Chess

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 438
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Thanked: 26 times

Chess

by chidcguy » Sun Jun 22, 2008 5:45 pm
A small marketing consortium wanted to get more young people to take up chess. Since chess is most enjoyable when two people of equal ability play one another, the group believed that few people play chess becauseit is so hard to finda suitable opponent.

Which of the following statements would most seriously undermine the consotium's viewpoint?

A. On average, a set of chess pieces costs much more than most other board games.
B. The chess industry received a lot of favourable publicity last year when a computer defeated the world chess chempion for the first time.
C. Tennis is most enjoyable when two equally mathed opponents play each other, and the number of young tennis players has risen steadily.
D. Playing chess help children develop analytical minds and learn to devise strategies to acheive long-term goals.
E. More than 50000 chess sets were sold last year.
Please do not post answer along with the Question you post/ask

Let people discuss the Questions with out seeing answers.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 124
Joined: 19 May 2008
Thanked: 3 times

by Nycgrl » Sun Jun 22, 2008 7:06 pm
Is it C?

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 438
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Thanked: 26 times

by chidcguy » Sun Jun 22, 2008 7:10 pm
Thats was as easy as donuts for you.

I kicked out C to start with as C brings in Tennis which I felt was out of scope as we are concerned about chess and not Tennis. How can we relate the rise in number of young people playing tennis to lack of young people playing chess. Just because both have a common feature does not mean that every other factor will be the same as well.
Please do not post answer along with the Question you post/ask

Let people discuss the Questions with out seeing answers.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 124
Joined: 19 May 2008
Thanked: 3 times

by Nycgrl » Sun Jun 22, 2008 7:12 pm
What's OA

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 124
Joined: 19 May 2008
Thanked: 3 times

by Nycgrl » Sun Jun 22, 2008 7:18 pm
Our argument says that chess is not popular bcauz its played among people who are comparable. Conclusion is sice most people are not able to find partner who is competent with them therefore chess is not popular

to weaken this argument C is best as it says that tennis is played by equally competent players and number of people playing tennis is increasing

this weakens the conclusion most people are not able to find partner who is competent with them therefore chess is not popular

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 438
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Thanked: 26 times

by chidcguy » Sun Jun 22, 2008 7:49 pm
I still don't understand How can one say that if young people are finding tennis players of similar skill level translates to a possibility that there are actually chess players out there with similar skill levels
Please do not post answer along with the Question you post/ask

Let people discuss the Questions with out seeing answers.

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 23
Joined: 21 Jun 2008

by Paddy1234 » Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:58 pm
What's the OA?

How abt A? :oops:

The conclusion talks about inability of finding the right partner as an inhibitor, for a larger audience to play chess..

"A" talks about the cost of the Chess board being more than other board games, could be one reason why people don play Chess.. (Not comprehensive tho )

know this is a faint link... :oops:
ne Thoughts?
Target 750

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 100
Joined: 27 Jul 2007
Thanked: 6 times

by g_beatthegmat » Sun Jun 22, 2008 11:34 pm
Has to be (C). Here's why -

A small marketing consortium wanted to get more young people to take up chess. Since chess is most enjoyable when two people of equal ability play one another, the group believed that few people play chess because it is so hard to find a suitable opponent.

The conclusion depends on the highlighted line above. The consortium's viewpoint is that few people play chess because finding people of the same calibre or level is difficult hence people don't take up chess.

Now, let's assume this is correct. Then that would mean that any sport in which one needs an opponent of similar calibre or level would face problems because its hard to find a suitable opponent. The problem area is of "finding suitable opponents" and not of "which sports is it concerned with". If people in Tennis can find suitable opponents, then surely people in any other sport can find suitable opponents - it MUST BE something other than this reason that Chess isn't very popular. Could be because people find Tennis more interesting, thrilling, fast... something other than "not being able to find a suitable opponent".

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 438
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Thanked: 26 times

by chidcguy » Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:28 am
If people in Tennis can find suitable opponents, then surely people in any other sport can find suitable opponents

To me this is a big problem. How can we make such reasoning that chess also has people with comparable skills just because Tennis has?

B T W OA is C
Please do not post answer along with the Question you post/ask

Let people discuss the Questions with out seeing answers.

Legendary Member
Posts: 631
Joined: 18 Feb 2008
Thanked: 29 times
Followed by:3 members

by netigen » Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:41 am
Chidcguy,

One very important point you seem to miss is that this is a weaken question. In weaken questions the answers can bring in information which is outside the question stem scope.

Usually, weaken questions state in the question - "if the following are true" but this question has ignored that part of the information.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 300
Joined: 07 Apr 2014

by peter.p.81 » Tue May 10, 2016 11:59 pm
I am leaning more towards C, but I'm not sure about it.