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
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
Live EA class + 6 months of EA OnDemand
  • Expert-led weekly online sessions
  • EA Masterclass access between classes
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.

130-point 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.

Faster way to solve this.

Expert replies
by vittalgmat » Mon Dec 14, 2009 1:31 pm
Hi,
I am looking for a faster way to solve problems of this type.
Plugging in numbers takes longer time for me.. coz I could not come up with "smart" numbers and I lost time thinking about what numbers to choose. I chose a fraction such as 1/3 and solved III but by then my 2 mins was up.

Pls suggest a faster way to solve such problems.


If x is positive, which of the following could be the correct ordering of 1/x,2x, and x^2

I. x^2<2x<1/x
II. x^2<1/x<2x
III. 2x< x^2<1/x

a. None
b. I only
c. III only
d. I and II
e I, II and III

TIA
Join the discussion
Source: — Problem Solving |

by valleeny » Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:37 pm
Is the ans D? I don't know of a short method either. I had to insert numbers and see the pattern. Not good. Maybe you can share your method.
Join the discussion

by Ian Stewart » Tue Dec 15, 2009 4:37 am
vittalgmat wrote: If x is positive, which of the following could be the correct ordering of 1/x,2x, and x^2

I. x^2<2x<1/x
II. x^2<1/x<2x
III. 2x< x^2<1/x
If you can quickly find a value of x that works in one of the inequalities, that may be the fastest way to establish that the inequality can be true. For II in particular it can be difficult to find a suitable number. If you can't find numbers that work, you can do this question algebraically; since x is positive, we can safely multiply or divide both sides of each inequality by x. Looking at I, we have three inequalities:

x^2 < 2x, or x < 2
2x < 1/x, or x^2 < 1/2, so x < sqrt(1/2)
x^2 < 1/x, or x^3 < 1, so x < 1

and if all three of these are true, I will be true - so I will be true if 0< x < sqrt(1/2)

For II, we have

x^2 < 1/x, so x^3 < 1, or x < 1
1/x < 2x, so 1 < 2x^2 or x > sqrt(1/2)
x^2 < 2x, so x < 2

and if all three of these are true, II will be true - so II will be true if sqrt(1/2) < x < 1

For III we have

2x < x^2, so 2 < x
x^2 < 1/x, so x^3 < 1, or x < 1

and since x cannot be larger than 2 and less than 1 at the same time, III cannot possibly be true.
For online GMAT math tutoring, or to buy my higher-level Quant books and problem sets, contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

ianstewartgmat.com
Join the discussion

by lunarpower » Fri Dec 18, 2009 1:51 pm
nice, ian.

re: these two approaches:
Ian Stewart wrote:x^2 < 2x, or x < 2
2x < 1/x, or x^2 < 1/2, so x < sqrt(1/2)
x^2 < 1/x, or x^3 < 1, so x < 1
and
x^2 < 1/x, so x^3 < 1, or x < 1
1/x < 2x, so 1 < 2x^2 or x > sqrt(1/2)
x^2 < 2x, so x < 2
if you have a "sandwich inequality" of the type A < B < C, you don't have to check all three of these inequalities.
it's sufficient to check just "A < B" and "B < C".
any number that satisfies both of these will automatically satisfy A < C, since B bigger than A and C bigger than B implies that C is bigger than A.

so these approaches would be just as effective if you ignored the 3rd inequality of each one.

aside from that, though -- not much else you could improve (i.e., not really a shorter method) unless you are insanely good at picking numbers.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron
Join the discussion