BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

knewton cr 3

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:41 pm
Thanked: 33 times
Followed by:5 members

knewton cr 3

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Fri Aug 27, 2010 1:58 am
Competitive runners who run barefoot have been shown to have greater stamina during races than other racers. Therefore, training in bare feet is a useful method to improve competitive runners' chances of winning any race.

Which of the following statements, if true, most seriously weakens this arguments?

A Countries in which runners run barefoot often send athletes to the Olympics and to worldwide marathons.

B Having greater stamina does not always improve runners' chances of winning races.
C Many competitive runners train for years to increase their stamina before entering any competitions.
D Competitive runners with greater stamina are more likely to win races that are 1500 meters or longer.
E The vast majority of competitive runners in training do not train barefoot.
A SMALL TOWN GUY
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:42 am
Location: Mumbai
Thanked: 14 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:710

by ankurmit » Fri Aug 27, 2010 3:32 am
IMO B
--------
Ankur mittal
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 6:56 am
Thanked: 4 times

by abhigang » Fri Aug 27, 2010 3:33 am
The assumption made here is greater stamina --> improved chances of winning any race.

I was thinking about B and D. But ultimately eliminated B because it mentions only runners whereas the argument talks about competitive runners only.

Also to mention about D, it talks about competive runners have their chances improved only on races that are 1500 or more whereas the argument talks about improving chances on any types of race.

IMO D.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Fri Aug 27, 2010 4:02 am
One more for B
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 422
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 11:47 am
Thanked: 22 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:680

by beatthegmatinsept » Fri Aug 27, 2010 8:24 am
I'd go for B.
Being defeated is often only a temporary condition. Giving up is what makes it permanent.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 9:14 am
Location: Pune, India
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:2 members

by adi_800 » Fri Aug 27, 2010 9:24 am
B+
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:46 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:570

by reply2spg » Fri Aug 27, 2010 9:42 am
Only B makes sense here
Sudhanshu
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:16 pm
Thanked: 29 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by debmalya_dutta » Fri Aug 27, 2010 11:19 am
B WOULD MAKE ME HAPPY
@Deb
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:56 pm
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:1 members

by paes » Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:00 pm
Everybody is going for B.

Bur can somebody explain how B is weakening the argument :

Conclusion : training in bare feet is a useful method to improve competitive runners’ chances of winning any race.

B : Having greater stamina does not always improve runners’ chances of winning races.

So, B is saying that It may or may not be useful. [ Bis not saying that it is not useful at all ]
Cocnlusion is also saying that chamces will increase. Conclusion is noy using the word : definetely

Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:16 pm
Thanked: 29 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by debmalya_dutta » Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:29 pm
paes wrote:Everybody is going for B.

Bur can somebody explain how B is weakening the argument :

Conclusion : training in bare feet is a useful method to improve competitive runners’ chances of winning any race.

B : Having greater stamina does not always improve runners’ chances of winning races.

So, B is saying that It may or may not be useful. [ Bis not saying that it is not useful at all ]
Cocnlusion is also saying that chamces will increase. Conclusion is noy using the word : definetely

Concusion "training in bare feet is a useful method to improve competitive runners' chances of winning any race" . This is based on the premise - runners who run barefoot have been shown to have greater stamina during races than other racers... So it is making an assumption that greater stamina causes as increase in the likelihood of runners to win in competitions .... So you need to introduce evidence which proves that stamina is not the only criteria that is responsible for increasing this likelihood which is what B says
"having greater stamina does not always improve runners’ chances of winning races. "
@Deb
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:56 pm
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:1 members

by paes » Fri Aug 27, 2010 8:19 pm
Deb@
thanks, but still my point is same:

I am saying that : conclusion is also talking only about CHANCES [ probability ]


B is : Having greater stamina does not always improve runner's chances of winning races. -> means 2 things can happen

Suppose there are 100 runners with greater stamina. Now 2 things can happen :

(1) For some cases [ 40 runners ] : It improves runner's chances of winning race
(2) For other Cases [ 60 runners] : It doesn't improve runner's chances of winning race

Ok now : based on 1 and 2, I can say that :

training in bare feet is a useful method to improve competitive runner's chances[PROBABILITY] of winning any race

I am not seeing anything wrong here.

If I(conclusion) say that :
the person training in bare feet will win the race. -> then I agree that B will weaken the conclusion
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 8:50 am
Thanked: 29 times
Followed by:3 members

by diebeatsthegmat » Sat Aug 28, 2010 12:45 am
pradeepkaushal9518 wrote:Competitive runners who run barefoot have been shown to have greater stamina during races than other racers. Therefore, training in bare feet is a useful method to improve competitive runners' chances of winning any race.

Which of the following statements, if true, most seriously weakens this arguments?

A Countries in which runners run barefoot often send athletes to the Olympics and to worldwide marathons.

B Having greater stamina does not always improve runners' chances of winning races.
C Many competitive runners train for years to increase their stamina before entering any competitions.
D Competitive runners with greater stamina are more likely to win races that are 1500 meters or longer.
E The vast majority of competitive runners in training do not train barefoot.
i am toward to B and E but i really dont like B much because of "does not always improve runners' chances of winning races" it used in the argument... "does not always" doesnt mean that it would not helpful in gettin a chance to win
thus for me, E is the answer
A, C and D seems to strengthen the conclusion
E it is
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:41 pm
Thanked: 33 times
Followed by:5 members

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:05 pm
oa is B
A SMALL TOWN GUY
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1