Good one!!!
Let me ponder over!!
BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course
Redeem
Featured Course
Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand
Scott Woodbury-Stewart’s private virtual classroom — 400 hours of master-class video lessons for the GMAT Focus Edition.
- 715+ score guarantee — highest in the industry (99th percentile)
- 52 chapters · 1,500+ lessons · 4,000+ practice questions
- 400 hours of video · 1,500+ instructor-led HD smartboard lessons
- 300,000+ students accepted to Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Booth & Sloan & more
- 24/7 live support + weekly Zoom office hours with GMAT instructors
- TTP AI Assist — 24/7 AI-powered virtual tutor for instant help
- 1,200+ flashcards + AI-powered study assistant & daily calendar
- OnDemand, LiveTeach & GMAT Bootcamp formats available
- Also: GRE, SAT Math & Executive Assessment courses
- MBA Admissions Consulting now available
- 🏆 2025 EdTech Breakthrough Award: Test Prep Solution Provider of the Year
- 200,000+ students served
- 5-day free trial — $0 to start, no auto-billing, cancel anytime
★★★★★
5.0
(559 reviews)
130-pt guarantee
$0 to start
then $127/mo
Alicia Green
Source: Beat The GMAT — Critical Reasoning |
Q18 I think C is the answer.
Q19, I elimated B, C & E. Between A & D. A seems out of place from the rest of the answer choices and D could be true so I would choose A, but not with confidence.
Q19, I elimated B, C & E. Between A & D. A seems out of place from the rest of the answer choices and D could be true so I would choose A, but not with confidence.
18 C Author admits that the car was damaged in Peter's case and not in Alicia's case... but it looks like a way to acknowledge the opposite side. It cannot be B because he wants Alicia to also be convincted
19 E
Conclusion states that Alicia should also be charged for theft.
Only E shows makes a strong case to refute the conclusion. It shows that Alicia was a good driver whereas Peter was a repeat offender which led to the difference in the way the two cases were handled by the police.
19 E
Conclusion states that Alicia should also be charged for theft.
Only E shows makes a strong case to refute the conclusion. It shows that Alicia was a good driver whereas Peter was a repeat offender which led to the difference in the way the two cases were handled by the police.
Is there an explaination of why 19 is C? I went with D. These are great questions, btw... for some reason i find lsat questions much easier than gmat
There is no explanation for the question. Even I'm looking for some explanations.
What we think, we become
Out of the ridiculous options C and A make sense to me as well.
I presume they are LSAT Q, as some other voices too is being made it seems it is useless to involve LSAT prep in GMAT, this Q and similes could be a prime example....
I presume they are LSAT Q, as some other voices too is being made it seems it is useless to involve LSAT prep in GMAT, this Q and similes could be a prime example....
Charged up again to beat the beast 
