LSAT 112 – Section 3 – Question 03

LSAT 112 - Section 3 - Question 03

December 2001

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Target time: 1:02

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT112 S3 Q03
+LR
Main conclusion or main point +MC
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
A
4%
151
B
9%
154
C
81%
160
D
1%
151
E
6%
153
126
140
153
 +Easier 144.548 +SubsectionEasier

Muscular strength is a limited resource, and athletic techniques help to use this resource efficiently. Since top athletes do not differ greatly from each other in muscular strength, it follows that a requirement for an athlete to become a champion is a superior mastery of athletic techniques.

Summarize Argument
The author argues that for athletes to become champions, they must have a superior mastery of athletic techniques. To support this, the author tells us that high-level athletes have similar muscular strength, so strength alone doesn’t make a champion. Instead, athletic techniques help athletes use their strength more efficiently. That means that mastery of athletic techniques can act as a differentiating factor between top athletes and true champions.

Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is that “a requirement for an athlete to become a champion is a superior mastery of athletic techniques.”

A
Only champion athletes have a superior mastery of athletic techniques.
This confuses the necessary and sufficient conditions of the conclusion. Just because champions must have superior mastery, that doesn’t mean someone who isn’t a champion cannot; there may be additional requirements to be a champion.
B
Superior muscular strength is a requirement for an athlete to become a champion.
The author never actually states whether or not superior strength is required to be a champion. It may be a tempting assumption, but the argument is focused on superior mastery of techniques. Strength may or may not be required.
C
No athlete can become a champion without a superior mastery of athletic techniques.
This is a good restatement of the conclusion. The rest of the argument leads to this claim by showing that raw strength isn’t the deciding factor, and that technique can increase athletes’ efficient use of strength.
D
The differences in muscular strength between top athletes are not great.
This is not supported by anything else in the argument, so cannot be the conclusion. Instead, it is used as support for the conclusion by eliminating differences in strength as a factor in who becomes a champion.
E
Athletic techniques help athletes use limited resources efficiently.
This is not supported by anything else in the argument, so cannot be the conclusion. It is used to help explain how mastery of technique can improve athletes’ performance, thus making technique a factor in being a champion.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 112 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply