BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

1000DS Please Help... want to be sure

Expert replies
by rookiez » Sun Jul 05, 2009 10:41 am
19. If x is an integer, what is the value of x?
(1) –2(x + 5) < -1
(2) – 3x > 9
how come OA is C

13. Before play-offs, a certain team had won 80 percent of its games. After play-offs, what percent of all its games had the team won?
(1) The team competed in 4 play-off games.
(2) The team won all of its play-off games.
OA E

15. If x&#8800;0, is |x| <1?
(1) x^2<1
(2) |x| < 1/x
OA d

23. Is x less than y?
(1) x-y+1<0
(2) x-y-1<0
OA A

24. Is quadrilateral RSTV a rectangle?
(1) The measure of &#8736;RST is 90o
(2) The measure of &#8736;TVR is 90o
OA E
Last edited by rookiez on Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by DanaJ » Sun Jul 05, 2009 12:54 pm
Before writing anything else, I'd like to remind you that you're supposed to post only one question per thread.

19. It's obvious that each statement by itself is not sufficient:
1. –2(x + 5) < -1
x + 5 > 1/2
x > -9/2 --- plenty of values for x: -4, -3, ...

2. – 3x > 9
x < -3 ---- again, lots of possible values: -4, -5, ...

But put both together to get that only -4 is the integer that is in both lists.


13. You've got that the team played x games before the playoffs, out of which they won 80% or 0.8x. You're trying to establish the percentage of wins out of (x + p), with p = total number of playoff games.
1. tells you that p = 4, but you don't know how many of the 4 games the team won. 1 is not enough.

2. tells you that the team won all playoff games, so wins = 100% of playoffs. This brings the total wins to 0.8x + p. However, there's no way of determining the percentage of wins out of (x + p). Consider k = percentage of wins.

k%*(x + p) = 0.8x + p
k% = (0.8x + p)/(x + p) --- there's no way of working around this fraction unless you know the values or some other relationship between x and p.

Put both together and still nothing:

k% = (0.8x + 4)/(x + 4) --- same as with statement 2


15. You've missed something on this question. Let's analyze statement 1 to prove it's enough, but you'll need to edit your post for statement 2:
x^2 < 1
x^2 - 1 < 0
(x - 1)(x + 1) < 0 --- the quadratic equation is negative only between the roots (in this case, the roots, i.e. values for which (x - 1)(x + 1) is zero, are -1 and 1). This means that the inequality holds only if -1 < x < 1. This is why |x| < 1.


23. Take each statement and analyze it:
1. x - y + 1< 0 --- add y to each side
x + 1 < y --- subtract 1 from each side
x < y - 1 --- since x is smaller than y - 1, x will definitely be smaller than y. The answer to the question in the stem will be a clear NO. 1 is sufficient.

2. x - y - 1 < 0 --- add y to each side
x - 1 < y --- add 1 to each side
x < y + 1 --- this does not necessarily mean that y is greater than x. Consider a numerical example:
x = 1
y = 0.8 --- y + 1 = 1.8, which is indeed greater than 1; however, y < x.
2 is insufficient.


24. See the picture for a possible shape of a non-rectangular polygon that has both specified right angles. Please forgive the approximate drawing, the art of MS Paint is a delicate one.

Image
Join the discussion

by rookiez » Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:07 pm
Thanks DanaJ!
It helps a lot!

Following que needs your attention
15. If x&#8800;0, is |x| <1?
(1) x^2<1
(2) |x| < 1/x
OA D
Join the discussion

by DanaJ » Sun Jul 05, 2009 10:37 pm
2. |x| < 1/x --- when dealing with modulus, you need to break it up into two cases:
a. x is negative, which means that 1/x is also negative. However, |x| will be positive. So, if x is negative, then you get (positive number) < (negative number), which is iimpossible. This means that x cannot be negative.

b. x is positive, meaning that |x| = x. You get that x < 1/x or that x^2 < 1. You're back to statement 1, so 2 is also sufficient.
Join the discussion