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][accidents] HSPA posts

Expert replies
by HSPA » Sun Apr 17, 2011 2:39 am
Premiums for automobile accident insurance are often higher for red cars than for cars of other colors. To justify these higher charges, insurance companies claim that, overall, a greater percentage of red cars are involved in accidents than are cars of any other color. If this claim is true, then lives could undoubtedly be saved by banning red cars from the roads altogether.

The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument:
(A) accepts without question that insurance companies have the right to charge higher premiums for higher-risk clients
(B) fails to consider whether red cars cost the same to repair as cars of other colors
(C) ignores the possibility that drivers who drive recklessly have a preference for red cars
(D) does not specify precisely what percentage of red cars are involved in accidents
(E) makes an unsupported assumption that every automobile accident results in some loss of life
First take: 640 (50M, 27V) - RC needs 300% improvement
Second take: coming soon..
Regards,
HSPA.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by force5 » Sun Apr 17, 2011 3:29 am
I will go with C.

its saying that the reason for accidents is not the color of the car but the drivers who are reckless.
Join the discussion

by AIM GMAT » Sun Apr 17, 2011 3:51 am
IMO E .

The conclusion talks about saving lives .

If this claim is true, then lives could undoubtedly be saved by banning red cars from the roads altogether.
Thanks & Regards,
AIM GMAT
Join the discussion

by HSPA » Sun Apr 17, 2011 4:00 am
Even I went for E but the question want to weaken the Reasoning not conclusion..

Hi Force,
Is reason = red cars are involved in crash.

OA is C.
First take: 640 (50M, 27V) - RC needs 300% improvement
Second take: coming soon..
Regards,
HSPA.
Join the discussion

by rohu27 » Sun Apr 17, 2011 5:59 am
C
argument says:
If this claim is true, then lives could undoubtedly be saved by banning red cars from the roads altogether
.
its not just the red cars causing the accidents, wht abt the drivers driving thm?
even if u ban red cars, the reckless drivers may choose other ones and accidnet rates still remain the same. argument ignores that point.
E says
makes an unsupported assumption that every automobile accident results in some loss of life
even if evry accidet doesnt result, some do result in loss of life. so if its true tht by baning red cars lives can be saved, those 'some' lives can well be saved.
this IMO strenghtens the argument.
Join the discussion

by force5 » Sun Apr 17, 2011 7:05 am
Yes HSPA was going to acknowledge the reasoning. you are correct that the question is to weaken the reasoning and hence solution.

Rohu is correct in explaining E.
E infact, is strengthening the reasoning. even if lives are not lost on every accident, some lives will still be saved. Its just how the question wants you to not think...

C talks about the culprit drivers. Hence its not about the red or green or a blue car... its about the drivers who are driving them which is causing the problem. with C we are negating the premise that Red Cars are causing accidents.....

Hope it helps.. Let me know if there is still a doubt bro...
Join the discussion