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
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.

GMAtprep question

Expert replies
Source: — Problem Solving |

ans

by smashinonions » Sun Jun 22, 2008 6:25 pm
Let X1, X2, X3 be the 3 readings so,


X1 + X2 + X3 / 3 = 8

or X 1 + X2 + X3 = 24

so as the range is from 0- 10

to find the min qty measured, we maximize the remaining two i.e

X1 (assuming to be smallest) = 24 - (X2 + X3)
= 24 - (10 + 10) [ 10 being the max value that the meter can read)
= 4
------------------------------------------------------
Five years ago: GMAT - 740

Five years later: 1st Attempt - 620
GOING for 2nd attempt: Target - 740
Join the discussion

by mlane25269 » Tue Jun 24, 2008 9:36 pm
ok that makes sense! thank you!

is it possible to solve this problem by backsolving and if so how would I backsolve? Or is it easier/quicker just to solve algebraically like in your example above?
Join the discussion