The stimulus asserts in a premise that the team only lost when Jennifer was not playing. The conclusion states Jennifer's presence will ensure a win.
The stem asks how the argument is vulnerable to criticism and apparently the answer is D.
D states: Presumes, without justification, occurrences that previously coincided must continue to coincide.
How is the correct answer D? Doesn't this answer choice incorrectly assume the logical opposite of losing is winning? Losing and winning are not logical opposites, they are polar opposites. The logical opposite of "losing" should be "not losing". I don't agree with Choice D because some of the games "not lost" by the team could have resulted in a tie, and the stimulus conclusion asserts Jennifer's presence ensures a win.
What am I missing?
