Some will say it’s a heinous act committed by serial cheaters. Others will say it’s a minor violation and that “everybody does it.” And still others will say it’s an inadvertent mistake that happened to run afoul of a technicality. What does it mean for you, a GMAT aspirant?

**Be careful about honest mistakes that could be construed as cheating!**

While the NFL isn’t going to kick the Patriots out of the Super Bowl, the Graduate Management Admission Council won’t hesitate to cancel your score if you’re found to be in violation of its test administration rules. So beware these rules that honest examinees have accidentally violated:

**1. You cannot bring “testing aids” into the test center.**

Don’t bring an Official Guide, a test prep book, or study notes into the test center with you. You may want to have notes while you’re waiting to check in, but if you’re caught with “study material” in your hands during one of your 8-minute breaks – which has happened to students who were rearranging items in their lockers to grab an apple or a granola bar – you’ll be in violation of the rule, and GMAC has cancelled scores for this in the past. Don’t take that risk! Leave watches, cell phones, and study aids in your car or at home so that there’s no chance you violate this rule simply by having a forbidden item in your hand during a break.

**2. You cannot talk to anyone about the test during your administration.**

You’ll be at the test center with other people, and someone’s break might coincide with yours. Holding a restroom door or crossing paths near a drinking fountain, you might be tempted to socially ask “how is your test going?” or sympathetically mention “man these tests are hard.” But since those innocent phrases could be seen as “talking about the test” you would technically be in violation of the rule, and GMAC has cancelled scores for this in the past. Your 8-minute break isn’t the time to make new friends – don’t take the risk of being caught talking about the test.

You know that you’re not a cheater, but as most New Englanders feel today it’s very possible to be considered a cheater if you end up on the wrong side of a rule, however accidentally. Learn from the lessons of test-takers before you: avoid these common mistakes and ensure that the score you earn is the score you’ll keep.

Are you studying for the GMAT? We have free online GMAT seminars running all the time. And, be sure to find us on Facebook and Google+, and follow us on Twitter!

*By Brian Galvin*

Thou doth protest too much. Meaning:

*We all think we can write verbal questions better than the authors of the test.*

When it comes to GMAT verbal questions, we critique but don’t solve Critical Reasoning problems, we correct rather than solve Sentence Correction problems, and we try to write but don’t thoroughly read Reading Comprehension questions. And this hubris can be the death of your GMAT verbal score, even if it comes from a good place and a good knowledge base.

Wander into a GMAT class or scan a GMAT forum and you’ll see and hear tons of comments like:

“I feel like the question should say *people* and not *individuals*.”

“I would never use the word imply like that.”

“I don’t think that’s the right idiom.”

“I would have gotten it right if it said X…I think it should have said X.”

Or you’ll hear questions like:

“But what if answer choice D said *and* and not *or*?”

“If that word were different would my answer choice be right? And if so would it be more right than B?”

And while these questions often come from a genuine desire to learn, they more often come from a place of frustration, and they’re the type of hypothetical thinking that doesn’t lend itself to progress on this test. Even if it’s not always perfect, **the GMAT chooses its words very carefully**. When the word in the Reading Comprehension correct answer choice isn’t the word you were hoping it would be (but it’s close), they picked that word for a reason – it makes the problem more difficult. When none of the Sentence correction answer choices match the way you or your classmates would have phrased it, that’s not a mistake – that’s an intentional device to make you eliminate four flawed answers and keep the strange-but-correct one. The GMAT can’t always match your expectations, not just because doing so would make it too easy but also because it’s trying to test other critical-thinking skills. It has to test your ability to see less-clear relationships, to make logical decisions amidst uncertainty, to find the least of five evils, and it has to punish you for jumping to unwarranted conclusions.

GMAT verbal is constructed carefully, and as you study it you have to learn how to answer questions more effectively, not to write better questions. The only thing you get to write on test day is the AWA essay; everything else you must answer on the GMAT’s terms, not on your own, so as you study you have to resist the urge to protest the problem and instead learn to see the value in it.

So as you study, remember your mission. Your job isn’t to find a flaw with the logic of the question, but rather with the logic of the four incorrect answers. When you get mad at a wrong answer, use that energy to attack the next problem with the lessons you learned from that frustrating mistake. Take the GMAT as it is and don’t try to justify your mistakes or fight the test.

Save your writing energy for the AWA essay; on the verbal section, you only get to answer the problem in front of you. When you accept that the test is what it is and commit yourself to learning how to attack it through critical thinking and not just general angst, you’ll have a competitive advantage over most frustrated examinees. Think like the testmaker, but don’t try to be the testmaker.

Are you studying for the GMAT? We have free online GMAT seminars running all the time. And, be sure to find us on Facebook and Google+, and follow us on Twitter!

*By Brian Galvin*

As a GMAT student who wants to make 2015 the year of the elite MBA acceptance letter, how can you be among the disappointingly-few who keep up this week’s excellence exuberance?

Keep it simple.

The problem with most New Year’s Resolutions and GMAT study plan’s is that they’re far too ambitious. Hatched over eggnog and 7-10 days of paid vacation, these plans are destined to failure because they’re way too much for anyone to adhere to in the long term. They often read like:

“I’ll get up 90 minutes before I normally do and study over a healthy breakfast, then after work three days a week I’ll go the library, and every Saturday I’ll take a practice test and spend Sunday mornings with a tutor reviewing it all.”

“I’ll take a leave of absence from work so that I can study 40-50 hours a week for three months, then I’ll take the GMAT in the spring and get a high score, then volunteer all summer to demonstrate my community service, then apply round 1 to Harvard/Stanford/Wharton, and maybe throw Yale or London Business School in the mix as a safety school.”

“I’ll turn off my smartphone and give up social media for the next few months, study at least 90 minutes a day, and….”

And the problem with those study plans? You’ll resent them within a week, just like most New Year’s Resolvers resent their no-carb / all-lettuce diets and overpriced gym memberships. You have to come up with a study plan that:

1) You can fit in to your lifestyle so that you can keep to it.

This means that you factor in your hobbies and, yes, limitations. If you’re not a morning person, you won’t keep to a schedule of studying every morning before work. If you thrive on a good workout, giving up your soccer league or gym regimen completely won’t work either. And friends, family, work functions, etc. are always important.

2) You can build on.

The best study plans are those that start a bit smaller and build into something more robust, like a “Couch to 5k (or marathon)” training program. If you want to run a marathon, you start with a couple miles and build up to 18-20 milers as your body is ready for it. If you want a 700 on the GMAT, you start with a handful of study sessions per week and build into longer sessions when they’re more purposeful and you know what you’re using the time to work on.

3) Focus on achievement, not activity.

Veritas Prep emphasizes the famous John Wooden quote “never mistake activity for achievement”, meaning that simply spending 4 hours studying Sentence Correction, for example, isn’t going to get the job done; it’s the quality of study that helps. So hold yourself accountable for goals, not time spent. Think in terms of “I want to do 25 SC problems focusing on major error categories first, then thinking of logical meaning second”

or “I’m going to practice applying right triangle principles to geometry problems” or “I’m going to do a timed drill to force myself to think more quickly.” Give your study sessions themes and achievement goals, and they’ll not only be more productive but they’ll also be more fun.

So what does a productive, sustainable study schedule look like?

*It’s firm but flexible. Plan to study at least 3 times per week, but let yourself move Tuesday’s session to Wednesday if you get tickets to a Tuesday concert or you work late and just need to blow off steam with a run. You have to get those sessions in, but you don’t have to resent them or go through the motions just to stick to your (probably arbitrary) schedule.

*It’s achievement-driven. Your study sessions have themes and goals, not just durations.

*It’s reasonable. Know yourself and your preferences and limitations.

Very few people can study for hours every day, so schedule something you can commit to – a few sessions per week, maybe two weeknights and one weekend morning, or something that you know you can hold yourself accountable to.

*It’s custom-built. Think about when you’ve been most successful in other academic pursuits and try to replicate that. Do you study better in the morning? In the evening? With friends or music? Alone? After a good workout? With a snack? Build your plan around your own successes.

*It’s built to expand. 2-3 study sessions a week may very well not be enough for you, so be honest with yourself once you’ve up and running. Do you need more time to master algebra? Do you need to build in a class or On Demand program to supplement your practice? Do you have enough time for practice tests? Once you’re committed to a bsseline study regimen, you need to be honest with yourself about what you need, and at that point it’s often easier to bite the bullet and dive into something more intense.

But in the beginning, make sure you have a schedule/plan that you won’t quit before your neighbors even take their Christmas lights down.

January is a great time to make plans for self-improvement, but most of those plans never live to see February. To ensure that your New YEAR’s Resolution to succeed on the GMAT isn’t limited to one month or less, resolve to plan on something that will last. If you can do that, we’ll see you back in this GMAT Tip of the Week every Friday until you have that score you’re looking for.

Are you studying for the GMAT? We have free online GMAT seminars running all the time. And, be sure to find us on Facebook and Google+, and follow us on Twitter!

*By Brian Galvin*

If your New Year’s Resolution is to make 2015 the year that you ace the GMAT, you can take a lesson from this time of year. The darkest points always give way to enlightenment, and that secret will get you through some very difficult GMAT problems. There are two very common structures for challenging GMAT quant problems:

1) It looks easy, but the last step or two are tricky.

2) It looks impossible, but once you’ve found the right foothold it gets easy quickly.

This post is all about #2, those problems where it looks incredibly dark right up until that moment that you reach enlightenment. Veritas Prep’s own Jason Sun recounts the first quant question en route to his official 780 score: “I stared at a nasty sequence problem for probably 45 seconds with my jaw open thinking ‘there’s no way to solve this’. Then I remembered the strategy of starting with small numbers and finding a pattern, and 10 seconds later the answer was obvious.”

That’s common on the GMAT, and step one for you is to realize that problems are designed to look like that. When things look darkest, have faith that they’ll clear up. Here are a few ways that that occurs on the GMAT.

**Calculations look awful, but work themselves out before you get to the answer.**

Consider this problem:

If the product of the integers a, b, c, and d is 1,155 and if a > b > c > d > 1, then

what is the value of a – d?

(A) 2

(B) 8

(C) 10

(D) 11

(E) 14

Upon first glance, 1155 and four variables might look really messy. But take the first step – you know it’s divisible b y 11 and that you have to factor it. 1100 is 11*100 and 55 is 11*5, so you have 11*105. And 105 is much easier to divide out since it ends in a 5. That’s 21*5, which is 7*3*5. Once you’ve factored it down, it’s 11*7*5*3, which are all prime, so when 1 has to be less than any of these, that’s exactly a, b, c, and d. You need the biggest minus the smallest, and 11-3 is 8. What may have looked like a big, intimidating number was actually not so bad once you took the first step. It’s always darkest before the light goes on.

**The problem is abstract, but comes into focus when you test small numbers.**

What is the units digit of 2^40?

(A) 2

(B) 4

(C) 6

(D) 8

(E) 0

2^40 is an insanely large number. You’ll never be able to calculate it. But if you take the first few steps with small numbers, you’ll see a pattern:

2^1 = 2

2^2 = 4

2^3 = 8

2^4 = 16

2^5 = 32

2^6 = 64

2^7 = 128

2^8 = 256

And since you only care about the units digits, you should see a pretty firm pattern emerging. 2, 4, 8, 6, 2, 4, 8, 6. If you repeat through this pattern, you’ll see that every 4th number is a 6, and since 2^40 will be the finish of the tenth run of that every-fourth-number cycle, the answer has to be 6. The GMAT loves to give you problems with big or abstract numbers that seem unfathomable, but if you test properties with small numbers you can often find a pattern or some other way to determine what you have.

**It’s always the last place you look.**

Another common theme is specific to geometry problems – the GMAT often constructs them so that a seemingly irrelevant piece of information (like the measure of a far, far away angle, or the area of a figure when you’re only solving for the length of one line) is crucial to the answer…it’s just that you don’t even consider filling in that piece of information that seems so far away from what you’re really trying to solve for. So FILL IN EVERYTHING! Even if it seems irrelevant, fill in every piece of information you can solve for and you’ll give yourself a better shot of finding that unlikely relationship that cracks the code.

**You’re not supposed to be able to solve for it, but you can estimate or use answer choices.**

Plenty of GMAT questions beg you to do some horrifying math, but if you look at the answer choices ahead of time you can see that they’re either spread incredibly far apart and ready to be estimated or they have easy-to-plug-in properties that allow you to just test them. It’s crucial to remember that the GMAT isn’t a test of pure math, but of problem solving using math. Heed this advice: if you think the calculations are too detailed to do in two minutes, you’re probably right. That’s when you should look to estimate or backsolve.

So if your GMAT study sessions are growing longer as the daylight does, keep this wisdom in mind. It always looks darkest before sunrise, and the same is true of many tough GMAT quant problems. As you struggle through practice problems, pay attention to all those times that the solution wasn’t nearly as bad as it seemed it would have to be upon first glance.

*By Brian Galvin*

The other answer we can give you? Sarah Koenig would do pretty darned well on Data Sufficiency questions, where often it’s just as important to determine what you don’t know as it is to determine what you do. While the internet buzzed with theories certain that Adnan did it, that Jay did it, that a recently-released serial killer did it, Koenig was often ridiculed for being so noncommittal in her assessment of whether Adnan is guilty or not. But that’s an important mentality on Data Sufficiency questions, as one of the common ways that the GMAT will bait you is giving you information that seems overwhelmingly sufficient (The Nisha call! The phone was in Leakin Park!) but that leaves just enough doubt (Why did Jay’s story change so much?) that you can’t prove a definitive answer. And like the jury in the Serial case, we all have that tendency to jump to conclusions (“well if he didn’t kill her, who did?”) and filter out information that we don’t like (Christina Gutierrez’s performance…). This Serial-themed Data Sufficiency problem should exemplify (forgive the lack of subscript formatting, but a sequence problem in a Serial blog post seemed fitting):

The infinite (serial) sequence a1, a2, …, an, … is such that a1 = x, a2 = y, a3 = z,a4 = 3 and an = a(n-4) for n > 4. What is the sum of the first 98 terms of the sequence?

(1) x = 5

(2) y + z = 2

As people unpack the mystery in this problem, they start to see what’s going on. If an = a(n-4), then each term equals the term that came four prior. So the sequence really goes:

x, y, z, 3, x, y, z, 3, x, y, z, 3…

So although it looks like a pretty massive mystery, really you’re trying to figure out x, y, and z because 3 is just 3. And here’s a common way of thinking:

Statement 1 is not sufficient, but it gets you one of the terms. And Statement 2 is not sufficient but it gets you two more. So when you put them together, you know that the sum of one trip through the 4-term sequence is 5 + 2 + 3 = 10, so you should be able to extrapolate that to the whole thing, right? Just figure out how many trips through will get you to term 98 and you have it; like the Syed jury, you have the motive and the timeline and the cell phone records and Jay’s testimony, so the answer has to be C. Right?

But let’s interview Sarah Koenig here:

Sarah: The pieces all seem to fit but I’m just not so sure. Statement 2 looks really bad for him. If we can connect those dots for y and z, and we already have x, we should have all variables converted to numbers. Literally it all adds up. But I feel like I’m missing something. I can definitely get the sum of the first 4 terms and of the first 8 terms and of the first 12 terms; those are 10, and 20, and 30. But what about the number 98?

And that’s where Sarah Koenig’s trademark thoughtfulness-over-opinionatedry comes in. There is a giant hole in “Answer choice C’s case” against this problem. You can get the sequence in blocks of 4, but 98 is two past the last multiple of 4 (which is 96). The 97th term is easy: that’s x = 5. But the 98th term is tricky: it’s y, and we don’t know y unless we have z with it ( we just have the sum of the two). So we can’t solve for the 98th term. The answer has to be E – we just don’t know.

Now if you’ve heard yesterday’s episode, think about Dana’s “think of all the things that would have to have gone wrong, all the bad luck” rundown. “He lent his car and his phone to the guy who pointed the finger at him. That sucks for him. On the day that his girlfriend went missing. That’s awful luck…” And in real life she may be right – that’s a lot of probability to overcome. But on the GMAT they hand pick the questions. On this problem you can solve for the 97th term (up to 96 there are just blocks of 4 terms, and you know that each block sums to 10, and the 97th term is known as 5) or the 99th term (same thing, but add the sum of the 98th and 99th terms which you know is 2). But the GMAT hand-selected the tricky question just like Koenig hand-selected the Adnan Syed case for its mystery. GMAT Data Sufficiency questions are like Serial…it pays to be skeptical as you examine the evidence. It pays to think like Sarah Koenig. Unlike Jay, the statements will always be true and they’ll always be consistent, but like Serial in general you’ll sometimes find that you just don’t have enough information to definitively answer the question on everyone’s lips. So do your journalistic due diligence and look for alternative explanations (Don did it!). Next thing you know you’ll be “Stepping Out!!!” of the test center with a high GMAT score.

This message presented by Mail Chimp. Send us a high five.

*By Brian Galvin*

However…

There are three knee-jerk questions that you should plug (if not chug) into your brain to ask yourself every time you see a Min/Max problem before you ask that fourth question “What’s my strategy?”:

- Do the numbers have to be integers?
- Is zero a possible value?
- Are repeat numbers possible?

In the Veritas Prep Word Problems lesson we refer to these problems as “scenario-driven” Min/Max problems precisely because of the above questions. The scenario created by the problem drives the whole thing, related mainly to those three above questions. Consider these four prompts and ask yourself which ones can definitively be answered:

*#1: “Four friends go fishing and catch a total of 10 fish. How many fish did the friend with the highest total catch?”*

*#2: “Four friends go fishing and catch a total of 10 fish. If no two friends caught the same number of fish, how many fish did the friend with the highest total catch?”*

*#3: “Four friends go fishing and catch a total of 10 fish. If each friend caught at least one fish but no two friends caught the same number, how many fish did the friend with the highest total catch?”*

*#4: “Four friends go fishing and catch a total of 10 pounds of fish. If each friend caught at least one fish but no two friends caught the same number, how many pounds of fish did the friend with the highest total catch?”*

Hopefully you can see the progression as this set builds. In the first problem, there’s clearly no way to tell. Did one friend catch all ten? Did everyone catch at least two and two friends tied with 3? You just don’t know. But then it gets interesting, based on the questions you need to ask yourself on all of these.

With #2, two big restrictions are in play. Fish must be integers, so you’re only dealing with the 11 integers 0 through 10. And if no two friends caught the same number there’s a limited number of unique values that can add up to 10. But the catch on this one should be evident after you’ve read #3. Zero *IS* possible in this case, so while the totals could be 1, 2, 3, and 4 (guaranteeing the answer of 4), if the lowest person could have caught 0 (that’s where “min/max” comes in – to maximize the top value you want to minimize the other values) there’s also the possibility for 0, 1, 2, and 7. Because the zero possibility was still lurking out there, there’s not quite enough information to solve this one. And that’s why you always have to ask yourself “is 0 possible?”.

#3 should showcase that. If 0 is no longer a possibility *AND* the numbers have to be integers *AND* the numbers can’t repeat, then the only option is 1 (the new min value since 0 is gone), 2 (because you can’t match 1), 3, and 4. The highest total is 4.

And #4 shows why the seemingly-irrelevant backstory of “friends going fishing” is so important. Pounds of fish can be nonintegers, but fish themselves have to be integers. So even though this prompt looks very similar to #3, because we’re no longer limited to integers it’s very easy for the values to not repeat and still give wildly different max values (1, 2, 3, and 4 or 1.5, 2, 3, and 3.5 for example).

As you can see, the scenario really drives the answer, although the fourth question “What is my strategy?” will almost always require some real work. Let’s take a look at a couple questions from the Veritas Prep Question Bank to illustrate.

**Question 1:**

Four workers from an international charity were selling shirts at a local event yesterday. Did one of the workers sell at least three shirts yesterday at the event?

(1) Together they sold 8 shirts yesterday at the event.

(2) No two workers sold the same number of shirts.

(A) Statement (1) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient to answer the question asked

(B) Statement (2) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient to answer the question asked

(C) Both statements (1) and (2) TOGETHER are sufficient to answer the question asked; but NEITHER statement ALONE is sufficient

(D) EACH statement ALONE is sufficient to answer the question asked

(E) Statements (1) and (2) TOGETHER are NOT sufficient to answer the question asked, and additional data specific to the problem are needed

Before you begin strategizing, ask yourself the three major questions:

1) Do the values have to be integers? YES – that’s why the problem chose shirts.

2) Is zero possible? YES – it’s not prohibited, so that means you have to consider zero as a min value.

3) Can the numbers repeat? That’s why statement 2 is there. With the given information and with statement 1, numbers can repeat. That allows you to come up with the setup 2, 2, 2, and 2 for statement 1 (giving the answer “NO”) or 1, 2, 2, and 3 (giving the answer “YES” and proving this insufficient).

But when statement 2 says on its own that, NO, the numbers cannot repeat, that’s a much more impactful statement than most test-takers realize. Taking statement 2 alone, you have four integers that cannot repeat (and cannot be negative), so the smallest setup you can find is 0, 1, 2, and 3 – and with that someone definitely sold at least three shirts. Statement 2 is sufficient with really no calculations whatsoever, but with careful attention to the ever-important questions.

**Question 2:**

Last year, Company X paid out a total of $1,050,000 in salaries to its 21 employees. If no employee earned a salary that is more than 20% greater than any other employee, what is the lowest possible salary that any one employee earned?

(A) $40,000

(B) $41,667

(C) $42,000

(D) $50,000

(E) $60,000

Here ask yourself the same questions:

1) The numbers do not have to be integers.

2) Zero is theoretically possible (but probably constrained by the 20% difference restriction)

3) Numbers absolutely can repeat (which will be very important)

4) What’s your strategy? If you want the LOWEST possible single salary, then use your answer to #3 (they can repeat) and give the other 20 salaries the maximum. That way your calculation looks like:

x + 20(1.2x) = 1,050,000

Which breaks out to 25x = 1,050,000, and x = 42000. And notice how important the answer to #3 was – by knowing that numbers could repeat, you were able to quickly put together a smart strategy to minimize one single value.

The larger lesson is crucial here, though – these problems are often (but not always) fairly basic mathematically, but derive their difficulty from a situation that limits some options or allows for more than you’d think via integer restrictions, the possibility of zero, and the possibility of repeat values. Ask yourself these four questions, and your answer to the first three especially will maximize your efficiency on the strategic portion of the problem.

*By Brian Galvin*

Why?

There are certain combinations of numbers that just have to be top of mind when you take the GMAT. The quantitative section goes quickly for almost everyone, and so if you know the following combinations you can save extremely valuable time.

Based on Pythagorean Theorem, a^2 + b^2 = c^2, these four ratios come up frequently with right triangles:

a_______b________c

3_______4________5

5______12_______13

x_______x______x*(sqrt 2)___(in an isosceles right triangle)

x____x*(sqrt3)___2x________(in a 30-60-90 triangle)

These four ratios come up frequently when right triangles are present, so they’re about as high as you can get on the “should I memorize this?” scale. But just as important is using these ratios wisely and appropriately, so make sure that when you see the opportunity for them you keep in mind these two important considerations:

1) **These “Pythagorean Triplets” are RATIOS, not just exact numbers.**

So a 3-4-5 right triangle could also be a 6-8-10 or 15-20-25, and an isosceles right triangle could very well have dimensions a = 4(sqrt 2), b = 4(sqrt 2), and c = 8 (which would be one of the short sides 4(sqrt 2) multiplied by (sqrt 2) ). An average level question might pair 5 and 12 with you and reward you for quickly seeing 13, while a harder question could make the ratio 15, 36, 39 to reward you for seeing the ratio and not just the exact numbers you memorized.

Similarly, people often memorize the 45-45-90 and 30-60-90 triangles so specifically that the test can completely destroy them by making the “wrong” side carry the radical. If the short sides are 4 and 4, you’ll naturally see the hypotenuse as 4(sqrt 2). But if they were to ask you for the length of the hypotenuse and tell you that the area of the triangle is 4 (so 1/2 * a * b = 4, and with a equal to b you’d have 1/2 a^2 = 4, so a^2 = 8 and the short side then measures 2(sqrt 2)), it’s difficult for many to recognize that the hypotenuse could be an integer. So be careful and know that the above chart gives you *RATIOS* and not fixed numbers or fixed placements for the radical sign that denotes square root.

2) **In order to apply these ratios, you MUST know which side is the hypotenuse.**

In a classic GMAT trap, they could easily ask you:

What is the perimeter of triangle ABC?

(1) Side AB measures 5 meters.

(2) Side AC measures 12 meters.

And it’s common (in fact a similar problem shows that about 55% of people make this exact mistake) to think “oh well this is a 5-12-13, so both statements together prove that side BC is 13 and I can calculate that the perimeter is 30 meters.” But wait – 5 and 12 only lead to a third side of 13 when you know that 5 and 12 are the short sides. If you don’t know that, the triangle could fit the Pythagorean Theorem with 12 as the hypotenuse, meaning that you’re solving for side b:

5^2 + b^2 = 12^2, so 25 + b^2 = 144, and b then equals the square root of 119.

So while it’s critical that you memorize these four right triangle ratios, it’s just as important that you don’t fall so in love with them that you use them even when they don’t apply.

Important caveats aside, knowing these ratios is crucial for your ability to work quickly on the quant section. For example, a problem that says something like:

In triangle XYZ, side XY, which runs perpendicular to side YZ, measures 24 inches in length. If the longest side of the the triangle is 26 inches, what is the area, in square inches, of triangle XYZ?

(A) 100

(B) 120

(C) 140

(D) 150

(E) 165

Those employing Pythagorean Theorem are in for a fight, calculating a^2 + 24^2 = 26^2, then finding the length of a and calculating the area. But those who know the trusty 5-12-13 triplet can quickly see that if 24 = 12*2 and 26 = 13*2, then the other short side is 5*2 which is 10, and the area then is 1/2 * 10 * 24, which is 120. Knowing these ratios, this is a 30 second problem; without them it could be a slog of over 2 minutes, easily, with a higher degree of difficulty due to the extensive calculations. So on today of all days, Friday, the 5th day of the 12th month, keep that 13th in there as a lucky charm.

On the GMAT, these ratios will get you out of lots of trouble.

*By Brian Galvin*

Watch this video to learn how you can find hidden hints within statements and how that can help you avoid any GMAT traps. You don’t want to leave any points on the table.

*By Brian Galvin*

Arguably the single most common trap the authors set for you is evident in this question, which we invite you to answer before you read the rest of this post:

Uncle Bruce is baking chocolate chip cookies. He has 36 ounces of dough (with no chocolate) and 15 ounces of chocolate. How much chocolate is left over if he uses all the dough but only wants the cookies to consist of 20% chocolate?

(A) 3

(B) 6

(C) 7.2

(D) 7.8

(E) 9

Now, we don’t want to gloss over the math here but there’s plenty of opportunity to practice with word problems and ratios in other posts and resources, so let’s cut to the true takeaway here. Most students will correctly arrive at the amount of chocolate used by employing a method similar to:

If the 36 ounces of dough are to be 80% of the total weight, then 36 = 4/5 * total.

That means that the total weight is 45 ounces, and so when we subtract out the 36 ounces of dough, there’s 9 ounces of chocolate in the cookies.

So…the answer is E. Right?

Wrong. Go back and double-check the question – the question asks for how much chocolate is LEFT OVER, not how much is USED. To be correct, you’d need to go back to the 15 original ounces of chocolate, subtract the 9 used, and correctly answer that 6 were left.

What’s the trap? GMAT questions are frequently set up so that you can answer the wrong question. If a question asks you to solve for y, it typically makes it easier to first solve for x…and then x is a trap answer. If a question asks you to strengthen a conclusion, the best way to weaken it is likely to be an answer choice. If a question asks for the maximum value, the minimum is going to be a trap.

*The most common wrong answer to any problem on the GMAT is the right answer to the wrong question.*

So take precaution – to avoid this trap, make sure that you:

- Circle the variable for which you’re solving, or write down the question at the top of your work.
- Jot a question mark at the top of your noteboard on test day, and tap it with your pen before you submit your answer to double check “did I answer the right question?”
- Keep track of your units in word problems (minutes vs. seconds, amount used vs. amount remaining) and double check the units of your answer against the question
- Make note of every time you make that mistake in practice, and as a more general tip be sure not to write off silly mistakes as just “silly mistakes”. If you made them in practice, you’re susceptible to them on the test, so make a note to watch out for them particularly if you’ve made the same mistake twice.

Few outcomes are more disappointing than doing all the work correctly but still getting the question wrong. The GMAT doesn’t do partial credit, so on a question like this falling for the trap is just as bad as not knowing how to get started. Get credit for what you know how to do – make sure you pause before you submit your answer to make sure that it answers the proper question!

*By Brian Galvin*

Wait for it.

And that one phrase can totes make your GMAT score supes high. Like, for real.

How?

Perhaps the best example comes from an all-staff email sent at Veritas Prep headquarters this week regarding the holiday vacation schedule. It began “With pumpkin spice season nearing its apex, it’s…” Seeing that introduction, multiple Veritas Prep staffers commented later that “it’s” after the comma made them nervous, as the possessive of “season” is *its*, not *it’s* (which grammatically means “it is”).

Now later in that sentence it became clear that the intention was “it is” (…”it’s time to start making holiday vacation plans.”), but the fact that so many Sentence Correction experts were on the edge of their seats just seeing that contraction “it’s” next to a possessive should demonstrate for you how to become great at Sentence Correction. To be efficient and effective with Sentence Correction, it’s helpful to anticipate what types of errors you might see, rather than simply sit back and wait for them to appear. Those who are most successful at Sentence Correction read sentences looking for signs of potential danger; they’re proactive as they search for likely Decision Points. For example, if you were to read the introduction:

Particularly for a leadership or management role, it is important that a candidate be both…

your senses should be heightened for parallel structure with “both X and Y,” number one, and secondly you should be acutely aware that the word “be” precedes the word “both,” so there is a very high likelihood that there will be an extraneous “be” after the word “and” to follow. In other words, when you see “both,” wait for it…where’s the “and,” and is the portion directly after it parallel to the first portion?

Correct:

(A) qualified to perform the duties of most subordinates and able to inspire subordinates to perform those duties at a higher level.

Incorrect:

(B) qualified to perform the duties of most subordinates and be able to inspire subordinates to perform those duties at a higher level.

While the grammar of this problem is crucial, true expertise comes from knowing where to focus your attention and expend your mental energy. Analyzing every word of every answer choice is exhausting, so the experts train themselves to see clues and “…wait for it” focusing back in on the parts of the sentence most highly correlated with errors. Clues can be:

Signals of parallel structure: both, either, neither, not only

Signals of verb tense: since, from, until

Signals of pronoun or subject/verb agreement: it, they, its, their

To train yourself to spot those clues that tell you to “wait for it…”, pay attention not only (wait for it…) to the grammatical reasons that an answer choice is right or wrong in your homework, but also (here it is…is it parallel?) to the signals outside the underline that required the application of that grammar. Sentence Correction is to an extent about “what do you know” but to really excel it also has to be about “what do you do” – the clues and signals that tell you what to look for and where to spend your time and energy.

*By Brian Galvin*