Warner: Until recently, most competitive swimmers

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsMethod

Keep going in LSAT Lab

Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one
Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step
81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Warner: Until recently, most competitive swimmers were high school or university students. Now, more and more competitive swimmers are continuing well beyond their university years. Clearly, better training regimens have allowed longer than swimmers of the past.

Young: Not necessarily. No one has the time to both be a competitive swimmer and hold an outside job. But unlike in the past, today’s living at their sport.

What this question is testing

Method

Your task

Describe how the argument proceeds — the technique it uses to reach its conclusion.

Common trap

Answers that describe a method the argument doesn't actually use.

Winning move

Track the role each statement plays, then match that to the choice describing the same moves.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question

Young responds to Warner’s argument

Answer choices

Self-Contradiction1% picked this
attempting to demonstrate that the evidence Warner advances actually undermines
Young doesn't claim that Warner's evidence undermines Warner's conclusion. Young offers their own evidence which undermines Warner's conclusion.
1%
Bad Evidence Match4% picked this
presenting a counterexample in order to weaken the evidence offered in support
This answer doesn't accurately describe Young's statements. The evidence that Young offers isn't a counterexample. A counterexample would be evidence suggesting that there are not more and more competitive swimmers continuing well beyond their university years. Young never says that.
4%
Necessary vs. Sufficient2% picked this
arguing that a condition that Warner takes to be sufficient to account for a phenomenon is
This describes a conditional logic flaw that is not what Young is suggesting and is not present in Warner's argument. Warner takes better training to be a sufficient explanation for competitive swimmers continuing to swim after university. But Young never argues that better training is necessary, not sufficient.
2%
Circular Reasoning0% picked this
maintaining that the evidence presented in support of Warner’s conclusion presupposes the truth
Young offers evidence that supports a different conclusion from Warner's. Young never argues that Warner's evidence presupposes the truth of that conclusion. Warner's evidence only describes a situation. The evidence itself doesn't presuppose any particular explanation for the situation. Warner's conclusion is what suggests that one particular explanation, better training, is correct.
0%
Correct93% picked this
offering an alternative to Warner’s explanation of a
Why this is right
This is exactly what Young does, suggesting that the ability to make a living from swimming, not better training, explains the phenomenon of more and more swimmers competing well beyond their university years.
Skill tested: Method · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
93%

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free