Cyclists in the Tour de France are extremely physically fit: all of

Question

Cyclists in the Tour de France are extremely physically fit: all of the winners of this race have had abnormal physiological constitutions. Typical of the abnormal physiology of these athletes are exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts. Tests conducted on last year’s winner did not reveal an exceptionally powerful heart. That cyclist must, therefore, have exceptional lung capacity.

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it overlooks the possibility that

(A) having exceptional lung capacity and an exceptionally powerful heart is an advantage in cycling
(B) some winners of the Tour de France have neither exceptional lung capacity nor exceptionally powerful hearts
(C) cyclists with normal lung capacity rarely have exceptionally powerful hearts
(D) the exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts of Tour de France winners are due to training
(E) the notions of exceptional lung capacity and exceptional heart function are relative to the physiology of most cyclists

jaiswalicsi · Answer

E explains why B ....since E is more comprehensive I chose E

Posted from my mobile device

BlueBook · Answer

I agree. It's a close call between B and E. Please clarify...

nandeta · Answer

Cyclists in the Tour de France are extremely physically fit: all of the winners of this race have had abnormal physiological constitutions. Typical of the abnormal physiology of these athletes are exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts. Tests conducted on last year’s winner did not reveal an exceptionally powerful heart. That cyclist must, therefore, have exceptional lung capacity.

Argument reasoning: Test conducted on last years winners did not reveal exceptionally powerful heart.

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it overlooks the possibility that

(A) having exceptional lung capacity and an exceptionally powerful heart is an advantage in cycling 
Wrong. This is what the argument is saying. We need to weaken it.

(B) some winners of the Tour de France have neither exceptional lung capacity nor exceptionally powerful hearts  
Correct. This weakens the reasoning of the argument.

(C) cyclists with normal lung capacity rarely have exceptionally powerful hearts 
Wrong. The argument states to have one of the both.

(D) the exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts of Tour de France winners are due to training 
Wrong. They are not asking why.

(E) the notions of exceptional lung capacity and exceptional heart function are relative to the physiology of most cyclists 
Wrong. This is just re-stating the argument.

BlueBook · Answer

I still do not understand  how  choice B weakens the argument

analytica233 · Answer

Notice the second sentence in the argument, "TYPICAL of the abnormal physiology of these athletes ARE exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts", which does NOT mean that ALL these winners have exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts. Hence, the reasoning overlooks the possibility that some winners do not have these 2 traits: although they have abnormal physiology, it may not involve exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts TYPICAL of the physiology of winners. (B) is correct.

GmatKnightTutor · Answer

Cyclists in the Tour de France are extremely physically fit: all of the winners of this race have had abnormal physiological constitutions. Typical of the abnormal physiology of these athletes are exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts. Tests conducted on last year’s winner did not reveal an exceptionally powerful heart. That cyclist must, therefore, have exceptional lung capacity.

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it overlooks the possibility that

(A) having exceptional lung capacity and an exceptionally powerful heart is an advantage in cycling
Not relevant to whether the cyclist in question has exceptional lung capacity

(B) some winners of the Tour de France have neither exceptional lung capacity nor exceptionally powerful hearts
The question specifies that all the winners have exceptional constitutions, not lung and heart capacities. Bingo.

(C) cyclists with normal lung capacity rarely have exceptionally powerful hearts
Doesn't seem relevant. At least when it comes to competitive cyclists it is TYPICAL

(D) the exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts of Tour de France winners are due to training

If anything this would strengthen the conclusion.

(E) the notions of exceptional lung capacity and exceptional heart function are relative to the physiology of most cyclists
Great. But they are still exceptional, right? In any event, does this impact the conclusion in either direction?

unraveled · Answer

Cyclists in the Tour de France are extremely physically fit: all of the winners of this race have had abnormal physiological constitutions. Typical of the abnormal physiology of these athletes are exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts. Tests conducted on last year’s winner did not reveal an exceptionally powerful heart.  That  cyclist must, therefore, have exceptional lung capacity.

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it overlooks the possibility that

(A) having exceptional lung capacity and an exceptionally powerful heart is an advantage in cycling
(B) some winners of the Tour de France have neither exceptional lung capacity nor exceptionally powerful hearts
(C) cyclists with normal lung capacity rarely have exceptionally powerful hearts
(D) the exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts of Tour de France winners are due to training
(E) the notions of exceptional lung capacity and exceptional heart function are relative to the physiology of most cyclists

The last sentence of the passage is the conclusion and we need to find something that weakens it. So, it should either say something else other than lung capacity helped last year's winner win the race or that both exceptional powerful heart and exceptional lung capacity is not a necessity.
The word 'that' in the last sentence is specific to the cyclist. B makes a generic statement about cyclists that must include last year's winner. However, this generic statement does create a doubt selecting it.

On the other hand, E goes in either direction - strengthens or weakens - depending on the further assumption one makes.

HarshaBujji · Answer

Cyclists in the Tour de France are extremely physically fit: all of the winners of this race have had abnormal physiological constitutions.   Typical of the abnormal physiology of these athletes are exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts  . Tests conducted on last year’s winner did not reveal an exceptionally powerful heart. That cyclist must, therefore, have exceptional lung capacity.

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it overlooks the possibility that

(A) having exceptional lung capacity and an exceptionally powerful heart is an advantage in cycling
(B) some winners of the Tour de France have neither exceptional lung capacity nor exceptionally powerful hearts
(C) cyclists with normal lung capacity rarely have exceptionally powerful hearts
(D) the exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts of Tour de France winners are due to training
(E) the notions of exceptional lung capacity and exceptional heart function are relative to the physiology of most cyclists

Here, we need to understand the below 2 premises clearly to solve this question/  
 1)All of the winners of this race have had abnormal physiological constitutions
2)Typical of the abnormal physiology of these athletes are exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts

Derived statement

This means All the winners must have Abnormal Physiology, and Most of the winners have the exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful hearts

So now its clear that there are some winners who don't have both exceptional lung capacity and exceptionally powerful.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Cyclists in the Tour de France are extremely physically fit: all of

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 Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Cyclists in the Tour de France are extremely physically fit: all of

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