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

Redeem
TTP OnDemand GMAT Video Course
Featured Course

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Scott Woodbury-Stewart’s private virtual classroom — 400 hours of master-class video lessons for the GMAT Focus Edition.

  • 715+ score guarantee — highest in the industry (99th percentile)
  • 52 chapters · 1,500+ lessons · 4,000+ practice questions
  • 400 hours of video · 1,500+ instructor-led HD smartboard lessons
  • 300,000+ students accepted to Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Booth & Sloan & more
  • 24/7 live support + weekly Zoom office hours with GMAT instructors
  • TTP AI Assist — 24/7 AI-powered virtual tutor for instant help
  • 1,200+ flashcards + AI-powered study assistant & daily calendar
  • OnDemand, LiveTeach & GMAT Bootcamp formats available
  • Also: GRE, SAT Math & Executive Assessment courses
  • MBA Admissions Consulting now available
  • 🏆 2025 EdTech Breakthrough Award: Test Prep Solution Provider of the Year
  • 200,000+ students served
  • 5-day free trial — $0 to start, no auto-billing, cancel anytime
★★★★★ 5.0 (559 reviews)
130-pt guarantee
$0 to start then $127/mo
Start Free 5-Day Trial Read 559 Reviews →

Youth Hockey League

Expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 9:39 pm
Thanked: 6 times
by okigbo » Sun Oct 25, 2009 1:05 pm
Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of players in the league have become concerned with the number of flagrant fouls occurring during league games. This past season, the number of flagrant fouls was double the number from the season before. League officials plan to reduce the number of such fouls during the coming season by implementing mandatory suspensions for players who commit flagrant fouls.

Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the officials' plan will be effective?

Most serious injuries occurring during league games are a direct result of flagrant fouls.

League referees have been trained to recognize flagrant fouls and to report incidents involving such fouls.

Parents of players in the league are in support of mandatory suspensions for flagrant fouls.

A similar league suspends players for committing flagrant fouls; this league has a relatively low incidence of flagrant fouls when compared with the Youth Hockey League.

Most players in the league strive to be selected for the All-Star team, and league rules state that no player with a record of suspension shall be selected for the All-Star team.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 113
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:51 am
Thanked: 10 times
GMAT Score:690

Re: Youth Hockey League

by Ludacrispat26 » Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:51 pm
okigbo wrote:Officials of the Youth Hockey League and parents of players in the league have become concerned with the number of flagrant fouls occurring during league games. This past season, the number of flagrant fouls was double the number from the season before. League officials plan to reduce the number of such fouls during the coming season by implementing mandatory suspensions for players who commit flagrant fouls.

Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the officials' plan will be effective?

Most serious injuries occurring during league games are a direct result of flagrant fouls.

League referees have been trained to recognize flagrant fouls and to report incidents involving such fouls.

Parents of players in the league are in support of mandatory suspensions for flagrant fouls.

A similar league suspends players for committing flagrant fouls; this league has a relatively low incidence of flagrant fouls when compared with the Youth Hockey League.

Most players in the league strive to be selected for the All-Star team, and league rules state that no player with a record of suspension shall be selected for the All-Star team.
iMO D and E are close, but I'm going to go with E. D tells us that the league is similar and does suspend players, but doesn't give us direct causality. In E, we see a clear incentive for youth hockey players to stop committing flagrant fouls.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Legendary Member
Posts: 1161
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 2:52 amFollowed by: 1 member
Location: Sydney
Thanked: 23 times

by mehravikas » Sun Oct 25, 2009 7:52 pm
IMO - E

It shouldn't be 'D' because it talks about a similar league, the option is not strong enough to claim that the plan will be effective.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 2:48 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:740

by 2010gmat » Sun Oct 25, 2009 9:12 pm
clearly E

Most serious injuries occurring during league games are a direct result of flagrant fouls. --> so what

League referees have been trained to recognize flagrant fouls and to report incidents involving such fouls. --> train em ... players can still play foul

Parents of players in the league are in support of mandatory suspensions for flagrant fouls. --> keep supporting the mandate .. players eill keep on playin fouls

A similar league suspends players for committing flagrant fouls; this league has a relatively low incidence of flagrant fouls when compared with the Youth Hockey League. --> wat if similar league is smaller in size as compared to this league or lesser no. of matches are played in that league as compared to this league...this is not the best criterion for comparing 2 leagues

Most players in the league strive to be selected for the All-Star team, and league rules state that no player with a record of suspension shall be selected for the All-Star team.
Perfecttt and hence the answer...
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Legendary Member
Posts: 1404
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 6:55 pmFollowed by: 2 members
Thanked: 18 times

by tanviet » Tue Oct 27, 2009 4:01 am
(no cause, no effect) is a strengthener. D is correct

B support evidence. B is not needed because evidence is evidently correct.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 amFollowed by: 2 members
Thanked: 173 times
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:12 am
B & E were strong contenders..

IMO E supercedes B...But Agian we need to assume that for a player to get suspended "only flagrant foul is the reason & not anyother means."
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Legendary Member
Posts: 594
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 11:51 pm
Thanked: 12 times

by nervesofsteel » Wed Oct 28, 2009 12:23 am
imo E

if players strive for something then the will avoid whatever will prevent them to achieve their goal
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:26 am
Thanked: 1 times

by dare2dream » Wed Oct 28, 2009 10:07 pm
IMO E....
D rules out as the two different league can have teo different parameter to evaluate the flagrant foul.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 8:59 pm
Thanked: 8 times

E

by brick2009 » Sun Nov 01, 2009 11:00 pm
Answer has to be E:

Most players--> want to get selected to X

X --> not possible with fouls

Hence , Most wont commit foul anymore...result in reduction of fouls
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1