Could someone explain this to me?

EvaJager's explanation seems correct and let me make it more simple algebraically:

EvaJager's explanation:

There is a well known inequality, called the "triangle inequality", which states that for any non-zero real numbers x and y, |x+y|\leq|x|+|y|. Equality holds if and only if either x and y are both positive, or x and y are both negative. If x and y have opposite signs, the inequality is strict.

In our case, we can denote by x = a - b, y = a - 2b, and the given inequality becomes |x+y|<|x|+|y|. So, the question is asking whether x and y are of opposite signs, or a - b and a - 2b are of opposite signs

~~~~~~~~~~`

Here I will add my two cents True that for |x+y|\leq|x|+|y| to hold true, a - b and a - 2b should of opposite signs. So: a-b>0 and a-2b<0 which means 2b<a<b Option B contradicts that above statement. It states: a<b: Thus Combining the two options, the inequality fails to stand true. Hence C

There is a well known inequality, called the "triangle inequality", which states that for any non-zero real numbers x and y, \(|x+y|\leq|x|+|y|\). Equality holds if and only if either x and y are both positive, or x and y are both negative. If x and y have opposite signs, the inequality is strict.

In our case, we can denote by \(x = a - b, y = a - 2b\), and the given inequality becomes \(|x+y|<|x|+|y|\). So, the question is asking whether x and y are of opposite signs, or \(a - b\) and \(a - 2b\) are of opposite signs.

Then, we can see that neither (1) nor (2) alone is sufficient. For (1) and (2) together: \(x = a - b = a - 3 < 0, y =a - 2b = a - 6 < 0\), so the given inequality doesn't hold (definite answer is NO), therefore sufficient.

Answer C

Excellent man! Keep sharing, keep helping. Got to learn something new today after a couple of weeks.
_________________

There’s something in Pacific North West that you cannot find anywhere else. The atmosphere and scenic nature are next to none, with mountains on one side and ocean on...

This month I got selected by Stanford GSB to be included in “Best & Brightest, Class of 2017” by Poets & Quants. Besides feeling honored for being part of...

Joe Navarro is an ex FBI agent who was a founding member of the FBI’s Behavioural Analysis Program. He was a body language expert who he used his ability to successfully...