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.
May 1001:00 AM EDT
-02:00 AM EDT
Stuck at the same GMAT score? Plateaus aren’t about effort—they’re about approach. Watch Srikar’s journey to uncover what truly drives score improvement—and how you can apply it to break your plateau.
May 0912:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Struggling to find the right strategies to score a 99 %ile on GMAT Focus? Riya (GMAT 715) boosted her score by 100-points in just 15 days! Discover how the right mentorship, tailored strategies, and an unwavering mindset can transform your GMAT prep.
May 1506:00 PM PDT
-07:00 PM PDT
Start your free trial!
09 May 2026, 09:19
Kudos
Bookmarks
E
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
80% (00:56) correct
20%
(01:29)
wrong
based on 5
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Letter to the editor: According to last Thursday's editorial, someone who commits a burglary runs almost no risk of being caught. This is clearly false. Police reports show that at least 70 percent of people who commit crimes are caught. All burglars are criminals, so although some burglars will undoubtedly escape, a large percentage of them will eventually be caught.
The claim that some burglars will undoubtedly escape plays which one of the following roles in the letter writer's argument?
(A) It is evidence presented in support of the letter writer's conclusion.
(B) It is the conclusion of a subsidiary argument.
(C) It provides an example of the kind of case under discussion.
(D) It restates the position against which the letter writer's argument as a whole is directed.
(E) It concedes a point that does not undermine the letter writer's conclusion.
The claim that some burglars will undoubtedly escape plays which one of the following roles in the letter writer's argument?
(A) It is evidence presented in support of the letter writer's conclusion.
(B) It is the conclusion of a subsidiary argument.
(C) It provides an example of the kind of case under discussion.
(D) It restates the position against which the letter writer's argument as a whole is directed.
(E) It concedes a point that does not undermine the letter writer's conclusion.
09 May 2026, 09:36
Kudos
Bookmarks
I think the correct answer is E.
The statement “although some burglars will undoubtedly escape” is not the main conclusion.
It is a concession.
The author is basically saying:
“Yes, some burglars may escape...”
BUT
“a large percentage of burglars will still be caught.”
So the statement accepts a small opposing point without damaging the overall conclusion.
That is exactly what option E describes.
Why the others do not fit:
(A) Incorrect.
The statement is not evidence supporting the conclusion. The actual support is:
“70% of criminals are caught” + “burglars are criminals.”
(B) Incorrect.
It is not the conclusion of a separate argument. Nothing is being proven there.
(C) Incorrect.
It is not giving an example. It is making a concession.
(D) Incorrect.
The opposing position was:
“burglars run almost no risk of being caught.”
But the statement says only:
“some burglars will escape.”
That is much weaker and not the same claim.
(E) Correct.
The author concedes that some burglars escape, but says this does not weaken the main conclusion that many burglars are eventually caught.
So the role of that statement is to acknowledge a minor point while still defending the overall argument.
Answer: E
The statement “although some burglars will undoubtedly escape” is not the main conclusion.
It is a concession.
The author is basically saying:
“Yes, some burglars may escape...”
BUT
“a large percentage of burglars will still be caught.”
So the statement accepts a small opposing point without damaging the overall conclusion.
That is exactly what option E describes.
Why the others do not fit:
(A) Incorrect.
The statement is not evidence supporting the conclusion. The actual support is:
“70% of criminals are caught” + “burglars are criminals.”
(B) Incorrect.
It is not the conclusion of a separate argument. Nothing is being proven there.
(C) Incorrect.
It is not giving an example. It is making a concession.
(D) Incorrect.
The opposing position was:
“burglars run almost no risk of being caught.”
But the statement says only:
“some burglars will escape.”
That is much weaker and not the same claim.
(E) Correct.
The author concedes that some burglars escape, but says this does not weaken the main conclusion that many burglars are eventually caught.
So the role of that statement is to acknowledge a minor point while still defending the overall argument.
Answer: E
Updated on: 09 May 2026, 10:43
Originally posted by AbhishekP220108 on 09 May 2026, 10:43.
Last edited by AbhishekP220108 on 09 May 2026, 10:43, edited 1 time in total.
Last edited by AbhishekP220108 on 09 May 2026, 10:43, edited 1 time in total.
Kudos
Bookmarks
yc168 FYI I changed the tag from Method of reasoning to Boldfaced CR since the question stem resembles the single boldfaced type.
Thanks in advance
Thanks in advance
yc168
