OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

In this prompt, the conclusion can be tricky to properly identify because it has two parts to it: “save the money they would spend on radar detectors” and “simply pay the tickets.” The conclusion is essentially saying “radar detectors don’t help drivers avoid tickets,” based on the statistic that radar detector owners get 10% more tickets than those who don’t. But answer choice B suggests something else: what if those drivers were actually “supposed to” get twice or three times as many tickets? 10% more would then be a decrease from what you would expect. If only the drivers who are the most likely to get tickets use radar detectors, then it stands to reason that radar detectors do work, even if not all the time. Answer choice B is correct.

I do not agree with the official explanation. Is it logical to link 10% more likely to receive speeding tickets to the receiving of speeding tickets purchase and use radar detectors?
_________________

In my opinion:
apart from B , we can eliminate all choices easily ..POE is best for this question,

we need to prove that radar detector is helping---B does that.

As radar is used by drivers who most likely to receive speeding tickets,radar is helping drivers ,otherwise , may be they would have got more speeding tickets that can out cast the radar cost....So B

Hi ziyuen,

I actually reached the solution by eliminating all other possible answers as they strengthen conclusion. However, I still skeptical about explanation answer B. Let's make GMATNinja shares hos thoughts.

Dear Charles,

The official answer provided by Veritas is not convincing for me to weaken the argument. It assumes that those drivers will get twice or 3 times tickets. I think that it is huge assumption that may or may not be true.

Can you please share your thoughts.

Yeah, the question-writers were clearly trying to copy an LSAT question here. It's somewhere in LSAT PrepTests #29-38, I think -- but in any case, they didn't do a great job on the execution. Again, it's brutally, brutally hard for even the best test-prep companies to copy the style of actual tests. The GMAT spends $1500-$3000 developing each individual question, and I have reason to suspect that the figure is even higher for the LSAT.

So this isn't a criticism of the question-writers, since they're trying to accomplish the impossible... but fwiw, here's where they lost me:



No, that's not really what the conclusion is saying. Here's the conclusion of the passage:



Now, that's a completely different animal. In writing the explanation, they're committing a cardinal sin of CR: changing the language of the conclusion so that it says something subtly different. Actually, this isn't even subtle: the explanation changes the conclusion pretty radically. As GMATNinjaTwo likes to say, whoever wrote the explanation is "putting words in the passage's mouth" -- and that's a huge error when you're doing CR.

(B) might be the best of the bunch, but it's still a pretty lousy answer. So don't worry too much about this one.
_________________

Agree with GMATNinja, while option B seems to be the possible choice but it is debatable, also OE is not crystal clear.

GMATNinja bb, these days I see quite a few problems especially in SC and CR which actually in a way are not logically sound. Sometimes, these questions end up creating confusions for many people(beginners like me:P).

Can we have some flag associated with each question in which forum moderators can update the quality of the problem? Say something like "Trusted by experts" (Don't know if this is appropriate, but something of this sort). At the moment we only have the difficulty level of the problem which is determined by the answers given by users.
This will help users not to worry about their wrong answers in flawed or debatable questions.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.