OG Quant Review: DS, Chapter 5.5, Problem 117 wrong?

i think the answer is wrong.. how can it be A :roll:

Yes, It looks wrong.

looks like a printing error.

answer should be E.

the problem is correct and the answer is E.

For the first one, the problem didnt say that AD is equal to DC. So it doesnt matter whether AD has a value.

For the second, you cant get the answer for if theres no value. the problem gave the value of x, and x is the degree not the length.

@lan0583

if u r saying that answer is E on which we all r agree.

then problem cannot be correct.

i mean problem is correct but the answer given (ie A ) is incorrect.

the problem is correct. the answer is not

Hi All,
I have seen this problem before (I dont remeber the OG guide version). I remember that the angle BAC is "x" degrees.

This info in addition to the what gmatace posted helps us solve this problem.

Try it out. Hope this is helpful

No. the book's answer is correct. I think the answer in the book explains this question sufficiently using the rule that, " the degree measure of an exterior angle of a triangle is equal to the sum of the remote interior angles"

therefore, according to this rule, BDC is then an exterior angle of triangle ADB and equal to its remote interior angles which are angles ABD ( call this x) and DAB ( call this y). Therefore x+y=2x, therefore you know y=x, and you can go from here. this is all in the solution that the OG gives. Statement 1 only is sufficient. Hope this helps.

I am disappointed in the theory coverage of the OG though, as they are using geometry rules including mini arcs, rules such as the one above where I have not seen coverage anywhere... I am really glad that I am learning these new rules as I go along as they are simply not covered in the KAPlan, Princeton or any OG books.

The answer of this question is wrong. It should be E.

If you think the explanation is right, you are making an assumption that can't be made which is the same mistake the OG made. One can't assume one of the angles equals x. instead of x+y=2x it should be z+y=2x. If you can't understand this then draw a few example that cannot possibly follow reasoning of the OG. That's what I did to validate my assumptions about OG's mistake.

hi jbsears,
did u follow what mr. Rahul said?
BAC is x.
that solves all problem. the q published & file uploaded here on d web site therefore must have been incorrect.
with Rahuls INFO ans. is A.
agree with FEI:)

aim-wsc,

Rahul's answer is right if that is true but it is not. The OG doesn't give the angle BAC is X. Therefore, one cannot assume it is X. Maybe there are alternative versions of the book, but the book I have doesn't have BAC listed as X. So the answer is E. But if it was X, then A would be the correct answer.

phew... glad I found this.. I was going cross-eyed reading the explanation in the OG which wasn't making any sense to me..

They've missed a vital bit of information while printing it... It must be stated that BAC is x, or half of BDC, or something.

It's kinda dissappointing actually.. Giving 'sufficient' data is most critical in the Data Sufficiency section..

There is a same question in OG10 with extra information. With the information given in OG 10, the correct answer is absolutely A, but without it, the correct answer is E.

can somebody explain how by giving /BAD as X we can get the ans with A alone???????????