Samuel is obviously a bad fisherman. During the past season, in which he and the five members of his team spent four months on a boat together off Dutch Harbor, AK, he caught fewer fish than any of his teammates.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument above?
A) Two seasons ago, Samuel fished on another boat off Dutch Harbor and caught more fish than any other member of that boat.
B) Before becoming a fisherman, Samuel piloted a fishing boat whose members regularly caught record numbers of fish.
C) While fishing this past season, Samuel fell sick for a week and did not catch any fish during this time.
D) Unlike the other fishermen on his boat, at the order of the captain, Samuel fished this past season with experimental bait.
E) Amongst the fishing community in Dutch Harbor, Samuel has a reputation for being an especially bad fisherman.
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Samuel - Bad Fisherman ?
This topic has expert replies
I feel A & C are contender. But, C gives an alternate reason why he caught fewer fish. So a weakener.sk1 wrote:Samuel is obviously a bad fisherman. During the past season, in which he and the five members of his team spent four months on a boat together off Dutch Harbor, AK, he caught fewer fish than any of his teammates.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument above?
A) Two seasons ago, Samuel fished on another boat off Dutch Harbor and caught more fish than any other member of that boat.
B) Before becoming a fisherman, Samuel piloted a fishing boat whose members regularly caught record numbers of fish.
C) While fishing this past season, Samuel fell sick for a week and did not catch any fish during this time.
D) Unlike the other fishermen on his boat, at the order of the captain, Samuel fished this past season with experimental bait.
E) Amongst the fishing community in Dutch Harbor, Samuel has a reputation for being an especially bad fisherman.
-
HSPA
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1101
- Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:26 am
- Thanked: 47 times
- Followed by:13 members
- GMAT Score:640
sk1 wrote:Samuel is obviously a bad fisherman. During the past season, in which he and the five members of his team spent four months on a boat together off Dutch Harbor, AK, he caught fewer fish than any of his teammates.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument above?
A) Two seasons ago, Samuel fished on another boat off Dutch Harbor and caught more fish than any other member of that boat.
B) Before becoming a fisherman, Samuel piloted a fishing boat whose members regularly caught record numbers of fish.
C) While fishing this past season, Samuel fell sick for a week and did not catch any fish during this time.
D) Unlike the other fishermen on his boat, at the order of the captain, Samuel fished this past season with experimental bait. E) Amongst the fishing community in Dutch Harbor, Samuel has a reputation for being an especially bad fisherman.
First take: 640 (50M, 27V) - RC needs 300% improvement
Second take: coming soon..
Regards,
HSPA.
Second take: coming soon..
Regards,
HSPA.
-
abhijit_ghonge
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:20 pm
- Location: Mumbai, India
I think A is answer.
Situation: in past season, he caught less number of fish that any of his team members. If we could prove this is not usual case but just an exception in the previous season, then we weaken the line of argument.
In A, Two seasons ago, on the same Dutch Harbor he caught more fish that any of the other member of that boat. This shows that its not usually the case that he catches less fish, hence this weakens the argument. Please reply if this understanding is incorrect.
Situation: in past season, he caught less number of fish that any of his team members. If we could prove this is not usual case but just an exception in the previous season, then we weaken the line of argument.
In A, Two seasons ago, on the same Dutch Harbor he caught more fish that any of the other member of that boat. This shows that its not usually the case that he catches less fish, hence this weakens the argument. Please reply if this understanding is incorrect.
-
MartinK
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 12:38 am
- Location: Slovakia
- Thanked: 3 times
IMO D.
Firstly, you have to understand the reasoning: he caught a small amount of fish, compare to others -> because he is a bad fisherman.
If we want to weaken the conclusion we have to find option that comes with different explanation of these results...and must rather concentrate on his style of fishing than on him as a person.
Option C - is very tricky, I firstly thought it's the right answer as well. However, when we look closer we will see that this option is rather neutral.
Being ill can be a reason why he caught less fish but still he could be a bad fisherman compare to others. This option concentrate on a person rather than on his fishing abilities.
Firstly, you have to understand the reasoning: he caught a small amount of fish, compare to others -> because he is a bad fisherman.
If we want to weaken the conclusion we have to find option that comes with different explanation of these results...and must rather concentrate on his style of fishing than on him as a person.
Option C - is very tricky, I firstly thought it's the right answer as well. However, when we look closer we will see that this option is rather neutral.
Being ill can be a reason why he caught less fish but still he could be a bad fisherman compare to others. This option concentrate on a person rather than on his fishing abilities.
-
Ozlemg
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 407
- Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 9:19 am
- Thanked: 25 times
- Followed by:7 members
Definately D.
abhijit_ghonge--> On the contrary, A strenghts the argument!
We should not care for the past in the case. He might be bad at fishing in the past but he can be good at it at the moment. Cos he was a bad fisherman in the past, it does not mean/guarantee that he is at the moment.
abhijit_ghonge--> On the contrary, A strenghts the argument!
We should not care for the past in the case. He might be bad at fishing in the past but he can be good at it at the moment. Cos he was a bad fisherman in the past, it does not mean/guarantee that he is at the moment.
