PrepTest 112, Section 3, Question 3
Muscular strength is a limited resource, and athletic(39 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- AOnly champion athletes(7 more words not shown)
- BSuperior muscular strength(10 more words not shown)
- CNo athlete can(10 more words not shown)
- DThe differences in(8 more words not shown)
- EAthletic techniques help(5 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Technique can help two equally strong people get different results. Picture a baseball pitcher using the legs and the rest of the body well, compared with someone relying only on an awkward arm motion. That helps me understand the claim that technique lets an athlete use a limited amount of strength efficiently.
The author adds that top athletes don't differ greatly in strength. Let's accept that comparison; it doesn't mean their strength is exactly equal. The author then concludes that superior technique is required to become a champion.
Is that definitely required? I'd want to know whether some other advantage could decide the competition. Imagine a table-tennis player whose opponents become so intimidated that they play unusually badly. That's a hypothetical possibility, not a claim about how champions normally win. And simply mentioning finesse wouldn't settle the objection, since finesse could itself be part of athletic technique.
What we’re looking for
But we aren't asked to attack the argument. We need its main conclusion. The claims about limited strength, efficient technique, and similar strength levels are offered to support the requirement we were questioning: to become a champion, an athlete must have superior mastery of athletic techniques.
Working the answers
- A
This restricts superior technique to champions. The argument instead requires champions to have superior technique. Someone could master the techniques and still lose to another athlete who also mastered them. In that situation, the author's requirement could hold even though A's claim about only champions having that mastery would fail.
- B
Strength and mastery of technique aren't the same. The author says the top athletes' strength levels are fairly similar and uses that fact to emphasize how they use their strength. B makes superior strength the requirement, replacing the very feature the conclusion identifies.
- CCorrect
Saying an athlete cannot become a champion without superior mastery says that mastery is required. That's exactly the author's point. The other claims are reasons for accepting it, even if we have questions about whether those reasons fully establish it.
C doesn't say mastery guarantees a championship. An athlete can meet a requirement and still fail to win. It preserves the direction and the limited claim the conclusion actually makes.
- D
This is a stated reason for the conclusion. If top athletes aren't far apart in strength, the author thinks technique must supply the necessary advantage. Repeating the strength comparison leaves out the claim that comparison is being used to establish.
- E
This gives the opening reason technique matters: it helps use a limited resource efficiently. The argument goes beyond that benefit to claim superior mastery is required for a championship. E stops at the supporting observation instead of reaching the main point.
More Role/Main Point questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Role/Main Point questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.