Baseball Analyst: Since the 2000 season, the average number of strikeo

Question

Baseball Analyst : Since the 2000 season, the average number of strikeouts per player has dramatically increased in Major League Baseball. The 2011 and 2012 seasons have the highest averages on record. Some writers have argue that batters, trying to hit homeruns at the same elevated rate at which they were hit in the “steroid” era, are taking increasingly larger swings, making them that much more vulnerable to striking out. But the real reason is enhanced video review. Pitchers are not necessarily any more talented than in the past, but they all watch video on each and every batter, studying his unique weaknesses, and, well-informed, are better able to exploit those weaknesses in game situations, even weaknesses of those batters with more compact swings. Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the baseball analyst’s argument? (A) Both the total number of homeruns and the average number of homeruns per batter have decreased steadily since 2000. (B) Batters who hit more singles and have shorter swings strike out, on average, far less than the power hitters who are trying to hit homeruns. (C) Baseball bats now, on average, are much lighter and easier to swing fast than were bats of fifty years ago. (D) Most batters also watch video of each and every pitcher, learning to detect what pitches he throws and how he releases each pitch. (E) Catchers and pitching coaches watch the same video that pitchers watch, and they are in a position to advise pitchers on different batters throughout the game For more on the "strengthen the argument" question type, as well as a complete explanation of this question, please see: https://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-cr-st ... -argument/ Mike

mikemcgarry · Accepted Answer

Dear bsahil , I'm happy to help. :-)

(A) is a good distractor. This is tricky --- there's the widespread argument, which associates the increase in strikeouts with the decrease in homeruns, and then this argument presents a new view, about the impact of videos. Thus, supporting this latter argument, the speaker's argument, cannot support the first argument, which the speaker opposes. In GMAT CR, it's very important to be careful with the different voices in an argument. Many GMAT CR arguments are of the form, " many people say THING #1, but I say THING #2 ". It does not support this argument to support THING #1. Does all this make sense? Mike :-)

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear emmafoster , I'm happy to respond. :-)

I will say that, within Magoosh, we discontinued this question, because answering it correctly at least may depend on some general knowledge about baseball, and for someone who, for whatever reason, knows absolutely nothing about baseball, this question could be construed as unfair. The GMAT would not do this to students. A couple salient baseball facts of which you may or may not be aware. The pitcher throws the ball that the batter is trying to hit, so they are, in some sense, adversaries: the pitcher is trying to get the hitter to miss the ball or not to hit it well, and the batter is trying to hit is well. They have directly antithetical purposes with one another. The core argument is that the pitchers have an advantage here because they have some extra knowledge about the batters, their adversaries. This knowledge comes from watching the videos. Knowledge is always power, and this power gives them an advantage in this athletic confrontation. Now, let's look at (D) & (E). (D) Most batters also watch video of each and every pitcher, learning to detect what pitches he throws and how he releases each pitch. The prompt argument is that the pitcher's big advantage is the knowledge he has of the batter. Well, if the batter also has knowledge of the pitcher, then that seems as if it might cancel out the pitcher's advantage. It certainly doesn't strengthen the argument, because the pitcher's adversary gets the same kind of advantage that the pitcher has. Suppose the prompt were about Company F and Company G, two rival companies, and the prompt argument said that Company F had a clear advantage over Company G because Company F has XYZ, some amazing benefit or strength. Well, if one of the choices tells us that Company G also has XYZ, that would seem to take away the reason that Company F had any advantage. That would be a weakener. This choice is similar to that. This may be a weakener, but it certainly is NOT a strengthen, so it is wrong. (E) Catchers and pitching coaches watch the same video that pitchers watch, and they are in a position to advise pitchers on different batters throughout the game. Think about it. Suppose I need to know some collection of facts to do my job well. Well, if I just have to have all these facts in my head by myself and can only depend on myself, then that could be hard: especially under pressure, it's hard to remember everything one needs to know. It's an extraordinary advantage if I have helpers or colleagues who can support me, helping me to remember what I need to know, helpers who have my back in a pressure situation That's huge! That makes it much more like that, at the crucial moment of action, I will have all the knowledge I need. The fact that the catcher and pitching coach have all this knowledge also and can remind the pitcher during the course of the game makes it much more likely that the pitcher won't forget or get confused, and therefore much more likely that he will be able to retain and apply the knowledge that gives him a competitive advantage. This is a strengthener, and this is the OA. Does this make sense? Mike :-)

bsahil · Answer

I cold come down to A and E and then marked A. What is wrong in option A

ela4490 · Answer

Hi mike,

What is wrong with option D?
Can you explain the difference between D and E?
Why E is correct?

anje29 · Answer

I don't get this question

even after reading explanations

mbaprep2016 · Answer

conclusion :- the average number of strikeouts per player has dramatically increased in Major League Baseball.

fact :- The 2011 and 2012 seasons have the highest averages on record.

Some writers have argue that 
batters are taking increasingly larger swings, making them that they can be easily out.

But the real reason is enhanced video review. 
Pitchers watch video on each and every batter, studying his unique weaknesses, and, well-informed, are better able to exploit those weaknesses in game situations, even weaknesses of those batters with more compact swings.

Any option which helps us to tell why more srike out

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the baseball analyst’s argument?
(A) Both the total number of homeruns and the average number of homeruns per batter have decreased steadily since 2000. (this is tricky we have to find an option that tells us strike out .. not about the run)
(B) Batters who hit more singles and have shorter swings strike out, on average, far less than the power hitters who are trying to hit homeruns. (comaparision of batters is of no use)
(C) Baseball bats now, on average, are much lighter and easier to swing fast than were bats of fifty years ago. (of no use)
(D) Most batters also watch video of each and every pitcher, learning to detect what pitches he throws and how he releases each pitch. what if batter watch .. does it help increase strike out NO 
(E) Catchers and pitching coaches watch the same video that pitchers watch, and they are in a position to advise pitchers on different batters throughout the game
(only option )

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear anje29 , I'm happy to respond. :-)

This is NOT your fault. When I wrote this questions, I didn't realize how much I was taking for granted. You see, I am huge baseball fan. I wrote a question that I thought folks who didn't know baseball well would still understand. Indeed, Americans who grow up with baseball in the background absorb enough of the game that mostly they could understand this question. It turns out, though, that this question is grossly unfair to all the good folks who grew up in parts of the world in which baseball is not present. For a short time we had this question live in the Magoosh product, but the data quickly revealed that is a tremendously biased question, so we removed it from our data pool and don't use it any more. While the logic is sound, the subject matter is highly problematic and culturally biased. This question is unfair to most non-American students. The fact that you don't understand it is NOT your fault. This is question has problems. Here's a free CR question with no cultural bias: The element ytterbium increases Let me know if you have any questions. Mike :-)

Mo2men · Answer

Thanks Mike for clarification. The question reveals your attachment to baseball :-D

Actually I found it hard to absorb because of the baseball terminologies used. However, I cracked the question after I taught myself through googling those words. Learning never stops. For sake of practice, any one wants to solve question, please familiarize yourself with pitcher and strikeout. https://www.google.com.eg/search?q=stri ... e&ie=UTF-8 https://www.google.com.eg/search?q=Pitc ... n+baseball

DharLog · Answer

Too many words here. So we have to concentrate on one main point. The argument says about the video. So our answer-option has to have the word "video" in it.
There are only D and E. But D does not make much sense for our case.

E

berdibekov · Answer

i guess such type of question is very unlikely to appear on gmat, because the question is very culture-specific. One has to be well aware of baseball rules to be able to answer this question. GMAT doesn't discriminate on culture-awareness.

Foreheadson · Answer

I have no clue about baseball. I hope I don't see such specific question on the exam 😢

Posted from my mobile device

Thekingmaker · Answer

This a well thought out question it's most certainly a gmat type question now on to the elemination of each answers
A-if the strike out was increasing year on why was the average greatest at 2011-12 it could have been greater at 2013 even though it's not mentioned not quite resolving 
B- this could have been a great choice however we aren't given the exact number maybe there are one member in each statted type and others belonging to some other category
C- this rather weakens if the bats are lighter why are there more stike outs with improved effeciency 
D- another weakening if the batters are studying well the pitchers and statergy why the stike out
E- at last yes the pitchers are well informed about the weakness of the batters and aided in the pitch by the positioing too culuminating in the stiking out hence IMO E

Hope it makes sense

Danush649 · Answer

HI
But the author doesn't oppose the first argument. He opposes the first reason behind the event and gives a new reason for that event to happen.
could you please explain this?

Baseball Analyst: Since the 2000 season, the average number of strikeo

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

Baseball Analyst: Since the 2000 season, the average number of strikeo

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