Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Jun 0808:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Master the GMAT with expert live instruction, a personalized study plan, and real-time support. Includes 40 hours of online classes plus 6 months of access to the TTP GMAT OnDemand video course. Mon/Wed June 8, 2026 →August 12, 2026 8:00pm-10:00pm EST
Jun 1006:00 AM PDT
-06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..- Jun 10
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Scoring 715 on the GMAT Focus Edition requires more than just learning formulas, memorizing concepts, or solving hundreds of questions. In this episode, Nishant shares how he improved his GMAT preparation by focusing on application of concepts, and more. 
Jun 1111:00 AM EDT
-01:00 PM EDT
TTP GMAT OnDemand gives serious students 400+ hours of expert video instruction, the full TTP course, AI support, weekly office hours, and a 715+ score guarantee—all built for elite GMAT score improvement.
18 Mar 2022, 07:45
Kudos
Bookmarks
Although E is a reasonable answer, I don't believe it is flawless, because it says "most of the players". what if the players that do not want to go to the all star team actually are the ones making more of these fouls?
I think this is a loophole in the answer
I think this is a loophole in the answer
28 May 2026, 18:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
Boil it down:
· We see a problem – increasing flagrant fouls
· Fouls are double of the last season
· Officials plan to reduce the fouls
We need to strengthen the plan will be effective.
Gap:
· Is it really a problem to begin with?
· Will the plan really solve the problem?
· Will the plan worsen the problem?
Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the officials’ plan will be effective?
(A) Most serious injuries occurring during league games are a direct result of flagrant fouls – Irrelevant – “serious injuries” is not mentioned anywhere
(B) League referees have been trained to recognize flagrant fouls and to report incidents involving such fouls. – okay it may strengthen that training of league referees may reduce fouls. But it does not provide support for “implementing mandatory suspensions for players who commit flagrant fouls.”- OUT
(C) Parents of players in the league are in support of mandatory suspensions for flagrant fouls – Irrelevant – no support for “plan will be effective” - OUT
(D) A similar league suspends players for committing flagrant fouls; this league has a relatively low incidence of flagrant fouls when compared with the Youth Hockey League – TRAP – we have no data whether that the number of fouls reduced in that league due to mandatory suspensions or it could have been the case that the number of fouls were already negligible in that league. - OUT
(E) Most players in the league strive to be selected for the All-Star team, and league rules state that no player with a record of suspension shall be selected for the All-Star team – Better than D – it boosts confidence in the plan that most players will be cautious to not to make fouls – CORRECT
On a lighter note, if I modify the option D as “(D) A similar league suspends players for committing flagrant fouls; this league has substantially reduced the incidence of flagrant fouls after implementing this system”
Now, this Option D is a very strong strengthener.
· We see a problem – increasing flagrant fouls
· Fouls are double of the last season
· Officials plan to reduce the fouls
We need to strengthen the plan will be effective.
Gap:
· Is it really a problem to begin with?
· Will the plan really solve the problem?
· Will the plan worsen the problem?
Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the officials’ plan will be effective?
(A) Most serious injuries occurring during league games are a direct result of flagrant fouls – Irrelevant – “serious injuries” is not mentioned anywhere
(B) League referees have been trained to recognize flagrant fouls and to report incidents involving such fouls. – okay it may strengthen that training of league referees may reduce fouls. But it does not provide support for “implementing mandatory suspensions for players who commit flagrant fouls.”- OUT
(C) Parents of players in the league are in support of mandatory suspensions for flagrant fouls – Irrelevant – no support for “plan will be effective” - OUT
(D) A similar league suspends players for committing flagrant fouls; this league has a relatively low incidence of flagrant fouls when compared with the Youth Hockey League – TRAP – we have no data whether that the number of fouls reduced in that league due to mandatory suspensions or it could have been the case that the number of fouls were already negligible in that league. - OUT
(E) Most players in the league strive to be selected for the All-Star team, and league rules state that no player with a record of suspension shall be selected for the All-Star team – Better than D – it boosts confidence in the plan that most players will be cautious to not to make fouls – CORRECT
On a lighter note, if I modify the option D as “(D) A similar league suspends players for committing flagrant fouls; this league has substantially reduced the incidence of flagrant fouls after implementing this system”
Now, this Option D is a very strong strengthener.
Moderators:
670 posts
