Live GMAT classes with Target Test Prep start Nov 21 and Nov 22. First class free.

See classes
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.

Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
GMATLiveTeachStarts Nov 22
Josh Braslow, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Josh Braslow, 20+ years in test prep

Nov 22 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemandStart anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

with

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
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 Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemandStart 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

GMAT Prep Math zy < xy < 0 |x-z| + |x| = |z|

Expert replies
by manjithmanohar » Wed Mar 25, 2009 5:21 am
The basic condition for the equation |x-z| + |x| = |z| to be true is that
|z| > |x|

The inequality zy < xy < 0
further implies that |z| > |x| where the y value could be both +/ - respectively to maintain the inequality. (I hope I don't need to elaborate this part)

So considering the answers:

1. z < x (if it is considered with the inequality both z and x are negative and that y is positive.) so proves |z| > |x|, hence true.
2. y < 0 (when fit into the inequality proves that again |z| > |x|) so true.

Answer most definitely is D.

Please feel free to discuss this! :D
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by Ian Stewart » Wed Mar 25, 2009 7:36 am
I posted a solution to this to another forum, so I'll just paste that here:

_______________

This is one of the strangest questions in GMATPrep, since you don't need either of the statements to answer the question. That's not supposed to happen on a GMAT DS question, which makes me wonder whether there was an error in the question design. In any case, we're given:

zy < xy < 0

Rewrite this as three inequalities:

(1) xy < 0
(2) zy < 0
(3) zy < xy

From (1), we have two possibilities:

(A) x is positive, and y is negative. Then, from (2), z is positive, and from (3), dividing by y and reversing the inequality because y is negative, we have x < z. So it may be that y < 0 < x < z .

(B) x is negative and y is positive. Then, from (2), z is negative, and from (3), dividing by y, we have z < x. So it may be that z < x < 0 < y .

Those are the only two possibilities here. Draw the number line in each case:

(A)

--------y-------0--------x--------z----------

(B)

-z--------x-----0---------y------------------


In either case, we can see that the distance from z to zero is equal to the sum of the distance from x to zero and the distance from x to z. That is, in either case, |z| = |x| + |x - z|. So we don't need any additional information to be sure that the answer to the question is yes - neither of the statements is required here.

I suppose that makes the answer 'D', though it's the only question I know of in any official GMAT material (and I've seen pretty much every question) where the statements aren't needed to answer the question given.
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

Re: Proof_or so I think!

by bluementor » Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:10 am
manjithmanohar wrote: 1. z < x (if it is considered with the inequality both z and x are negative and that y is positive.) so proves |z| > |x|, hence true.
2. y < 0 (when fit into the inequality proves that again |z| > |x|) so true.
I thought DS statements should never contradict each other. You are getting y>0 in the first statement, and this clearly contradicts statement 2.

As Ian mentions in his post, this is a strange question.

-BM-
Join the discussion

Re: Proof_or so I think!

by Ian Stewart » Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:25 am
bluementor wrote:
manjithmanohar wrote: 1. z < x (if it is considered with the inequality both z and x are negative and that y is positive.) so proves |z| > |x|, hence true.
2. y < 0 (when fit into the inequality proves that again |z| > |x|) so true.
I thought DS statements should never contradict each other. You are getting y>0 in the first statement, and this clearly contradicts statement 2.

As Ian mentions in his post, this is a strange question.

-BM-
Nicely spotted - that's a typo in the original post, and in the real version of the question, Statement 2 reads "y > 0". The question is from GMATPrep; there's a screenshot of the question here:

gmatclub.com/forum/t70195-modulus-gmat-prep
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 ghacker » Sun Jun 14, 2009 7:48 am
This is a very simple question



Answer is D
Join the discussion

by rah_pandey » Wed Jun 17, 2009 2:00 am
Ian is right that none of the condition is needed to give the answer to the question. The equality is true under all circumstances
Join the discussion

by r321 » Mon Feb 28, 2011 12:29 pm
Ian Stewart wrote:I posted a solution to this to another forum, so I'll just paste that here:

_______________

This is one of the strangest questions in GMATPrep, since you don't need either of the statements to answer the question. That's not supposed to happen on a GMAT DS question, which makes me wonder whether there was an error in the question design. In any case, we're given:

zy < xy < 0

Rewrite this as three inequalities:

(1) xy < 0
(2) zy < 0
(3) zy < xy

From (1), we have two possibilities:

(A) x is positive, and y is negative. Then, from (2), z is positive, and from (3), dividing by y and reversing the inequality because y is negative, we have x < z. So it may be that y < 0 < x < z .

(B) x is negative and y is positive. Then, from (2), z is negative, and from (3), dividing by y, we have z < x. So it may be that z < x < 0 < y .

Those are the only two possibilities here. Draw the number line in each case:

(A)

--------y-------0--------x--------z----------

(B)

-z--------x-----0---------y------------------


In either case, we can see that the distance from z to zero is equal to the sum of the distance from x to zero and the distance from x to z. That is, in either case, |z| = |x| + |x - z|. So we don't need any additional information to be sure that the answer to the question is yes - neither of the statements is required here.

I suppose that makes the answer 'D', though it's the only question I know of in any official GMAT material (and I've seen pretty much every question) where the statements aren't needed to answer the question given.
I just got this question on my prep test today and spent about 10 minutes after the test trying to figure out why I would need either of the statements to answer the question stem...until, of course, i found this post (and others like it - https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/pos ... tml#p30742)

Makes me wonder though - if all the gmat prep software questions are retired questions from the official test, doesn't that mean that the official GMAT at one point contained this (clearly flawed) question!

And, I downloaded the prep software only in January '11 - seems like they still haven't realised that this question is flawed..
Join the discussion