The only major thing I was able to infer was that out of the Topazes, there could be anywhere from 2-3 selected and I represented this by w/z __ (__). What else was I missing here?
PT 33, Game 3 (Jeweler: Rubies, Saph, Topazes) Forum
-
spets

- Posts: 135
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:44 pm
PT 33, Game 3 (Jeweler: Rubies, Saph, Topazes)
Hi all, I've been scouring the forums/internet for an explanation to this game but to no avail. I had an extremely hard time figuring out the major deduction (assuming there was indeed one) and ended up spending 15+ mins on this one particular game, working through each answer choice it feels like. I even had to save the last two "must be true" questions for last.
The only major thing I was able to infer was that out of the Topazes, there could be anywhere from 2-3 selected and I represented this by w/z __ (__). What else was I missing here?
The only major thing I was able to infer was that out of the Topazes, there could be anywhere from 2-3 selected and I represented this by w/z __ (__). What else was I missing here?
- LSAT Blog

- Posts: 1257
- Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:24 pm
Re: PT 33, Game 3 (Jeweler: Rubies, Saph, Topazes)
That's a great inference. It tells us that we can only have either 2 or 3 Topazes, which greatly restricts the number of variables that can be selected from each group.
If we have only 2 topazes, then we will have either 1 ruby and 3 sapphires, or 3 rubies and one sapphire.
If we have 3 topazes, we will have either 3 rubies and 0 sapphires, 0 rubies and 3 sapphires, 1 ruby and 2 sapphires, or 2 rubies and 1 sapphire.
More succinctly, for rubies, sapphires, and topazes, respectively:
R-S-T
1-3-2
3-1-2
3-0-3
0-3-3
1-2-3
2-1-3
This is the key inference for the game and should make the questions much easier.
If we have only 2 topazes, then we will have either 1 ruby and 3 sapphires, or 3 rubies and one sapphire.
If we have 3 topazes, we will have either 3 rubies and 0 sapphires, 0 rubies and 3 sapphires, 1 ruby and 2 sapphires, or 2 rubies and 1 sapphire.
More succinctly, for rubies, sapphires, and topazes, respectively:
R-S-T
1-3-2
3-1-2
3-0-3
0-3-3
1-2-3
2-1-3
This is the key inference for the game and should make the questions much easier.
-
spets

- Posts: 135
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:44 pm
Re: PT 33, Game 3 (Jeweler: Rubies, Saph, Topazes)
Thanks LSAT Blog. When I ran through the different possibilities, I assumed that there were simply too many for them to be useful (I'm used to numerical distributions simplifying a game into 2-3 possibilities), but now I can see how listing them would have definitely helped me finish in a more timely fashion. I'm glad to hear I wasn't blindsided by a huge inference.
Big fan of your blog and your contributions. Keep up the great work!
Big fan of your blog and your contributions. Keep up the great work!
-
2011Law

- Posts: 822
- Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:40 pm
Re: PT 33, Game 3 (Jeweler: Rubies, Saph, Topazes)
I got that there would be either 2-3 topazes, but didn't even think to make this diagram. Did you just make that when you were diagramming the other rules? I also took just over 15 min and spent way too long on 14, which your diagram solves immediately.LSAT Blog wrote: R-S-T
1-3-2
3-1-2
3-0-3
0-3-3
1-2-3
2-1-3
This is the key inference for the game and should make the questions much easier.
- LSAT Blog

- Posts: 1257
- Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:24 pm
Re: PT 33, Game 3 (Jeweler: Rubies, Saph, Topazes)
Glad to help, spets!spets wrote:Thanks LSAT Blog. When I ran through the different possibilities, I assumed that there were simply too many for them to be useful (I'm used to numerical distributions simplifying a game into 2-3 possibilities), but now I can see how listing them would have definitely helped me finish in a more timely fashion. I'm glad to hear I wasn't blindsided by a huge inference.
Big fan of your blog and your contributions. Keep up the great work!
I'd create it after laying out the other rules. One indication that distribution plays a role in this game is that many questions/choices refer to the categories of variables (R, S, T), rather than the variables themselves (the specific stones).2011Law wrote:I got that there would be either 2-3 topazes, but didn't even think to make this diagram. Did you just make that when you were diagramming the other rules? I also took just over 15 min and spent way too long on 14, which your diagram solves immediately.