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.

GMAT Prep Question

Expert replies
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by limestone » Mon Sep 27, 2010 7:48 pm
Hi,
I have a long approach to this problem. Hope anyone can give out a more concise method.

the rule for breaking the absolute syntax: [x] = x when x>=0; or [x] = -x when x<=0.
I will use plug-in and case by case method.
Original inequation: [x-y] >[x]-[y]?

1. y<x, there are three cases:

0>=x>y then (breaking the abs. syntax) x-y > -x - (-y)
or x-y>-x+y . This is correct as x>y then x-y>0 and -x+y<0

x>y>=0 then x-y>x-y. Impossible! You can stop here as this case will prove 1. to be insuff.

x>=0>=y ( I should stop at the second case, but test this to illustrate the full set of cases) then x-y>x-(-y)
or x-y > x+y. This is true as y is a negative number.

Hence 1 is insuff

2.xy<0, there are two cases:

x<=0<=y and x>=0>=y ( x & y must have different signs)

x<=0<=y then y-x>-x -y or y>-y ( eliminate "-x" in both sides) --> this is true as y>=0 then y>=-y

x>=0>=y then x-y> x - (-y) or x -y > x +y this is true as y is negative.

So 2 is suff.

IMO: B
"There is nothing either good or bad - but thinking makes it so" - Shakespeare.
Join the discussion

by reply2spg » Mon Sep 27, 2010 8:05 pm
Thanks, but I am completely lost. Can you plug in some values?

I can do that, but I am not following you. Sorry :(
limestone wrote:Hi,
I have a long approach to this problem. Hope anyone can give out a more concise method.

the rule for breaking the absolute syntax: [x] = x when x>=0; or [x] = -x when x<=0.
I will use plug-in and case by case method.
Original inequation: [x-y] >[x]-[y]?

1. y<x, there are three cases:

0>=x>y then (breaking the abs. syntax) x-y > -x - (-y)
or x-y>-x+y . This is correct as x>y then x-y>0 and -x+y<0

x>y>=0 then x-y>x-y. Impossible! You can stop here as this case will prove 1. to be insuff.

x>=0>=y ( I should stop at the second case, but test this to illustrate the full set of cases) then x-y>x-(-y)
or x-y > x+y. This is true as y is a negative number.

Hence 1 is insuff

2.xy<0, there are two cases:

x<=0<=y and x>=0>=y ( x & y must have different signs)

x<=0<=y then y-x>-x -y or y>-y ( eliminate "-x" in both sides) --> this is true as y>=0 then y>=-y

x>=0>=y then x-y> x - (-y) or x -y > x +y this is true as y is negative.

So 2 is suff.

IMO: B
Sudhanshu
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)
Join the discussion

by limestone » Mon Sep 27, 2010 8:24 pm
Sure,

1. x>y

0>=x>y : x= -1, y = -2 ( and -1>-2)
Then [-1 -(-2)] = [-1+2] = 1
[-1] - [-2] = 1-2 = -1
1>-1 then the inequation is confirmed.

x>y>=0 : x= 2, y =1
Then [2-1] = 1
[2] -[1] = 2-1 = 1
1 = 1 hence the inequation is not confirmed.

x>=0>=y : x= 1, y=-1
then [1-(-1)] = [2] = 2
[1] - [-1] = 1-1 = 0
2>0, correct.

3 cases: 2 say yes, 1 says no ==> cannot define => insuff

2. xy<0

x<=0<=y : x= -1, y =1
then [-1 -1] = 2
[-1] - [1] = 0
2>0, true

x>=0>=y: x =1, y=-1
then [1-(-1)] = [2] = 2
[1] - [-1] = 0
2>0, true

2 cases: both say yes => suff.

Hence pick B.
"There is nothing either good or bad - but thinking makes it so" - Shakespeare.
Join the discussion

by reply2spg » Mon Sep 27, 2010 8:29 pm
Thanks Buddy, I guess I need to go 2-3 times for A.

Btw....how can you solve this question in 2 minutes? Any simple method?
limestone wrote:Sure,

1. x>y

0>=x>y : x= -1, y = -2 ( and -1>-2)
Then [-1 -(-2)] = [-1+2] = 1
[-1] - [-2] = 1-2 = -1
1>-1 then the inequation is confirmed.

x>y>=0 : x= 2, y =1
Then [2-1] = 1
[2] -[1] = 2-1 = 1
1 = 1 hence the inequation is not confirmed.

x>=0>=y : x= 1, y=-1
then [1-(-1)] = [2] = 2
[1] - [-1] = 1-1 = 0
2>0, correct.

3 cases: 2 say yes, 1 says no ==> cannot define => insuff

2. xy<0

x<=0<=y : x= -1, y =1
then [-1 -1] = 2
[-1] - [1] = 0
2>0, true

x>=0>=y: x =1, y=-1
then [1-(-1)] = [2] = 2
[1] - [-1] = 0
2>0, true

2 cases: both say yes => suff.

Hence pick B.
Sudhanshu
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)
Join the discussion

by limestone » Mon Sep 27, 2010 8:55 pm
In absolute value question, I care about the sign. Here are the signs of x, y, and (x-y)

For 1. x>y, I think of how many cases can happen. There are three items to mix : x,y, and zero

x is always larger than y as given above. Then I place zero in front, after x then after y to give out 3 cases:
0>=x>y
x>=0>y
x>y>=0

In each case, plug in some very simple value such as 0,1,-1,2 ...etc. and calculate as fast as possible.

For 2. I do the same
xy<0 then x>0>y or y>0>x ( I'm sorry that I used x>=0>=y or y>=0>=x in my above post, x and y cannot be zero as xy<0)
Then plug-in then test.
"There is nothing either good or bad - but thinking makes it so" - Shakespeare.
Join the discussion

by reply2spg » Mon Sep 27, 2010 9:01 pm
Big Thanks,

I was struggling with A. I think B is pretty easy, Don't know I messed it up in exam. While analyzing I came to know that B is easier than A. Since xy < 0 means either x or y must be -ve. If you put values, it will make sense.

However, I was struggling with A. Your approach helped me.

Thanks again
limestone wrote:In absolute value question, I care about the sign. Here are the signs of x, y, and (x-y)

For 1. x>y, I think of how many cases can happen. There are three items to mix : x,y, and zero

x is always larger than y as given above. Then I place zero in front, after x then after y to give out 3 cases:
0>=x>y
x>=0>y
x>y>=0

In each case, plug in some very simple value such as 0,1,-1,2 ...etc. and calculate as fast as possible.

For 2. I do the same
xy<0 then x>0>y or y>0>x ( I'm sorry that I used x>=0>=y or y>=0>=x in my above post, x and y cannot be zero as xy<0)
Then plug-in then test.
Sudhanshu
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)
Join the discussion

by hi.itz.mani » Mon Sep 27, 2010 9:19 pm
My approach:

we have the inequality | x - y | > |x| - |y|

sqaring both sided | x- y|^2 > (|x| - |y| )^2 or | x- y|^2 < (|x| - |y| )^2

|x^2 + y^2 - 2xy | > |x|^2 + |y|^2 - 2|x||y| or |x^2 + y^2 - 2xy | < |x|^2 + |y|^2 - 2|x||y|

since squaring will make a number positive , hence I can remove the mod sign from left and mod signs from right where I see squares
x^2 + y^2 - 2xy > x^2 + y^2 - 2|x| |y| or x^2 + y^2 - 2xy < x^2 + y^2 - 2|x| |y|

2xy > - 2 |x| |y| or 2xy < - 2 |x| |y|
hence
we need to finally find if xy > |x| |y| or xy < |x| |y|

Statement 1:
y < x , insufficient as both y and x can be positive or negative or one of them positive and other regative

Statement 2:
xy < 0 Now we know that one of the x or Y is negative and hence xy will always be less that |x| |y|

Hence Statement 2 is sufficient

IMO B
Join the discussion