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.

OG114

Expert replies
by nafiul9090 » Sat Apr 23, 2011 6:13 pm
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the
country and have noticed that in those built before
1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is
generally superior to that in hotels built afterward.
Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930
typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than
carpenters who have worked on hotels built
subsequently.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens
the guidebook writer's argument?
(A) The quality of original carpentry in hotels is
generally far superior to the quality of original
carpentry in other structures, such as houses
and stores.
(B) Hotels built since 1930 can generally
accommodate more guests than those built
before 1930.
(C) The materials available to carpenters working
before 1930 were not signifi cantly different in
quality from the materials available to
carpenters working after 1930.
(D) The better the quality of original carpentry in a
building, the less likely that building is to fall into
disuse and be demolished.
(E) The average length of apprenticeship for
carpenters has declined signifi cantly since 1930.

i jst dont understand the reasoning here....wht m i missing???
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |


by nafiul9090 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 12:38 am
@jaymw for sharing the link. i just got it right because other options are substantially wrong but i dont know why option D is right.......
Join the discussion

by GMATGuruNY » Sun Apr 24, 2011 3:09 am
nafiul9090 wrote:Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the
country and have noticed that in those built before
1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is
generally superior to that in hotels built afterward.
Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930
typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than
carpenters who have worked on hotels built
subsequently.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens
the guidebook writer's argument?
(A) The quality of original carpentry in hotels is
generally far superior to the quality of original
carpentry in other structures, such as houses
and stores.
(B) Hotels built since 1930 can generally
accommodate more guests than those built
before 1930.
(C) The materials available to carpenters working
before 1930 were not signifi cantly different in
quality from the materials available to
carpenters working after 1930.
(D) The better the quality of original carpentry in a
building, the less likely that building is to fall into
disuse and be demolished.
(E) The average length of apprenticeship for
carpenters has declined signifi cantly since 1930.

i jst dont understand the reasoning here....wht m i missing???
Learn to recognize the common flaws.
This argument exhibits a change in scope.
The premise is about a very limited sampling: the hotels that the guidebook writer has visited.
The conclusion is about the whole: all hotels built before 1930.

When an argument exhibits a change in scope, look for an answer choice that shows that sample ≠ whole.

Answer choice D indicates that only the well-constructed hotels are still in existence, implying that the hotels that were poorly constructed have been demolished. The guidebook writer could not have visited the hotels that have been demolished. Thus, the sampling (the hotels that the writer has visited) ≠ the whole (all hotels built before 1930).

The correct answer is D.
Last edited by GMATGuruNY on Sun Apr 24, 2011 7:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Join the discussion

by nafiul9090 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 7:31 am
@mitch now tht makes sense to me......
Join the discussion