Critical Reasoning

Competitive runners who run barefoot have been shown to have greater stamina during races than other racers. Therefore, training in bare feet is a useful method to improve competitive runners' chances of winning any race.

Which of the following statements, if true, most seriously weakens this arguments?

A Countries in which runners run barefoot often send athletes to the Olympics and to worldwide marathons.

B Having greater stamina does not always improve runners' chances of winning races.
C Many competitive runners train for years to increase their stamina before entering any competitions.
D Competitive runners with greater stamina are more likely to win races that are 1500 meters or longer.
E The vast majority of competitive runners in training do not train barefoot.

IMO B

The assumption made here is greater stamina --> improved chances of winning any race.

I was thinking about B and D. But ultimately eliminated B because it mentions only runners whereas the argument talks about competitive runners only.

Also to mention about D, it talks about competive runners have their chances improved only on races that are 1500 or more whereas the argument talks about improving chances on any types of race.

IMO D.

One more for B

I'd go for B.

B+

Only B makes sense here

B WOULD MAKE ME HAPPY

Everybody is going for B.

Bur can somebody explain how B is weakening the argument :

Conclusion : training in bare feet is a useful method to improve competitive runners’ chances of winning any race.

B : Having greater stamina does not always improve runners’ chances of winning races.

So, B is saying that It may or may not be useful. [ Bis not saying that it is not useful at all ]
Cocnlusion is also saying that chamces will increase. Conclusion is noy using the word : definetely

paes wrote:Everybody is going for B.

Bur can somebody explain how B is weakening the argument :

Conclusion : training in bare feet is a useful method to improve competitive runners’ chances of winning any race.

B : Having greater stamina does not always improve runners’ chances of winning races.

So, B is saying that It may or may not be useful. [ Bis not saying that it is not useful at all ]
Cocnlusion is also saying that chamces will increase. Conclusion is noy using the word : definetely

Concusion "training in bare feet is a useful method to improve competitive runners' chances of winning any race" . This is based on the premise - runners who run barefoot have been shown to have greater stamina during races than other racers... So it is making an assumption that greater stamina causes as increase in the likelihood of runners to win in competitions .... So you need to introduce evidence which proves that stamina is not the only criteria that is responsible for increasing this likelihood which is what B says
"having greater stamina does not always improve runners’ chances of winning races. "

Deb@
thanks, but still my point is same:

I am saying that : conclusion is also talking only about CHANCES [ probability ]


B is : Having greater stamina does not always improve runner's chances of winning races. -> means 2 things can happen

Suppose there are 100 runners with greater stamina. Now 2 things can happen :

(1) For some cases [ 40 runners ] : It improves runner's chances of winning race
(2) For other Cases [ 60 runners] : It doesn't improve runner's chances of winning race

Ok now : based on 1 and 2, I can say that :

training in bare feet is a useful method to improve competitive runner's chances[PROBABILITY] of winning any race

I am not seeing anything wrong here.

If I(conclusion) say that :
the person training in bare feet will win the race. -> then I agree that B will weaken the conclusion

pradeepkaushal9518 wrote:Competitive runners who run barefoot have been shown to have greater stamina during races than other racers. Therefore, training in bare feet is a useful method to improve competitive runners' chances of winning any race.

Which of the following statements, if true, most seriously weakens this arguments?

A Countries in which runners run barefoot often send athletes to the Olympics and to worldwide marathons.

B Having greater stamina does not always improve runners' chances of winning races.
C Many competitive runners train for years to increase their stamina before entering any competitions.
D Competitive runners with greater stamina are more likely to win races that are 1500 meters or longer.
E The vast majority of competitive runners in training do not train barefoot.

i am toward to B and E but i really dont like B much because of "does not always improve runners' chances of winning races" it used in the argument... "does not always" doesnt mean that it would not helpful in gettin a chance to win
thus for me, E is the answer
A, C and D seems to strengthen the conclusion
E it is

oa is B