Live GMAT classes with Target Test Prep start Nov 21 and Nov 22. First class free.
See classesLearn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.
Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.
with Josh Braslow, 20+ years in test prep
Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.
with
Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.
Hi kiennguyen,kiennguyen wrote:imo D. OA pls
thanks, Testluv! i didn't see your post before i gave my idea! your explanation is perfect. i hope you can help me out in the future!Testluv wrote:Hi kiennguyen,kiennguyen wrote:imo D. OA pls
Actually, choice D is mathematically impossible. This is because the range for moderate rain is something just over 1 cm up to 2 cm.
To test it, let's maximize rain per moderately rain in 1990 at 2 inches, and minimize rain per moderately rainy day in 1910 at 1.00000.....1 inch.
So if you had an equal number of moderately rainy days in both years, then the ratio of 1990 mod rain/1910 mod rain would be: 2/1.0000.....1. This already makes it mathematically impossible.
But of course, there were fewer moderately rainy days in 1990, which means there were more in 1910, so our ratio would really look like: 2/(1.00000...1+).
Which means it is mathematically impossible for the amount of rain that fell on moderately rainy days in 1990 to have been more than twice as great as the amount of rain that fell on moderately rainy days in 1910.
I know why it doesn't take sense for (A) to be correct. But notice the modal quantifier "possibly". Possibly true is not same as necessarily true. (A) is not necessarily true, but possibly true.gettingready wrote:Hello crackgmat007,
Thank you for your very detailed explanation. I was going for D. Although, I perfectly understood your explanation of why D is not correct, to me choice A still does not make sense.Could you possible deepen the explanation of why A is correct? Or is it more of " the best choice" out of the worst?
Thanks
Testluv wrote:Hi kiennguyen,kiennguyen wrote:imo D. OA pls
Actually, choice D is mathematically impossible. This is because the range for moderate rain is something just over 1 inch up to 2 inches.
To test it, let's maximize rain per moderately rain in 1990 at 2 inches, and minimize rain per moderately rainy day in 1910 at 1.00000.....1 inch.
So if you had an equal number of moderately rainy days in both years, then the ratio of 1990 mod rain/1910 mod rain would be: 2/1.0000.....1. This already makes it mathematically impossible.
But of course, there were fewer moderately rainy days in 1990, which means there were more in 1910, so our ratio would really look like: 2/(1.00000...1+).
Which means it is mathematically impossible for the amount of rain that fell on moderately rainy days in 1990 to have been more than twice as great as the amount of rain that fell on moderately rainy days in 1910.[/quot
Testluv, is this a LSAT type question ?
Thanks,
Nope. This is a high-level GMAT kind of question. LSAT won't test quant this furiously.Testluv, is this a LSAT type question ?
