BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

one more sweetie

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3650
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:27 am
Location: India
Thanked: 267 times
Followed by:80 members
GMAT Score:760

one more sweetie

by sanju09 » Tue Apr 13, 2010 5:09 am
I had a number of sweeties in my bag. Not all did I distribute among five of my friends. Do I have at least 2 sweeties left in my bag now?

(1) I had sweeties one each for a through z in my bag, and after what number of sweeties I gave to the first friend of mine I met, every next friend I met received one more sweetie than what the foregoing friend of mine had received from me.

(2) None of my five friends had received less than 3 sweeties from me.
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
Top
Source: — Data Sufficiency |
Legendary Member
Posts: 576
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:31 pm
Thanked: 97 times
Followed by:1 members

by liferocks » Tue Apr 13, 2010 7:37 am
IMO ans will be C

because statement 1 gives total number of sweetie in the bag initially as well as how to distribute but it has 3 possibilities of ans

statement 2 alone is not sufficient

together we will get the ans.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 3:51 am
Thanked: 8 times
GMAT Score:680

by Fiver » Tue Apr 13, 2010 7:45 am
Agree with C.

St1] I had sweeties one each for a through z in my bag, and after what number of sweeties I gave to the first friend of mine I met, every next friend I met received one more sweetie than what the foregoing friend of mine had received from me.

This is insufficient on 2 accounts.

A] Assume a sweetie(s) was/were given to the first friend met.
Question is whether 5(a+2) <= 24
Is a<=2?
Hence for all values that comply to the above inequality the answer is yes else the answer is no.
Insufficient.

B] the statement says 'every friend I met'-We do not know whether the person met all of the 5 friends.

St2] None of my five friends had received less than 3 sweeties from me.
This means a>=3, but we do not know the number of sweeties.

Together we know that a>=3 and the total no. of sweeties is 26 and that the all 5 friends are to be accounted for.

What's the OA?
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 435
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 6:15 am
Thanked: 32 times
Followed by:1 members

by eaakbari » Tue Apr 13, 2010 8:18 am
Wow that is one un-sweet question. Can you tell us the source sanju as the wording seems quite hard.

From what i figure answer is C


Statement one
Tells us there are 26 sweets, and each friend gets one more than the preceding one , but since we dont know how many first one got, Insuff

Statement 2
Clearly Insuff

Combined
The minimum combination we can have is 3+4+5+6+7 which adds to 25 which is less than 2 sweets

Hence C

Please tell me whether i inferred the question correctly
Whether you think you can or can't, you're right.
- Henry Ford
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:33 am

by nisha.menon294 » Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:25 am
How does statement 1 tell us that he has 26 sweets?
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 3:51 am
Thanked: 8 times
GMAT Score:680

by Fiver » Fri Apr 16, 2010 8:54 am
nisha.menon294 wrote:How does statement 1 tell us that he has 26 sweets?
Quoting the initial part of statement 1-'I had sweeties one each for a through z in my bag'

a-z are 26 alphabets.
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3650
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:27 am
Location: India
Thanked: 267 times
Followed by:80 members
GMAT Score:760

by sanju09 » Mon Apr 19, 2010 1:26 am
Fiver wrote:Agree with C.

St1] I had sweeties one each for a through z in my bag, and after what number of sweeties I gave to the first friend of mine I met, every next friend I met received one more sweetie than what the foregoing friend of mine had received from me.

This is insufficient on 2 accounts.

A] Assume a sweetie(s) was/were given to the first friend met.
Question is whether 5(a+2) <= 24
Is a<=2?
Hence for all values that comply to the above inequality the answer is yes else the answer is no.
Insufficient.

B] the statement says 'every friend I met'-We do not know whether the person met all of the 5 friends.

St2] None of my five friends had received less than 3 sweeties from me.
This means a>=3, but we do not know the number of sweeties.

Together we know that a>=3 and the total no. of sweeties is 26 and that the all 5 friends are to be accounted for.

What's the OA?
What info do one get from this part of stem?
Not all did I distribute among five of my friends.
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
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3650
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:27 am
Location: India
Thanked: 267 times
Followed by:80 members
GMAT Score:760

by sanju09 » Mon Apr 19, 2010 1:30 am
eaakbari wrote:Wow that is one un-sweet question. Can you tell us the source sanju as the wording seems quite hard.

From what i figure answer is C


Statement one
Tells us there are 26 sweets, and each friend gets one more than the preceding one , but since we dont know how many first one got, Insuff

Statement 2
Clearly Insuff

Combined
The minimum combination we can have is 3+4+5+6+7 which adds to 25 which is less than 2 sweets

Hence C

Please tell me whether i inferred the question correctly
got your answer?

so far, it's only you who inferred what the author really implied.
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
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 3:51 am
Thanked: 8 times
GMAT Score:680

by Fiver » Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:49 am
sanju09 wrote:
Fiver wrote:Agree with C.

St1] I had sweeties one each for a through z in my bag, and after what number of sweeties I gave to the first friend of mine I met, every next friend I met received one more sweetie than what the foregoing friend of mine had received from me.

B] the statement says 'every friend I met'-We do not know whether the person met all of the 5 friends.
What info do one get from this part of stem?
Not all did I distribute among five of my friends.
The logical interpretation of the statement 'some items (a number greater than 0) were distributed, not necessarily evenly, among 5 people' is that a value of receipt is attached to each of the 5 people.
This value, among other values(< or = the total number) could also be 0.
Moreover this interpretation is consistent with st1] as presented above.

Of the record, i must say that whoever has written this question is adept in terms of the reproducing GMAT level quality, however, the style of writing is an area of improvement.

For instance this part (highlighted) of st1] 'every next friend I met received one more sweetie than what the foregoing friend of mine had received' is rectrictive and in that sense contributes to limiting the number of existing outcomes or otherwise raising new ones.
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3650
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:27 am
Location: India
Thanked: 267 times
Followed by:80 members
GMAT Score:760

by sanju09 » Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:07 am
Fiver wrote:
sanju09 wrote:
Fiver wrote:Agree with C.

St1] I had sweeties one each for a through z in my bag, and after what number of sweeties I gave to the first friend of mine I met, every next friend I met received one more sweetie than what the foregoing friend of mine had received from me.

B] the statement says 'every friend I met'-We do not know whether the person met all of the 5 friends.
What info do one get from this part of stem?
Not all did I distribute among five of my friends.
The logical interpretation of the statement 'some items (a number greater than 0) were distributed, not necessarily evenly, among 5 people' is that a value of receipt is attached to each of the 5 people.
This value, among other values(< or = the total number) could also be 0.
Moreover this interpretation is consistent with st1] as presented above.

Of the record, i must say that whoever has written this question is adept in terms of the reproducing GMAT level quality, however, the style of writing is an area of improvement.

For instance this part (highlighted) of st1] 'every next friend I met received one more sweetie than what the foregoing friend of mine had received' is rectrictive and in that sense contributes to limiting the number of existing outcomes or otherwise raising new ones.
For me, the quoted text implies that the author is admitting that all five friends are covered in the distribution process, and hence we know that the person met all of the 5 friends. I don't understand your stand, honestly saying.
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
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 3:51 am
Thanked: 8 times
GMAT Score:680

by Fiver » Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:14 am
sanju09 wrote:
Fiver wrote:
sanju09 wrote:
Fiver wrote:Agree with C.

St1] I had sweeties one each for a through z in my bag, and after what number of sweeties I gave to the first friend of mine I met, every next friend I met received one more sweetie than what the foregoing friend of mine had received from me.

B] the statement says 'every friend I met'-We do not know whether the person met all of the 5 friends.
What info do one get from this part of stem?
Not all did I distribute among five of my friends.
The logical interpretation of the statement 'some items (a number greater than 0) were distributed, not necessarily evenly, among 5 people' is that a value of receipt is attached to each of the 5 people.
This value, among other values(< or = the total number) could also be 0.
Moreover this interpretation is consistent with st1] as presented above.

Of the record, i must say that whoever has written this question is adept in terms of the reproducing GMAT level quality, however, the style of writing is an area of improvement.

For instance this part (highlighted) of st1] 'every next friend I met received one more sweetie than what the foregoing friend of mine had received' is rectrictive and in that sense contributes to limiting the number of existing outcomes or otherwise raising new ones.
For me, the quoted text implies that the author is admitting that all five friends are covered in the distribution process, and hence we know that the person met all of the 5 friends. I don't understand your stand, honestly saying.
That's quite ok. Let me see whether i could get hold of any official question to explain further.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1