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.

is r positive?

Expert replies
by uptowngirl92 » Sun Jul 19, 2009 6:53 pm
If r>s+t,is r positive?
1. s>t
2. r/s+t >1

[spoiler=]The OA is B[/spoiler]

Guys,Please help me find out where I went wrong.My solution:
Stmt. 1,
s>t.Taking values,
s=4,t=3 implies r is greater than 7.r is +ive.
s=4,t=-3 implies r is greater than 1.r is +ive
s=-3,t=-4 implies r is greater than -7.Can't say about r.
Hence,Stmt 1 is insufficient.

Stmt 2.
r/s+t>1
r>s+t....No new info.This is already mentioned in the ques.Hence insuff.so my answer came out (e)
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by mehravikas » Sun Jul 19, 2009 10:02 pm
Statement 1
S > t
S = 2, t = 1 – r would be +ve
S = -3, t = -4, r can be –ve

So insufficient

Statement 2
R / s + t > 1

R = 4, s = 1, t = 1 - result > 1
R = -1, s = -2, t = -1 – result < 1

Therefore, r has to be +ve to be greater than s + t, if R is negative, then statement 2 is false

Hence statement B is sufficient.

Also you cannot cross multiply if you are not sure whether the number being cross multiplied is +ve or –ve

Consider an example, -3 / -2 > 1, now according to you if I cross multiply, then -3 > -2, which is wrong. Because the number is negative the inequality sign should change

i.e. -3 < -2
Join the discussion

The 2nd option is

r/s+t >1


does that mean r/(s+t) > 1 or (r/s)+t>1....


Can you correct accordingly..
Anyone from Hyderabad or Telugu speaking community.

Searching for a serious study partner from Hyderabad or the one who work for same Company.
Join the discussion

by tohellandback » Sun Jul 19, 2009 10:42 pm
mehravikas wrote:Statement 1
S > t
S = 2, t = 1 – r would be +ve
S = -3, t = -4, r can be –ve

So insufficient

Statement 2
R / s + t > 1

R = 4, s = 1, t = 1 - result > 1
R = -1, s = -2, t = -1 – result < 1

Therefore, r has to be +ve to be greater than s + t, if R is negative, then statement 2 is false

Hence statement B is sufficient.

Also you cannot cross multiply if you are not sure whether the number being cross multiplied is +ve or –ve

Consider an example, -3 / -2 > 1, now according to you if I cross multiply, then -3 > -2, which is wrong. Because the number is negative the inequality sign should change

i.e. -3 < -2
well I don't think that statement B is sufficient
take t=1
s=-50
r=-1
here r>s+t
r/s +t >1
and r is negative

IMO C
The powers of two are bloody impolite!!
Join the discussion

by tohellandback » Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:01 pm
oh wait..I think I got it..so
its r/(s+t) and not r/s + t

statement 1) not SUFF

2)r/(s+t)>1
now uptowngirl you CANNOT write it as r>s+t, because if (s+t)<0, it will become r<s+t

so possibilities are
r>s+t, when (s+t)>0, so r>0
r<(s+t) when (s+t)<0- but this is not possible because it is given in the question that r>s+t
so SUFF

answer B
The powers of two are bloody impolite!!
Join the discussion