Knowing when to assume and when not to...

[JOHN.T.SNIPES]

I just came across this question in a question bank and I have an issue with how it is worded. It seems to me that one could find a similar 'doubt' in a lot of questions that are not specific but that most of the time from what I can tell you are not supposed to nitpick and focus on the heart of the question.

In year x, it rained on 40% of all Mondays and 20% of all Tuesdays. On what percentage of all the weekdays in year x did it NOT rain?
(1) During year x, it rained on 10% of all Wednesdays.

(2) During year x, it did not rain on 70% of Thursdays and it did not rain on 95% of all Fridays.

This is a DS question obviously but the answer purports that it cannot be answered because we don't know on which day of the year it started and thus we do not know the exact proportion of mondays, tuesdays et cetera. If you were to take this same approach to dissecting questions you would end up answering (E) on so many of these problems and being WRONG. Am I being crazy or is there some super obvious wording that should tell me when I should try and dismantle the question and when to take it at face value. When I did the question in real time I recall thinking to myself, well there's really no way to know exactly how many M/T/W/TH/F there are, but that is not what they are ASKING.

I will try and keep my eyes peeled for questions where you could find doubt in the statements yet they still expect an answer (not [E]) but I certainly recall coming across them quite often. Any help in parsing when to nitpick and when not too would be much appreciated. Thanks.

[JohnHarris]

Hi,

Like you , one of my first thoughts was 'what about Monday AND Tuesday AND ...' or something to that affect. I think the 'real answer' to your question is, technically, if it isn't sufficient, it isn't sufficient, that is interpret the question in a strict sense. HOWEVER, if there is a legitimate interpretation of the question which then make the problem make sense, use that interpretation FOR THE ANSWERS ON TESTS.

In this particular case, I don't think there is a legitimate interpretation, i.e. you are not allowed to add 'ands' to the problem. However, look at another question here
post15358.html
The question starts out "Of the 60 animals on a certain farm, 2/3 are either cows or pigs". There are two legitimate interpretations of the statement:
(1) There are a combined total 40 [2/3 of 60] pigs and cows ...
or
(2) There are either 40 cows and nothing is known about the pigs or there are 40 pigs and nothing is know about the cows ...

If (2) is used, there is an insufficient amount of data. If (1) is used, both statements together are sufficient.

Your type of question is however, a very important one in 'real life'. In 'real life' you must make sure you are on the right wavelength and, if there are any questions in your mind about the facts on which you are going to make a decision, get the facts clear. That is one of the reasons why there is a verbal part to the tests - to try to make sure that you are giving the proper facts/information.

NOTE: My interpretation of the 'or' in the problem was based on what could be the interpretations of the problem independent of any rules which might be in affect for the test, i.e. All ors are inclusive ors.

[JOHN.T.SNIPES]

Thanks for the response. It still seems like a very undefined area but I am going to keep my eye out for future questions that seem not right and try and post them in here for thoughts.

[tim]

The bottom line is that this is a non-issue. The GMAT will always make things sufficiently clear that it will be possible to discern what they mean. The problem you posted is totally un-GMAT-like; where did it come from?

If you want some specific instructions on when to nitpick, it’s the same as when to check your work: do it whenever you can afford the time to be careful..

[navs47]

The bottom line is that this is a non-issue. The GMAT will always make things sufficiently clear that it will be possible to discern what they mean. The problem you posted is totally un-GMAT-like; where did it come from?

This is one of the problems in the FDP Question bank [Manhattan GMAT]. Tim, you're right, this is not only an un-GMAT-like problem but also very un-MGMAT-like.

I'd appreciate if Ron can comment on this question. I wasted about 30 mins trying to comprehend why I couldn't confidently answer this question in 2 mins.

Thanks

[tim]

Not really sure what you're hoping Ron will say about this one; my guess is he would say the same thing I am saying: this is indeed an uncharacteristic problem because it is so nitpicky regarding the issue of how many weekdays of each type there are in the year. The point is valid, but it's not likely you'll see such a "gotcha" type problem on the GMAT..