A cricketer trying to predict the outcome of the one day world cup match in 1996 between the experienced Pakistan and the upstart Bangladesh, probably would have chosen the then invincible Pakistan by an odds of 10/1 and been quite wrong
A. have chosen the then invincible Pakistan by an odds of 10/1 and been quite wrong
B. have chosen that it would be the then invincible Pakistan by an odds of 10/1 and be quite wrong
C. choose the then invincible Pakistan by an odds of 10/1 and been quite wrong
D. choose the then invincible Pakistan by an odds of 10/1 and be quite wrong
E. choose in favor of the then invincible Pakistan by an odds of 10/1 and been quite wrong
Hi Experts,
I could not detect errors efficiently of this question. can you please help me to solve this question>
Thanks
anu
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
A cricketer trying to predict th
This topic has expert replies
-
fabiocafarelli
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 3:40 am
- Thanked: 57 times
- Followed by:2 members
1. Your first line of attack could be to select the beginning most in tune with the idea that the sentence is trying to convey. Thus, either WOULD HAVE CHOSEN or WOULD CHOOSE.
2. A cricketer trying to predict something today probably WOULD CHOOSE an outcome or WOULD SAY something or WOULD EXPECT something.
3. Nevertheless, this sentence is talking about how a hypothetical cricketer was trying in 1996 to predict something: in other words, the action of trying to predict is happening in the past. (The sentence makes this perfectly clear in the ending: the statement that the cricketer was WRONG tells us that the game finished and that the outcome was different from the one predicted.)
4. Consequently, the cricketer probably WOULD HAVE CHOSEN Pakistan. This Perfect Conditional form presents a hypothetical past action. And since this hypothetical action has a consequence, the cricketer WOULD HAVE BEEN wrong. (The given sentence does not repeat WOULD HAVE, because there is no need: those verbs apply equally to CHOSEN and to BEEN.)
5. In option B, the sequence WOULD HAVE CHOSEN ... AND BE is grammatically unsound and illogical. It implies that the cricketer would have chosen an outcome in 1996 and would be wrong in some unspecified future - perhaps in 2017. But cricket games, though long, are not that long.
6. If you missed this problem, you could still have eliminated B on the basis of the IT, which states quite directly that the outcome of the match would have been Pakistan.
(Actually, option A, though the best option and the one you would have to select, is still not very good: it makes little sense to say that somebody trying to predict the outcome would have chosen Pakistan: this is the same error as the one in option B, though there it occurs in a grosser form. What the sentence is trying to say, but does not say very successfully, is that a cricketer trying to predict the outcome would have foretold a victory by Pakistan.)
If you like this post, please click on the THANK icon.
You can also visit us at https://www.xgmat.com/
2. A cricketer trying to predict something today probably WOULD CHOOSE an outcome or WOULD SAY something or WOULD EXPECT something.
3. Nevertheless, this sentence is talking about how a hypothetical cricketer was trying in 1996 to predict something: in other words, the action of trying to predict is happening in the past. (The sentence makes this perfectly clear in the ending: the statement that the cricketer was WRONG tells us that the game finished and that the outcome was different from the one predicted.)
4. Consequently, the cricketer probably WOULD HAVE CHOSEN Pakistan. This Perfect Conditional form presents a hypothetical past action. And since this hypothetical action has a consequence, the cricketer WOULD HAVE BEEN wrong. (The given sentence does not repeat WOULD HAVE, because there is no need: those verbs apply equally to CHOSEN and to BEEN.)
5. In option B, the sequence WOULD HAVE CHOSEN ... AND BE is grammatically unsound and illogical. It implies that the cricketer would have chosen an outcome in 1996 and would be wrong in some unspecified future - perhaps in 2017. But cricket games, though long, are not that long.
6. If you missed this problem, you could still have eliminated B on the basis of the IT, which states quite directly that the outcome of the match would have been Pakistan.
(Actually, option A, though the best option and the one you would have to select, is still not very good: it makes little sense to say that somebody trying to predict the outcome would have chosen Pakistan: this is the same error as the one in option B, though there it occurs in a grosser form. What the sentence is trying to say, but does not say very successfully, is that a cricketer trying to predict the outcome would have foretold a victory by Pakistan.)
If you like this post, please click on the THANK icon.
You can also visit us at https://www.xgmat.com/
