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.

On the number line shown, is zero halfway

Expert replies
by utopian_wanderer » Sun Jan 18, 2009 11:08 am
On the number line shown, is zero halfway between r and s


<-----------------r---------s----t----------->

1)s is to the right of zero
2)The distance between t and r is the same as the distance between t and -s

In my opinion the answer to this question should be B. However GMAC says that the answer is C.

My reasoning is that, for the distance between rand t to be equal to the distance between t and -s, r should be equal to -s. Therefore statement 2 alone is sufficient to answer this question.

Can someone please explain how the answer is C
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

utopian_wanderer wrote:On the number line shown, is zero halfway between r and s


<-----------------r---------s----t----------->

1)s is to the right of zero
2)The distance between t and r is the same as the distance between t and -s

In my opinion the answer to this question should be B. However GMAC says that the answer is C.

My reasoning is that, for the distance between rand t to be equal to the distance between t and -s, r should be equal to -s. Therefore statement 2 alone is sufficient to answer this question.

Can someone please explain how the answer is C
r could be equal to -s, but it doesn't need to be, at least not if all three of our unknowns are negative. We could have r = -4, s = -2 and t = -1, for example.
For online GMAT math tutoring, or to buy my higher-level Quant books and problem sets, contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

ianstewartgmat.com
Join the discussion

Ian Stewart wrote:
utopian_wanderer wrote:On the number line shown, is zero halfway between r and s


<-----------------r---------s----t----------->

1)s is to the right of zero
2)The distance between t and r is the same as the distance between t and -s

In my opinion the answer to this question should be B. However GMAC says that the answer is C.

My reasoning is that, for the distance between rand t to be equal to the distance between t and -s, r should be equal to -s. Therefore statement 2 alone is sufficient to answer this question.

Can someone please explain how the answer is C
r could be equal to -s, but it doesn't need to be, at least not if all three of our unknowns are negative. We could have r = -4, s = -2 and t = -1, for example.
Your reasoning is not totally wrong that "for the distance between r and t to be equal to the distance between t and -s, r should be equal to -s." But you are missing one thing here that it will be true only if we know what type of number (+/-) s is, which we get to know only if we take statement 1 into account also. My answer is C
The mind is everything. What you think you become. -Lord Buddha



Sanjeev K Saxena
Quantitative Instructor
The Princeton Review - Manya Abroad
Lucknow-226001

www.manyagroup.com
Join the discussion

by navalpike » Fri Jul 17, 2009 8:46 pm
Although I am always grateful for Ian’s explanation, I doubt that I would have been able to apply this reasoning on test day. Actually the first time I saw the question, I did not think of the possibility of all three (r, s, & t) being negative.

Is there a more certain (maybe algebraic?) option for solving 2)?
For example, I am sure we could write 2) as

2)The distance between t and r is the same as the distance between t and –s

AB. VALUE ( t – r) = AB. VALUE ( t + s)

(Read : t-r between absolute value bars and t+s between absolute value bars)

Is there an algebraic way from here that might lead to ‘Insufficient’?
Join the discussion

by pkw209 » Thu May 06, 2010 3:56 pm
This question takes way longer than 2 minutes to figure out.

Any shortcuts?
Join the discussion

by jeemat » Tue Sep 07, 2010 5:14 pm
Can anyone explain how this can be accomplished in 2 minutes? Or like they asked above, how they would structure their work?
Join the discussion

by Ian Stewart » Wed Sep 08, 2010 12:39 pm
jeemat wrote:Can anyone explain how this can be accomplished in 2 minutes? Or like they asked above, how they would structure their work?
I'd suggest beginning by imagining the possible locations of zero on the number line shown. When we consider statement 2 alone, we know that -s is just the reflection of s through zero on the number line. Certainly s could be to the right of zero, and zero could be halfway between r and s:

---r---0---s---t---

so we just need to see if it's possible that s is to the left of zero. Indeed it is possible, provided all of our numbers are negative:

--r--s--t--0--(-s)-----

When I consider this latter possibility, I just imagine values for r, t and -s so that t is in the middle - for example -6, -1, 4, (so s = -4) or -10, -2, 6 (so s = -6). It's certainly feasible to imagine one of these scenarios within two minutes, provided you look at the problem in a suitable way early on.
For online GMAT math tutoring, or to buy my higher-level Quant books and problem sets, contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

ianstewartgmat.com
Join the discussion

utopian_wanderer wrote:
Sun Jan 18, 2009 11:08 am
On the number line shown, is zero halfway between r and s


<-----------------r---------s----t----------->

1)s is to the right of zero
2)The distance between t and r is the same as the distance between t and -s

Solution:

We need to determine whether zero halfway between r and s. We see that 0 could be in one of the following four places: 1) to the left of r, 2) between r and s, 3) between s and t, 4) to the right of t. We will refer to these four cases as cases 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively.

Statement One Only:

s is to the right of zero.

This tells us s is positive; however, without knowing anything about r, we can’t determine whether they are opposites. Statement one is not sufficient to answer the question.

Statement Two Only:

The distance between t and r is the same as the distance between t and -s.

We see that it can’t be case 1 or 3 since the former case has t further away from -s than it’s from r whereas the latter case has t further away from r than it’s from s. However, it can still be either case 2 or 4. If it’s the former, then yes, not only 0 is between r and s, 0 is exactly halfway between r and s. However, if it’s the latter, then no, because both r and s are less than 0. Statement two is not sufficient to answer the question.

Statements One and Two Together:

From statement two, we know it’s either case 2 or 4. However, since from statement one, s is positive, then it must be case 2 (since this case has s positive) and not case 4 (since this case has s negative). From the analysis for statement two, we see that if it is case 2, then 0 is exactly halfway between r and s. The two statements together are sufficient to answer the question.

Answer: C

Scott Woodbury-Stewart
Founder and CEO
[email protected]

Image

See why Target Test Prep is rated 5 out of 5 stars on BEAT the GMAT. Read our reviews

ImageImage
Join the discussion