According to some sports historians

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 1:18 am
Thanked: 1 times
GMAT Score:700

According to some sports historians

by manhhiep2509 » Fri Dec 06, 2013 9:37 am
According to some sports historians, professional tennis players develop unique playing styles that result from a combination of the peculiarities of each player's physical attributes and the influence of coaches during their early adaptation to the game. But when the increase in strength and endurance of modem players is discounted, it becomes readily apparent that the playing styles of the current crop of professional tennis players are no different from the styles of players from previous generations. Clearly, there is a universally efficient tennis style to which all professional tennis players conform.

The argument above is most weakened by which of the following statements?
(A) The differences in physical attributes among tennis players are even more pronounced than the sports historians believe.
(B) Few current professional tennis players are familiar with the professional tennis players of fifty years ago.
(C) The increased strength of current tennis players contributes more to the development of individual playing styles than does increased endurance.
(D) All of the early coaches of today's professional tennis players were professional tennis players themselves earlier in their lives.
(E) Weight training and greater attention to diet are the primary factors in the increased strength and stamina of the current generation of professional tennis players.
---
OA: D

I have struggled to figure out how the explanation in kaplan 800 says that 'there is no difference between the styles of the two generations" is a fact. I only conceive of the statement as an opinion of the author that is based on another statement, i.e. "when the increase in strength and endurance of modem players is discounted". Since I still consider the "no difference" an opinion, I have thought that it has a flaw. Although it does not take into account to the influence of coaches, it concludes there is no difference.
Keeping the flaw in mind, I cannot find the choice D correct.

Please explain what is the signal that indicates that the statement "no difference..." is a fact, not an opinion.

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
Elite Legendary Member
Posts: 10392
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:38 pm
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Thanked: 2867 times
Followed by:511 members
GMAT Score:800

by [email protected] » Fri Dec 06, 2013 3:59 pm
Hi manhhiep2509,

This CR has a challenging "style" to it that won't show up too often on the real GMAT. Before I explain the logic though, I'll address your questions.

In most CR questions, the prompt really only has two "parts" to it: the conclusion and the facts/evidence. Sometimes a sentence will "sound" opinionated, but it's actually part of the author's evidence. To put it in real simple terms, once you know what the conclusion is, EVERYTHING ELSE is the evidence.

In this prompt, the last sentence uses the word "clearly", which signals the conclusion. All of the proceeding sentences serve as evidence to support that conclusion.

The Facts:
-Professional tennis players develop UNIQUE styles as a result of their physical attributes and the influence of their early coaches.
-Modern players have increased strength and endurance
-Modern players have a playing style that is no different from previous generations.

The Conclusion:
-Professional tennis players have a universally efficient style of play that they all conform to.

The Logic:
Professional tennis players play at that level due to some special efficient style, and not because of physical attributes, coaches, or increased strength/endurance.

We need to weaken the logic, so we're looking for an answer that tells us that professional tennis players play that way for a DIFFERENT REASON.

The correct answer D doesn't state exactly what I would be looking for in a correct answer, but it does present part of one. IF the coaches were also players, then the coaches might be teaching their own style to the tennis players. So the players weren't coming to this universal style on their own, they'd be doing it because someone else taught it to them.

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
Contact Rich at [email protected]
Image