Re: Is the probability of drawing a 3 from a bag of numbered tiles greater
[#permalink]
25 Jul 2017, 07:35
For Statement 2, it needs to be clear how we're drawing the two tiles - with replacement, or without? If we're drawing with replacement, and the probability of getting two threes is zero, then there are no threes in the bag, so the answer to the question is 'no', and the statement is sufficient.
If we're drawing without replacement, again we may have zero threes in the bag (in which case the answer is 'no'), or we may have exactly one three. But if there's only one three in the bag, and you pick one tile, the probability of picking a three will be 1/n, where n is the total number of tiles. This will only be greater than 50% if n is exactly 1. But the wording of the question (a bag of numbered tiles) suggests that there is more than one tile in the bag. So the pluralization of 'tiles' in the question stem suggests to me that we are meant to rule out the possibility there is only one tile in total, and that would make Statement 2 sufficient also.
But I wouldn't really know how to answer the question, because it's ambiguous whether we should admit the possibility that there is exactly one tile in total in the bag of tiles.