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

Redeem

bad fisherman

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:55 am
Thanked: 12 times

bad fisherman

by nikhilkatira » Mon Aug 02, 2010 4:14 am
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.

Please answer with explanations for wrong choices.
Best,
Nikhil H. Katira
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 8:50 am
Thanked: 29 times
Followed by:3 members

by diebeatsthegmat » Mon Aug 02, 2010 4:23 am
nikhilkatira 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.

Please answer with explanations for wrong choices.
answer is D
A is out of scope because the question we care is why now Samuel couldnt catch as many fishes as other
B is also out of scope
C just explained the reason why he didnt catch many fishes, however it couldnt weaken the conclusion that he's a bad fisher
D is what we need. he didnt catch many fish because of using the EXPERIMENTAL bait, not because of being a bad fisher. so weaken the conclusion
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:55 am
Thanked: 12 times

by nikhilkatira » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:05 am
diebeatsthegmat wrote:
nikhilkatira 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.

Please answer with explanations for wrong choices.
answer is D
A is out of scope because the question we care is why now Samuel couldnt catch as many fishes as other
B is also out of scope
C just explained the reason why he didnt catch many fishes, however it couldnt weaken the conclusion that he's a bad fisher
D is what we need. he didnt catch many fish because of using the EXPERIMENTAL bait, not because of being a bad fisher. so weaken the conclusion
He caught fewer fishes because he was sick....so how can conclusion remain same ?
Best,
Nikhil H. Katira
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 4:41 am
Thanked: 7 times

by gmat1011 » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:00 am
Bad fisherman ---> because ---> he didn't catch fish in the same numbers as the others though he spent the same amount of time on the boat

Using "experimental" bait doesn't automatically mean the bait was worse than what others were using... it could have been better quality, but may be he didn't catch (though he spent the same amount of time as others) as he was in fact a bad fisherman. I don't think D does it.

C looks better to me. He didn't catch because he was sick and thus did not spend the same amount of time trying to catch fish as the others. So one can't compare and say he is worse than the others who got more time
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:55 am
Thanked: 12 times

by nikhilkatira » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:05 am
Source :https://www.platinumgmat.com/practice_gm ... ion_id=600

explanation
for Option C
On first glance, this looks like a good answer. However, it does not consider whether Samuel's teammates were sick during the same period. Perhaps one of Samuel's teammates was sick for two weeks.

for option D
This answer highlights something that made Samuel's fishing performance uniquely different than his teammates. Moreover, Samuel did not make the choice to fish with alternative bait--his captain ordered him to do it. If Samuel made the choice to fish with alternative bait, it would be his poor fishing judgment that would be at fault. Similarly, the answer makes clear that no other fisherman on Samuel's boat faced the same predicament.
Best,
Nikhil H. Katira
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1460
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:28 am
Thanked: 135 times
Followed by:7 members

by selango » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:10 am
IMO D.This provides the alternative reason.

Option C provides alternate reason..But it states that samuel fell sick only for a week and did not catch any fish only during this time (ie) 1 week.The team spent 4 months fishing.If samuel catch fewer fish in remaining period of time,then it strengthen the argument.
--Anand--
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:55 am
Thanked: 12 times

by nikhilkatira » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:21 am
selango wrote:IMO D.This provides the alternative reason.

Option C provides alternate reason..But it states that samuel fell sick only for a week and did not catch any fish only during this time (ie) 1 week.The team spent 4 months fishing.If samuel catch fewer fish in remaining period of time,then it strengthen the argument.


how can you assume the bold part ?
Best,
Nikhil H. Katira
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 4:41 am
Thanked: 7 times

by gmat1011 » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:24 am
well if he knew the bait wasn't as good then it wouldn't be "experimental" would it? so even he had taken it of his own volition without the captain's orders, his "poor judgment" cannot be faulted as you suggest...


I don't know --- D forces you to assume "different" means being put at a disadvantage. which may not have been the case...
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:46 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:570

by reply2spg » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:26 am
Premise - 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.

Coclusion - Samuel is obviously a bad fisherman

We must stick with the premise and with conclusion. Scope is past season, five members, four months and Dutch Harbor, AK.

If we see anything out of this information then it will be out of scope
nikhilkatira 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. - Irrelevent, we do not care what he did 2 seasons ago.

B) Before becoming a fisherman, Samuel piloted a fishing boat whose members regularly caught record numbers of fish. - we don't care what Samual did before becoming a fisherman

C) While fishing this past season, Samuel fell sick for a week and did not catch any fish during this time. - Ok this is some what looks convincing. let's look closer. All 5 people were on the boat for 4 months means 16 weeks. Samual fell seek for one week and he didn't catch any fish. We do not have any information about remaining 15 weeks. What if he had caught maximum number of fishes in remaining 15 weeks, and because of 16th week he stood last? This scenario does not tell us that he is a bad fisherman, so eliminate this. This is what every expert call as trap game.

D) Unlike the other fishermen on his boat, at the order of the captain, Samuel fished this past season with experimental bait. - This is correct. This option tells us that entire past season Samuel alone was working at the order of captian.

E) Amongst the fishing community in Dutch Harbor, Samuel has a reputation for being an especially bad fisherman. - Out of scope.

Please answer with explanations for wrong choices.
Hope this helps.
Sudhanshu
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 4:41 am
Thanked: 7 times

by gmat1011 » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:33 am
using a certain bait at the order of the captain does not mean he did everything else at the order of the captain and for that reason he can't get to blame the captain if that is what you are suggesting
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:46 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:570

by reply2spg » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:36 am
If you said that then none of the answer choices are correct. Also who knows how long he was working on the experimental bait
gmat1011 wrote:using a certain bait at the order of the captain does not mean he did everything else at the order of the captain and for that reason he can't get to blame the captain if that is what you are suggesting
Sudhanshu
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:55 am
Thanked: 12 times

by nikhilkatira » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:43 am
reply2spg wrote:If you said that then none of the answer choices are correct. Also who knows how long he was working on the experimental bait
gmat1011 wrote:using a certain bait at the order of the captain does not mean he did everything else at the order of the captain and for that reason he can't get to blame the captain if that is what you are suggesting
I agree with gmat1011
Best,
Nikhil H. Katira
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 8:50 am
Thanked: 29 times
Followed by:3 members

by diebeatsthegmat » Mon Aug 02, 2010 9:41 am
selango wrote:IMO D.This provides the alternative reason.

Option C provides alternate reason..But it states that samuel fell sick only for a week and did not catch any fish only during this time (ie) 1 week.The team spent 4 months fishing.If samuel catch fewer fish in remaining period of time,then it strengthen the argument.
i just dont think so. i think if he is an excellent fisher, he could fish a lot fishes after recovering, whatever and however he is, good is still good, bad is still bad. furthermore, a week is a so short time for a whole 4 month of going fishing. it couldnt explain anything why he caught fewer
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:55 am
Thanked: 12 times

by nikhilkatira » Mon Aug 02, 2010 9:45 am
diebeatsthegmat wrote:
selango wrote:IMO D.This provides the alternative reason.

Option C provides alternate reason..But it states that samuel fell sick only for a week and did not catch any fish only during this time (ie) 1 week.The team spent 4 months fishing.If samuel catch fewer fish in remaining period of time,then it strengthen the argument.
i just dont think so. i think if he is an excellent fisher, he could fish a lot fishes after recovering, whatever and however he is, good is still good, bad is still bad. furthermore, a week is a so short time for a whole 4 month of going fishing. it couldnt explain anything why he caught fewer
do you think such type of reasoning appears on gmat cr ?

Sorrry for typo.....
Last edited by nikhilkatira on Mon Aug 02, 2010 10:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
Best,
Nikhil H. Katira
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:46 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:570

by reply2spg » Mon Aug 02, 2010 10:04 am
Nikhil,

Can you write your specific question about this question. We will love to answer the same.
Sudhanshu
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1