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.

CR - Bold face

Expert replies
by karthikpandian19 » Sat Jun 30, 2012 3:40 am
Team Doctor: There is an above-average incidence of tendonitis among professional soccer players. The notion that the higher incidence of tendonitis is a result of the physical movements associated with playing soccer is misguided, however; tests have shown that running and kicking do not typically lead to tendonitis. Nevertheless, playing soccer is probably the cause of the high incidence of tendonitis among professional soccer players, though indirectly. These individuals are required to wear shin guards that press against the tendons. It is likely that many professional soccer players wear shin guards more often than is healthy for the tendons of the body, which are easily irritated and inflamed through such strong, consistent pressure.

In the team doctor's reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?


(A) The first introduces the conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is a position opposed by the team doctor.

(B) The first is an explanation contradicted by the team doctor; the second is an explanation put forth by the team doctor.

(C) The first is an evidential case advanced in support of a conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is that conclusion.

(D) The first introduces the conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is a judgment offered in explaining that conclusion.

(E) The first is a generalization put forward by the team doctor; the second presents instances in which that generalization does not hold.
Regards,
Karthik
The source of the questions that i post from JUNE 2013 is from KNEWTON

---If you find my post useful, click "Thank" :) :)---
---Never stop until cracking GMAT---
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by vk_vinayak » Sat Jun 30, 2012 4:58 am
D. First one is the conclusion, and the second boldface is the support offered for that conclusion.
- VK

I will (Learn. Recognize. Apply)
Join the discussion

by sandeep_thaparianz » Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:09 am
Join the discussion

by Birottam Dutta » Sat Jun 30, 2012 9:01 am
Team Doctor: There is an above-average incidence of tendonitis among professional soccer players. The notion that the higher incidence of tendonitis is a result of the physical movements associated with playing soccer is misguided, however; tests have shown that running and kicking do not typically lead to tendonitis. Nevertheless, playing soccer is probably the cause of the high incidence of tendonitis among professional soccer players, though indirectly. These individuals are required to wear shin guards that press against the tendons. It is likely that many professional soccer players wear shin guards more often than is healthy for the tendons of the body, which are easily irritated and inflamed through such strong, consistent pressure.

In the team doctor's reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?


(A) The first introduces the conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is a position opposed by the team doctor. -- The second is not a position opposed by the team doctor.

(B) The first is an explanation contradicted by the team doctor; the second is an explanation put forth by the team doctor. -- The first is not an explanation contradicted by the team doctor.

(C) The first is an evidential case advanced in support of a conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is that conclusion. --- The first is not an evidential case.

(D) The first introduces the conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is a judgment offered in explaining that conclusion. -- Correct. The first introduces the conclusion that the team doctor supports and the second is a judgement given to support that conclusion.

(E) The first is a generalization put forward by the team doctor; the second presents instances in which that generalization does not hold.---- The second is not an instance when the generalization does not hold.
Join the discussion

by Gaurav 2013-fall » Sun Jul 01, 2012 8:21 am
IMO D
whats OA?
Let me tell you something you already know. The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It is a very mean and nasty place and it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain't how hard you hit; it's about how hard you can get hit, and keep moving forward. How much you can take, and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done. Now, if you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hit, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you are because of him, or her, or anybody. Cowards do that and that ain't you. You're better than that! (Rocky VI)
Join the discussion

by karthikpandian19 » Sun Jul 01, 2012 9:02 pm
OA is D

The question asks about the logical roles of the two boldfaced sentences. The first of the two presents the team doctor's conclusion that soccer is the indirect cause of the tendonitis and the second is a more specific hypothesis, offered to support the conclusion.

Choice D is correct. As demonstrated above, the first statement introduces the conclusion, the second is a judgment helping to explain it.

Choice A is partially correct. While the first boldface portion does introduce the theory, the second is not a position opposed by the team doctor.

Choice B contains a trap. Because the team doctor states earlier in the argument that the physical movements associated with playing soccer have no connection to tendonitis, we might be tempted to conclude that this is, in fact, "an explanation contradicted by the team doctor." The word nevertheless preceding the first boldface statement, however, should make it clear that the doctor does agree with this statement.

Choice C is the correct answer turned backwards; it says that the first section is evidence advanced in support of a conclusion and that the second section is the conclusion. However, the first statement is presented as the doctor's opinion, and as such it is a conclusion, while the second is a hypothesis that the doctor makes to support his conclusion that shin guards and tendonitis are linked.

Choice E is completely off-base. The team doctor does not make any generalizations and there is no reference to any exceptional cases.

Choice D is correct

karthikpandian19 wrote:Team Doctor: There is an above-average incidence of tendonitis among professional soccer players. The notion that the higher incidence of tendonitis is a result of the physical movements associated with playing soccer is misguided, however; tests have shown that running and kicking do not typically lead to tendonitis. Nevertheless, playing soccer is probably the cause of the high incidence of tendonitis among professional soccer players, though indirectly. These individuals are required to wear shin guards that press against the tendons. It is likely that many professional soccer players wear shin guards more often than is healthy for the tendons of the body, which are easily irritated and inflamed through such strong, consistent pressure.

In the team doctor's reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?


(A) The first introduces the conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is a position opposed by the team doctor.

(B) The first is an explanation contradicted by the team doctor; the second is an explanation put forth by the team doctor.

(C) The first is an evidential case advanced in support of a conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is that conclusion.

(D) The first introduces the conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is a judgment offered in explaining that conclusion.

(E) The first is a generalization put forward by the team doctor; the second presents instances in which that generalization does not hold.
Regards,
Karthik
The source of the questions that i post from JUNE 2013 is from KNEWTON

---If you find my post useful, click "Thank" :) :)---
---Never stop until cracking GMAT---
Join the discussion