Mechmeera wrote:All of the athletes who will win a medal in competition have spent many hours training under an elite coach. Michael is coached by one of the world's elite coaches; therefore it follows logically that Michael will win a medal in competition.
The argument above logically depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Michael has not suffered any major injuries in the past year.
(B) Michael's competitors did not spend as much time in training as Michael did.
(C) Michael's coach trained him for many hours.
(D) Most of the time Michael spent in training was productive.
(E) Michael performs as well in competition as he does in training.

DavidG@VeritasPrep wrote:

Mechmeera wrote:All of the athletes who will win a medal in competition have spent many hours training under an elite coach. Michael is coached by one of the world's elite coaches; therefore it follows logically that Michael will win a medal in competition.
The argument above logically depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Michael has not suffered any major injuries in the past year.
(B) Michael's competitors did not spend as much time in training as Michael did.
(C) Michael's coach trained him for many hours.
(D) Most of the time Michael spent in training was productive.
(E) Michael performs as well in competition as he does in training.

Conclusion: Michael will win a medal

Premises: All medal winners trained for many hours under elite coach; Michael trained with elite coach

So if Michael were to win a medal, we know that he'd have had to train for many hours with an elite coach. If he has an elite coach, the only piece he's missing is the many hours with this coach. That's what C gives us.

Mechmeera wrote:I got stuck between C and E. I feel the argument will collapse if we negate option C.
Am I correct/wrong? Please explain?

I got stuck between C and E. I feel the argument will collapse if we negate option C.
Am I correct/wrong? Please explain?