Last summer, as with every summer, Oshin and Reena made exactly one

Question

Last summer, as with every summer, Oshin and Reena made exactly one long trip together to a town neither of them had visited before. For their long summer trips, Oshin and Reena have always chosen to visit a town that Reena would have liked to visit—unless Oshin had been to that town before. Reena had visited Town F and Town G before—and Oshin had never visited Town J or Town K. Did Oshin and Reena visit one of these four towns last summer?

(1) Reena had never visited Town J and Oshin had never visited Town F.

(2) Oshin would have liked to visit either Town G or Town K.

(1) Reena had never visited Town J and Oshin had never visited Town F.

(2) Oshin would have liked to visit either Town G or Town K.

GMATCoachBen · Accepted Answer

Video solution here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YH7mwRnmP4

I also created 2 more variations with alternate wording, to learn more from this problem:

Variation 2:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpC9qRMpmxE

Variation 3:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kmu3pGaZGfs

egmat · Answer

This DS question represents the new incarnation of DS questions – DS questions with verbal reasoning. The dataset in this question presents multiple conditions that need to be processed appropriately to answer the question asked.

To answer this question correctly, we need to develop the following skills:
 
 Extracting the conditions in our notes 
 Drawing inferences at the right time before we read new information. 
 Before processing the statements, understanding how we will answer the question asked. 
 Applying the DS framework in a methodical manner to arrive at the answer.

Watch the video to understand how to efficiently solve this question using the above mentioned skills.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOafCczSRow

Happy learning!

PS: This question may be worded a bit imprecisely. But don’t worry if you didn’t observe that! However, if you want to know more about it, let me know. 😊

mayankdgmat · Answer

(E)

Two conditions: 
-Town both have not visited before
-Reena like to visit

So automatically F & G are out since Reena has already visited. So left out with J & K

(1) Reena had never visited Town J and Oshin had never visited Town F.

But still if Reena don't want to visit J or not we don't know. Hence insufficient.

(2) Oshin would have liked to visit either Town G or Town K.

G is already out, but for K we don't know weather Reena want to visit K or not. Hence insufficient.

(1)+(2) together still not sufficient because we don't know about Reena preference

MartyMurray · Answer

Last summer, as with every summer, Oshin and Reena made exactly one long trip together to a town neither of them had visited before. For their long summer trips, Oshin and Reena have always chosen to visit a town that Reena would have liked to visit—unless Oshin had been to that town before. Reena had visited Town F and Town G before—and Oshin had never visited Town J or Town K. Did Oshin and Reena visit one of these four towns last summer?

(1) Reena had never visited Town J and Oshin had never visited Town F.

(2) Oshin would have liked to visit either Town G or Town K.

Notice that the passage does not indicate that Oshin and Reena could not have visited a town other than the four towns mentioned. So, unless one of the statements indicates that towns other than the four mentioned are not possible, the only way we can determine whether Oshin and Reena visited one of the four mentioned towns last summer is to determine whether they for sure did NOT visit any of the four towns. After all, even if we determine that they could have visited one of the four towns, we still don't know whether they visited that town or another one that's not mentioned

Thus, the question becomes basically the following: Can we eliminate all four mentioned towns or eliminate all towns not mentioned?

So, let's start eliminating towns.

The passage says that they went to "a town neither of them had visited before."

So, F and G are already out since the passage says, "Reena had visited Town F and Town G before."

We're left with J and K.

(1) Reena had never visited Town J and Oshin had never visited Town F.

F is already out. So, this choice means that they could have visited J because the passage says, "Oshin had never visited town J."

We can't use this choice to eliminate all four mentioned towns or to eliminate other towns.

Insufficient.

(2) Oshin would have liked to visit either Town G or Town K.

G is already out. So, this choice means that they could have visited K because the passage says, "Oshin had never visited town K."

We can't use this choice to eliminate all four mentioned towns or to elminate other towns.

Insufficient.

(1) and (2) combined

The two statements combined leave J, K, and towns other than the mentioned towns as possibilities.

Insufficient.

Correct answer:  E

Gemmie · Answer

R:
+ Visited: F; G
+ Never:

O:
+ Visited:
+ Never: J; K

Oshin and Reena have always chosen to visit a town that Reena would have liked to visit—unless Oshin had been to that town before. Did Oshin and Reena visit one of these four towns last summer?

==> Need to know a town which (i) Reena would have like to visit and (ii) Oshin had never been to that town

Statement 1:   
R:
+ Visited: F; G
+ Never:  J

O:
+ Visited:
+ Never: J; K;  F

==> Not sufficient

Statement 2:  
R:
+ Visited: F; G
+ Never:

O:
+ Visited:
+ Never: J; K
 + Love to: G; K

=> Not sufficient

Combined: 
+ Visited: F; G
+ Never:  J

O:
+ Visited:
+ Never: J; K,  F 
 + Love to: G; K

=> Not sufficient

Answer is E

pierjoejoe · Answer

the conditions to choose a city are:
- the city must have never been visited by BOTH.
- the city must be liked by REINA AND Oshin must not have visited it.
the cities are F,G,J,K
and F and G are already out, because the don't respect the first condition (since Reina visited them both as per the problem statement).
we are left with J and K

(1) Reina never visited J, so it might be the one. Oshin have never visited F, but F has been already excluded. 
if Reina likes J --> they go to J
if Reina does not like J --> they do not go to j

moreover, city K is not mentioned, Oshin has never visited it but:
if Reina has not visited it and she likes it --> they might go to K
if Reina has not visited and she does not like it --> the might NOT go to K
if Reina has visited K--> it will be excluded by the first condition (ALL THE CITIES MUST NOT BE ALREADY VISITED)
(NOT SUFFICIENT)
(2) Oshin preferences are not important, if he likes or not something is not part of the conditions. (NOT SUFFICIENT)

(1)(2)
statement 2 is not adding anything to statement (1). we know that 2 possible cities might be chosen: J and K, but with several conditions:
-> J is chosen only if Reina likes it
-> K is chosen only if Reina did not visited it and if she likes it.

we don't know if Resina visited K and we don't know weather Reina likes or dislikes J. thus it is not sufficient to say without reasonable doubt if they will visit any of the cities mentioned. (NOT SUFFICIENT)

RenB · Answer

In this qs, can I make a conclusive inference from the first line that one criteria is that neither should have visited the town?
I read it as last year, like they do every summer, they went on a trip. The fact that neither had visited the town earlier is just description. The actual conditions start from 'For their long summer trips....'
 KarishmaB   MartyMurray   GMATCoachBen   chetan2u 
Would like to know your thoughts

KarishmaB · Answer

Given: Last summer they visited a town neither had visited before.  
This is data given to us. It is known.  RenB  we must take it into account.

How do they select every year?  
They go where Reena wants to go (except if O has been there before - makes sense because they must go where neither has gone before)
Reena had visited Town F and Town G before — So F and G are out of picture. They did not go to F or G last summer.
and Oshin had never visited Town J or Town K -- J and K are in the running.

Did Oshin and Reena visit one of these four towns last summer? 
Keep in mind that both J and K are possible till now and that they could have visited a 5th town A or B or Z etc.

(1) Reena had never visited Town J and Oshin had never visited Town F.

Ignore F anyway. J is still a possible town they visited last summer. But they could have visited K too. Or A or B too.

(2) Oshin would have liked to visit either Town G or Town K.

From this we can possibly say that Oshin has not visited K before so K is still in the mix, but otherwise, Oshin's preference is irrelevant. Ignore.

Using both, we know that J, K or any other 5th town is a possibility.
 
Answer (E)

kpop1234567890 · Answer

Other variations of this Q by E-gmat towards end of the video. I have posted the answer according to me in the comments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IczCq3R ... MQ&index=2

egmat pls clarify the ans that i have put in comments

MagicMeat · Answer

I saw this on egmat as a modified of the same question. the answer as per egmat was A. But i believe it should be E as the condition that " recommended by their close friends  and  that either Oshin or Reena, but not both, had visited before" was not satisfied

Last summer, as with every summer, Oshin and Reena made exactly one long trip together. However, unlike previous years, this time, they decided to visit a town that was recommended by their close friends and that either Oshin or Reena, but not both, had visited before. Did Oshin and Reena visit one of these four towns last summer? Oshin had visited Town F and Town G before, while Reena had never visited Town J or Town K. 
 (1) Among the towns recommended by their friends were Town F and Town J. 
 (2) Reena prefers visiting towns that Oshin has already explored to have a familiar guide.

egmat · Answer

Hi MagicMeat,

First, so we're working on the same thing. The question in the second half of your post, the one with the friends' recommendation and the "either Oshin or Reena, but not both" rule, is a different question from the one in this thread. The roles are swapped, the selection rule is inverted, and both statements are new. That modified version is the one you want explained, so that is what this is about.

Why it comes out to A.

Two conditions govern the town they chose: it had to be recommended by the friends, and exactly one of the two had to have been there before. Now hold on to something the stem hands you for free. They  did  make the trip, and the town they picked  did  meet both conditions. You never have to prove that part for any particular town.

Then statement (1) puts Town F and Town J on the friends' list. Read that as the recommendations in full and the whole thing closes in one step:

- The town they visited was recommended.
- The recommended towns are F and J.
- So they went to F or to J.
- Both are among the four towns in the question.

The answer is yes. And notice you never had to settle  which  of the two it was, because either way the answer to "did they visit one of these four towns" comes out the same. That is what makes statement (1) sufficient on its own, which is  A .

Where your reasoning slips.  You said the condition "was not satisfied." It was satisfied - the stem guarantees it for whichever town they actually chose. What you cannot do from statement (1) is put a name to that town, and the elegance of this question is that you do not need to. Once the candidate list is down to F and J, naming it stops mattering.

Now the fair part of your objection.  The phrase "Among the towns recommended by their friends were Town F and Town J" is carrying a lot of weight, and it does not carry it cleanly. Read strictly, "among ... were" tells you only that F and J are  on  the list and leaves room for others. On that reading your instinct is right and the answer would be  E , because some fifth recommended town that exactly one of them had visited could exist, and they could have gone there instead. Nothing in the statements shuts that door.

So the intended reading is that F and J are the full set of recommendations, and that gives you  A . Your discomfort was worth having. It just lands on the wording rather than on the logic.

One thing worth keeping separate.  The question at the top of this thread is not the same problem, and on its own terms its answer is  E : there the four towns are explicitly not the only candidates, so a fifth town is always live. Review the two side by side and you will see the modification is precisely what removes that escape route.

Answer: A  for the modified version you posted. The question in this thread stays  E .

Last summer, as with every summer, Oshin and Reena made exactly one

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Data Sufficiency (DS) Questions

Last summer, as with every summer, Oshin and Reena made exactly one

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards