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.

absolute value in an equation

Expert replies
by Kogan » Wed Apr 21, 2010 10:28 am
Hello, the question is this:

t,q,s are different numbers. is t<s<q ?

1) q-t = |q-s|+|s-t|
2) q-t>0

obviously it's not B, and also not C (because you can see from statement 1 that q>t, no need for statement 2).
I don't know how to approach the equality given in statement 1. Any ideas?

(from all examples I took for statement 1, the answer seems to be "yes", but I couldn't find an algebraic way.)
Last edited by Kogan on Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by Stuart@KaplanGMAT » Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:35 pm
Kogan wrote:Hello, the question is this:

t,q,s are different numbers. is t<s<q ?

1) q-t = |q-s|+|s-t|
2) q-t>0
As you noted from (1), we can quickly determine that q > t, since the sum of the terms on the right is certainly going to be positive.

Since q, s and t are different numbers, we know that neither term on the right is 0; so, we can think about (1) as:

"The distance between q and t is equal to the sum of the distances between q and s and between s and t."

Since the term on the left side is equal to the sum of the two terms on the right side, we can say:

"The distance between q and t is greater than either of the other two distances."

Well, the only way the distance between q and t could be the greatest is if q and t are furthest apart on the number line. If q and t have to be the furthest apart, then s must be in the middle.

Accordingly, from (1) we can deduce that q>s>t... sufficient.
Image

Stuart Kovinsky | Kaplan GMAT Faculty | Toronto

Kaplan Exclusive: The Official Test Day Experience | Ready to Take a Free Practice Test? | Kaplan/Beat the GMAT Member Discount
BTG100 for $100 off a full course
Join the discussion

by el_torero » Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:49 pm
Wow this is a frickin' hard one. Let me roll up my sleeves...

Here's how I attacked the problem:

Let's start with (2) first because it's the easiest path to take:
(2) q - t > 0 means of course, q > t. Great. But how does this relate to s? Who knows. INSUFFICIENT.


Let's look at (1):
q - t = |q - s| + |s - t|

First thing to notice is that q - t MUST be > 0. Why? Notice we know q, s, t are DIFFERENT numbers, so q - t can't be 0 (FACT 1). This is key! Furthermore, since the right hand side has two absolute values, in conjunction with FACT 1, it must be > 0. Therefore, q > t.

But where does s lie in relation to q and t? We want to show if s lies in between q and t, which will satisfy the answer. I drew it on a number line to visualize:

(My really bad improvisational number line)
+ <-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -
q ------------------- s1? ---------------------- t ------------------------ s2?

I drew two examples of s: s1 that is between q and t, and s2, which is < t. (Drawing an s3 bigger than q is redundant and you'll see why).

Notice that the distance between q and s1 is precisely |q - s|. Great. Furthermore, the distance between s1 and t is precisely |s - t|.

Add those two distances together and you'll get q - t! Awesome! According to 1, then s MUST like between q and t and furthermore we've proved that q > s > t.

But what about s2? Well, if s2, lies where it is, then |q - s2| + |s2 - t| would be much greater than q - t, and therefore, contradicts what (1) says. You can visualize this on the bad number line. Notice that the same argument is true if we created an s3 that is > q, i.e. s3 is also impossible.

[spoiler]ANSWER: A[/spoiler]
Join the discussion

by Kogan » Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:30 am
Thank guys, both explanations are quite similar, and both are very good :) !
Join the discussion