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
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.

Can I use test it here? Inequality

Expert replies
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by GMATGuruNY » Fri Aug 08, 2014 2:45 am
[email protected] wrote:If r + s > 2t, is r > t ?

(1) t > s

(2) r > s
Here, the question stem supplies one algebraic relationship, while each statement supplies another.
When given two algebraic relationships, try to COMBINE them.

Inequalities can be ADDED together.
One constraint: Before adding, the < > must face the SAME DIRECTION in each inequality.

Statement 1: t > s
Adding this inequality to r+s > 2t, we get:
(r+s) + t > s + 2t
r > t.
SUFFICIENT.

Statement 2: r > s
Adding this inequality to r+s > 2t, we get:
r + (r+s) > s + 2t
2r > 2t
r > t.
SUFFICIENT.

The correct answer is D.
Last edited by GMATGuruNY on Fri Aug 08, 2014 6:11 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 Brent@GMATPrepNow » Fri Aug 08, 2014 4:49 am
Hi [email protected],

Plugging in numbers (aka testing values) typically works best when you suspect that the statement is NOT SUFFICIENT. In these cases, all you need to do is find values that yield different (conflicting) answers to the target question.

Conversely, if the statement is SUFFICIENT, then plugging in values will only HINT at whether or not the statement is sufficient, but you won't be able to make any definitive conclusions.

For example, let's say we have the following target question: If n is a positive integer, is (2^n) - 1 prime?
Let's say statement 1 says: : n is a prime number:

Now let's plug in some prime values of n:
If n = 2, then (2^n) - 1 = 2² - 1 = 3, and 3 IS prime
If n = 3, then case (2^n) - 1 = 2³ - 1 = 7, and 7 IS prime
If n = 5, then (2^n) - 1 = 2� - 1 = 31, and 31 IS prime
At this point, it certainly APPEARS that statement guarantees that (2^n) - 1 is prime? Let's try one more prime value of n.
If n = 7, then (2^n) - 1 = 2� - 1 = 127, and 127 IS prime

So, can we be 100% certain that statement 1 is sufficient? No. The truth of the matter is that statement 1 is NOT SUFFICIENT. To see why, let's examine the possibility that n = 11
If n = 11, then (2^n) - 1 = (2^11) - 1 = 2047, and 2047 is NOT prime


Here's a different example:
Target question: Is x > 0?
Let's say statement 1 says: 5x > 4x

Now let's plug in some values of x that satisfy the condition that 5x > 4x.
x = 3, in which case x > 0
x = 0.5, in which case x > 0
x = 15, in which case x > 0
x = 1000, in which case x > 0

Once again, it APPEARS that statement 1 provides sufficient information to answer the target question. Can we be 100% certain? No. Perhaps we didn't plug in the right numbers (as was the case in the first example). Perhaps there's a number that we could have plugged in such that x < 0

If we want to be 100% certain that a statement is SUFFICIENT, we'll need to use a technique other than plugging in.
Here, we can take 5x > 4x, and subtract 4x from both sides to get x > 0 VOILA - we can now answer the target question with absolute certainty.
So, statement 1 is SUFFICIENT.

TAKEAWAY: Plugging in numbers is best suited for situations in which you suspect that the statement is not sufficient. In these situations, plugging in values can yield results that are 100% conclusive. Conversely, in situations in which the statement is sufficient, plugging in values can STRONGLY HINT at sufficiency, but the results are not 100% conclusive.

For more on this, you can watch our free video titled "Choosing Good Numbers: https://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat- ... cy?id=1102 or you can read an article I wrote for BTG about it: https://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2013/10/ ... -in-values

Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image
Join the discussion