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 →

Examine Triangle (Image Included)

Expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3835
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:00 pmFollowed by: 523 members
Location: Milpitas, CA
Thanked: 1854 times
GMAT Score:770

by Anurag@Gurome » Mon Feb 21, 2011 8:59 pm
(1) z > x implies side opposite to angle z > side opposite to angle x.
So, AC > AB or AB < AC(since side opposite to angle z is AC and side opposite to angle x is AB).
Answer to the main question is "no".
So, (1) is SUFFICIENT.

(2) AC > AD does not imply whether AB < AC or AB > AC. So, (2) is NOT SUFFICIENT.

The correct answer is A.
Anurag Mairal, Ph.D., MBA
GMAT Expert, Admissions and Career Guidance
Gurome, Inc.
1-800-566-4043 (USA)

Join Our Facebook Groups
GMAT with Gurome
https://www.facebook.com/groups/272466352793633/
Admissions with Gurome
https://www.facebook.com/groups/461459690536574/
Career Advising with Gurome
https://www.facebook.com/groups/360435787349781/
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 101
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:44 am
Thanked: 1 times

by btgyes » Mon Feb 21, 2011 11:12 pm
Anurag@Gurome wrote:(1) z > x implies side opposite to angle z > side opposite to angle x.
So, AC > AB or AB < AC(since side opposite to angle z is AC and side opposite to angle x is AB).
Answer to the main question is "no".
So, (1) is SUFFICIENT.

(2) AC > AD does not imply whether AB < AC or AB > AC. So, (2) is NOT SUFFICIENT.

The correct answer is A.
Hi Anurag,

I think you have missed one point here....

ques DOES NOT say that AD is perpendicular to BC.... !

just think one again....

Thanks....!
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3650
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:27 amFollowed by: 80 members
Location: India
Thanked: 267 times
GMAT Score:760

by sanju09 » Tue Feb 22, 2011 12:26 am
btgyes wrote:
Anurag@Gurome wrote:(1) z > x implies side opposite to angle z > side opposite to angle x.
So, AC > AB or AB < AC(since side opposite to angle z is AC and side opposite to angle x is AB).
Answer to the main question is "no".
So, (1) is SUFFICIENT.

(2) AC > AD does not imply whether AB < AC or AB > AC. So, (2) is NOT SUFFICIENT.

The correct answer is A.
Hi Anurag,

I think you have missed one point here....

ques DOES NOT say that AD is perpendicular to BC.... !

just think one again....

Thanks....!
Where did Anurag say that AD is perpendicular to BC?

(1) When two angles in a triangle are comparable, the sides opposite to those are also comparable. Sufficient

(2) If AC > AD, then z can still be equal, less, or more than x. [spoiler]Insufficient


A[/spoiler]
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
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 101
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:44 am
Thanked: 1 times

by btgyes » Tue Feb 22, 2011 2:02 am
sanju09 wrote:
btgyes wrote:
Anurag@Gurome wrote:(1) z > x implies side opposite to angle z > side opposite to angle x.
So, AC > AB or AB < AC(since side opposite to angle z is AC and side opposite to angle x is AB).
Answer to the main question is "no".
So, (1) is SUFFICIENT.

(2) AC > AD does not imply whether AB < AC or AB > AC. So, (2) is NOT SUFFICIENT.

The correct answer is A.
Hi Anurag,

I think you have missed one point here....

ques DOES NOT say that AD is perpendicular to BC.... !

just think one again....

Thanks....!
Where did Anurag say that AD is perpendicular to BC?

(1) When two angles in a triangle are comparable, the sides opposite to those are also comparable. Sufficient

(2) If AC > AD, then z can still be equal, less, or more than x. [spoiler]Insufficient


A[/spoiler]
Anurag didn't said this thing

but

considering things which are only possible when AD is perpendicular to BC

-----------

just think over it...

.... i don't know how to describe things without picture...

Could anybody plz mention... OA

i am pretty sure it can't be A in any case..

ta
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3650
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:27 amFollowed by: 80 members
Location: India
Thanked: 267 times
GMAT Score:760

by sanju09 » Tue Feb 22, 2011 2:10 am
btgyes wrote:
sanju09 wrote:
btgyes wrote:
Anurag@Gurome wrote:(1) z > x implies side opposite to angle z > side opposite to angle x.
So, AC > AB or AB < AC(since side opposite to angle z is AC and side opposite to angle x is AB).
Answer to the main question is "no".
So, (1) is SUFFICIENT.

(2) AC > AD does not imply whether AB < AC or AB > AC. So, (2) is NOT SUFFICIENT.

The correct answer is A.
Hi Anurag,

I think you have missed one point here....

ques DOES NOT say that AD is perpendicular to BC.... !

just think one again....

Thanks....!
Where did Anurag say that AD is perpendicular to BC?

(1) When two angles in a triangle are comparable, the sides opposite to those are also comparable. Sufficient

(2) If AC > AD, then z can still be equal, less, or more than x. [spoiler]Insufficient


A[/spoiler]
Anurag didn't said this thing

but

considering things which are only possible when AD is perpendicular to BC

-----------

just think over it...

.... i don't know how to describe things without picture...

Could anybody plz mention... OA

i am pretty sure it can't be A in any case..

ta
We have Anurag's take right on top of this post, which consideration seems to be made on the basis that AD is perpendicular to BC?

...and why do you think that A cannot be the OA?
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
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 101
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:44 am
Thanked: 1 times

by btgyes » Tue Feb 22, 2011 2:34 am
sanju09 wrote:
btgyes wrote:
sanju09 wrote:
btgyes wrote:
Anurag@Gurome wrote:(1) z > x implies side opposite to angle z > side opposite to angle x.
So, AC > AB or AB < AC(since side opposite to angle z is AC and side opposite to angle x is AB).
Answer to the main question is "no".
So, (1) is SUFFICIENT.

(2) AC > AD does not imply whether AB < AC or AB > AC. So, (2) is NOT SUFFICIENT.

The correct answer is A.
Hi Anurag,

I think you have missed one point here....

ques DOES NOT say that AD is perpendicular to BC.... !

just think one again....

Thanks....!
Where did Anurag say that AD is perpendicular to BC?

(1) When two angles in a triangle are comparable, the sides opposite to those are also comparable. Sufficient

(2) If AC > AD, then z can still be equal, less, or more than x. [spoiler]Insufficient


A[/spoiler]
Anurag didn't said this thing

but

considering things which are only possible when AD is perpendicular to BC

-----------

just think over it...

.... i don't know how to describe things without picture...

Could anybody plz mention... OA

i am pretty sure it can't be A in any case..

ta
We have Anurag's take right on top of this post, which consideration seems to be made on the basis that AD is perpendicular to BC?

...and why do you think that A cannot be the OA?
Sanju...
i know you are very proficient....

i can't write much..

just visualize...

1st scenario -> lets say angle adc = 45
then AB > AC

now second scenario , lets say angle adc = 145

now AB < AC

i hope u understand now...

just try to visualize ...
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3650
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:27 amFollowed by: 80 members
Location: India
Thanked: 267 times
GMAT Score:760

by sanju09 » Tue Feb 22, 2011 2:45 am
btgyes wrote:
sanju09 wrote:
btgyes wrote:
sanju09 wrote:
btgyes wrote:
Anurag@Gurome wrote:(1) z > x implies side opposite to angle z > side opposite to angle x.
So, AC > AB or AB < AC(since side opposite to angle z is AC and side opposite to angle x is AB).
Answer to the main question is "no".
So, (1) is SUFFICIENT.

(2) AC > AD does not imply whether AB < AC or AB > AC. So, (2) is NOT SUFFICIENT.

The correct answer is A.
Hi Anurag,

I think you have missed one point here....

ques DOES NOT say that AD is perpendicular to BC.... !

just think one again....

Thanks....!
Where did Anurag say that AD is perpendicular to BC?

(1) When two angles in a triangle are comparable, the sides opposite to those are also comparable. Sufficient

(2) If AC > AD, then z can still be equal, less, or more than x. [spoiler]Insufficient


A[/spoiler]
Anurag didn't said this thing

but

considering things which are only possible when AD is perpendicular to BC

-----------

just think over it...

.... i don't know how to describe things without picture...

Could anybody plz mention... OA

i am pretty sure it can't be A in any case..

ta
We have Anurag's take right on top of this post, which consideration seems to be made on the basis that AD is perpendicular to BC?

...and why do you think that A cannot be the OA?
Sanju...
i know you are very proficient....

i can't write much..

just visualize...

1st scenario -> lets say angle adc = 45
then AB > AC

now second scenario , lets say angle adc = 145

now AB < AC

i hope u understand now...

just try to visualize ...
Angle measure ADC or the length AD determines nothing so that AB could be compared with AC, this is why (2) is already said to be insufficient my friend, I have visualized what you wanted us to do, just tell which consideration of Anurag seems to you be made on the basis that AD is perpendicular to BC?

...and why do you think that A cannot be the OA?
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
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 8:55 pm
Location: Canada
Thanked: 7 times
GMAT Score:700

by BarryLi » Tue Feb 22, 2011 3:03 am
The OA is A

There was nothing on the diagram that indicated AD is perpendicular to BC.

The problems I am posting from this book are the ones I fail to understand, and the lack of clarity may be why. I see that this sentiment is shared by others. I will no longer be posting questions from this book.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 101
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:44 am
Thanked: 1 times

by btgyes » Tue Feb 22, 2011 3:03 am
sanju09 wrote:
btgyes wrote:
sanju09 wrote:
btgyes wrote:
sanju09 wrote:
btgyes wrote:
Anurag@Gurome wrote:(1) z > x implies side opposite to angle z > side opposite to angle x.
So, AC > AB or AB < AC(since side opposite to angle z is AC and side opposite to angle x is AB).
Answer to the main question is "no".
So, (1) is SUFFICIENT.

(2) AC > AD does not imply whether AB < AC or AB > AC. So, (2) is NOT SUFFICIENT.

The correct answer is A.
Hi Anurag,

I think you have missed one point here....

ques DOES NOT say that AD is perpendicular to BC.... !

just think one again....

Thanks....!
Where did Anurag say that AD is perpendicular to BC?

(1) When two angles in a triangle are comparable, the sides opposite to those are also comparable. Sufficient

(2) If AC > AD, then z can still be equal, less, or more than x. [spoiler]Insufficient


A[/spoiler]
Anurag didn't said this thing

but

considering things which are only possible when AD is perpendicular to BC

-----------

just think over it...

.... i don't know how to describe things without picture...

Could anybody plz mention... OA

i am pretty sure it can't be A in any case..

ta
We have Anurag's take right on top of this post, which consideration seems to be made on the basis that AD is perpendicular to BC?

...and why do you think that A cannot be the OA?
Sanju...
i know you are very proficient....

i can't write much..

just visualize...

1st scenario -> lets say angle adc = 45
then AB > AC

now second scenario , lets say angle adc = 145

now AB < AC

i hope u understand now...

just try to visualize ...
Angle measure ADC or the length AD determines nothing so that AB could be compared with AC, this is why (2) is already said to be insufficient my friend, I have visualized what you wanted us to do, just tell which consideration of Anurag seems to you be made on the basis that AD is perpendicular to BC?

...and why do you think that A cannot be the OA?
okie...ans will be A .. that fine...

my mistake is that

in given scenario, angle ADC will be always greater then 90

second scenario ir angle ADC < 90 is not possible because Z need to keep > X


thats fine...

thanks mate...
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3650
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:27 amFollowed by: 80 members
Location: India
Thanked: 267 times
GMAT Score:760

by sanju09 » Tue Feb 22, 2011 3:25 am
BarryLi wrote:The OA is A

There was nothing on the diagram that indicated AD is perpendicular to BC.

The problems I am posting from this book are the ones I fail to understand, and the lack of clarity may be why. I see that this sentiment is shared by others. I will no longer be posting questions from this book.
Nothing is wrong with the question or the source, take to light all that pesters you without hitch
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
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3835
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:00 pmFollowed by: 523 members
Location: Milpitas, CA
Thanked: 1854 times
GMAT Score:770

by Anurag@Gurome » Tue Feb 22, 2011 3:39 am
btgyes wrote:Hi Anurag,

I think you have missed one point here....

ques DOES NOT say that AD is perpendicular to BC.... !

just think one again....

Thanks....!
I hope all the queries are sorted now?
Anurag Mairal, Ph.D., MBA
GMAT Expert, Admissions and Career Guidance
Gurome, Inc.
1-800-566-4043 (USA)

Join Our Facebook Groups
GMAT with Gurome
https://www.facebook.com/groups/272466352793633/
Admissions with Gurome
https://www.facebook.com/groups/461459690536574/
Career Advising with Gurome
https://www.facebook.com/groups/360435787349781/
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 101
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:44 am
Thanked: 1 times

by btgyes » Tue Feb 22, 2011 3:45 am
Anurag@Gurome wrote:
btgyes wrote:Hi Anurag,

I think you have missed one point here....

ques DOES NOT say that AD is perpendicular to BC.... !

just think one again....

Thanks....!
I hope all the queries are sorted now?
Yes .. thanks a lot Anurag...

Anurag. can u plz see one ques...

https://www.beatthegmat.com/gmat-prep-t76519.html#342131

Thanks...!
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3835
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:00 pmFollowed by: 523 members
Location: Milpitas, CA
Thanked: 1854 times
GMAT Score:770

by Anurag@Gurome » Tue Feb 22, 2011 3:54 am
btgyes wrote:
Yes .. thanks a lot Anurag...

Anurag. can u plz see one ques...

https://www.beatthegmat.com/gmat-prep-t76519.html#342131

Thanks...!
Great! Thanks.
Anurag Mairal, Ph.D., MBA
GMAT Expert, Admissions and Career Guidance
Gurome, Inc.
1-800-566-4043 (USA)

Join Our Facebook Groups
GMAT with Gurome
https://www.facebook.com/groups/272466352793633/
Admissions with Gurome
https://www.facebook.com/groups/461459690536574/
Career Advising with Gurome
https://www.facebook.com/groups/360435787349781/
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Legendary Member
Posts: 586
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:38 amFollowed by: 5 members
Thanked: 31 times
GMAT Score:730

by rohu27 » Thu Feb 24, 2011 6:04 am
im not able to see any image. i see a frog instead. am i hallucinating? :D
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Post new topic Post Reply