Mimic the reasoning

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 1:27 am
Thanked: 1 times
Followed by:1 members

Mimic the reasoning

by ritika_bsg » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:13 am
If, in a tennis tournament, a match reaches a fifth-set tiebreak, the lower-ranked player always loses the tiebreak (and, therefore, the match). If Rafael, the second-ranked player, wins a tournament by beating Roger, the top-ranked player, then the match must not have included a fifth-set tiebreak.

Which of the following arguments most closely mimics the reasoning used in the above argument?

If a woman with a family history of twins gets pregnant three times, she will have one set of twins. Jennifer, who falls into this category, had two sets of twins, so she must not have gotten pregnant exactly three times.

If a salesman sells more product than anyone else in a calendar year, then he will earn an all-expenses-paid vacation. Joe earned an all-expense-paid vacation, so he must have sold more product than anyone else for the year.

A newspaper can charge a 50% premium for ads if its circulation surpasses 100,000; if the circulation does not pass 100,000, therefore, the newspaper can't charge any kind of premium for ads.

If a student is in the top 10% of her class, she will earn a college scholarship. Anna is not in the top 10% of her class, so she will not earn a scholarship.

All of the players on a football team receive a cash bonus if the team wins the Super Bowl. If quarterback Tom Brady earned a cash bonus last year, he must have been a member of the winning Super Bowl team.

OA A
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:48 am
Location: Mysore

by rapper » Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:01 am
The argument is if in TT 5th set(a) then LowerRank(b) loses
R(2nd)rank wins and beats 1st rank then 5th not reached.
Here the realtion is if a happens then b happens and b has not happened so the a will not happen.
i hope you would be able to get the relation.
I think the mimic argument should be C.
Dax d Rapper...

User avatar
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 1:27 am
Thanked: 1 times
Followed by:1 members

by ritika_bsg » Tue Oct 23, 2012 11:32 am
OA is A .i had selected B .. not sure how it is A .

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2193
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:30 pm
Location: Vermont and Boston, MA
Thanked: 1186 times
Followed by:512 members
GMAT Score:770

by David@VeritasPrep » Thu Oct 25, 2012 5:33 pm
So this one is not an official question! They do not have a question about Nadal and Federer on the GMAT. However I did write an article about these two called "Why Federer would beat Nadal on the GMAT." You should read it! https://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2011/01/ ... n-the-gmat

As to this mimic question. You need to map it out in abstract language so no reference to tennis or to fifth set or anything like that. You want a logical framework that can be applied to the answer choice as well.

So in the stimulus we have a result that always occurs (lower ranked loses) if a certain scenario is met (fifth set tie-breaker). The result did not occur (lower ranked player won) so the scenario must not have been met.

Let me state this again so we know what we are looking for in the answer choice. If a given scenario is met then a specific result will happen. The result did not happen so the scenario must not have been met.

Answer choice A fits this exactly. If the scenario is met(women with family history of twins gets pregnant three times) then the result will happen (one set of twins). The result did not happen (more than now set of twins so not exactly one set) and therefore the scenario was not met (the women must not have gotten pregnant exactly three times).

Answer Choice B does not meet this. In B the result is realized (all-expenses vacation) and so the scenario must have been met (sold the most product). But this is the opposite of the stimulus where the result does NOT happen and the scenario is NOT met.

Does that help?
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:48 am
Location: Mysore

by rapper » Sun Oct 28, 2012 2:42 pm
David@VeritasPrep wrote:So this one is not an official question! They do not have a question about Nadal and Federer on the GMAT. However I did write an article about these two called "Why Federer would beat Nadal on the GMAT." You should read it! https://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2011/01/ ... n-the-gmat

As to this mimic question. You need to map it out in abstract language so no reference to tennis or to fifth set or anything like that. You want a logical framework that can be applied to the answer choice as well.

So in the stimulus we have a result that always occurs (lower ranked loses) if a certain scenario is met (fifth set tie-breaker). The result did not occur (lower ranked player won) so the scenario must not have been met.

Let me state this again so we know what we are looking for in the answer choice. If a given scenario is met then a specific result will happen. The result did not happen so the scenario must not have been met.

Answer choice A fits this exactly. If the scenario is met(women with family history of twins gets pregnant three times) then the result will happen (one set of twins). The result did not happen (more than now set of twins so not exactly one set) and therefore the scenario was not met (the women must not have gotten pregnant exactly three times).

Answer Choice B does not meet this. In B the result is realized (all-expenses vacation) and so the scenario must have been met (sold the most product). But this is the opposite of the stimulus where the result does NOT happen and the scenario is NOT met.

Does that help?
yes thanks for ur help.. :)
Dax d Rapper...