The table gives information about the top 10 cricket grounds (CG) in Australia. Name State First year used Most recent...

OWNING THE DATASET

Let's start by understanding what we're working with. This table shows data about 10 cricket grounds in Australia, including:

• The name of each cricket ground
• The Australian state where each ground is located
• The year each ground was first used
• The number of first-class cricket games played at each ground (as of 2011)

Key insights from our initial scan:

• The grounds span different time periods - some dating back to the 1800s, others more recent
• The locations include multiple Australian states including Tasmania and Victoria
• The number of first-class games varies significantly across grounds
• 2011 appears to be the reference year for our data

The sorting capability will be crucial here - rather than manually tracking 10 grounds across multiple criteria, sorting will instantly reveal patterns and save us significant effort.

ANALYZING STATEMENT 2

Statement 2 Translation:
Original: "All cricket grounds with fewer than 100 first-class games are located in Tasmania."
What we're looking for:

• Identify all grounds with \(<100\) first-class games
• Check if ALL of these grounds are in Tasmania

In other words: Is Tasmania the only state with low-usage cricket grounds?

Let's approach this strategically. Instead of checking each ground individually, we can sort by "First-class games" to immediately group all relevant grounds together.

Step 1: Sort the table by "First-class games" in ascending order.
This instantly shows us all grounds with fewer than 100 games at the top of our list.

Step 2: Scan the "State" column for these grounds to see if they're all in Tasmania.

Looking at our sorted data, we can see that while several grounds with \(<100\) games are in Tasmania, there's at least one ground in Victoria that also has fewer than 100 games.

Since we found at least one counter-example (a ground in Victoria with \(<100\) games), we can immediately conclude that not all grounds with fewer than 100 first-class games are in Tasmania.

Statement 2 is False.

Teaching Note: Notice how sorting eliminated the need to count every ground's games. The pattern became visible immediately, and finding just one counter-example was sufficient to disprove the statement.

ANALYZING STATEMENT 3

Statement 3 Translation:
Original: "Exactly one cricket ground that was first used before 1900 has hosted fewer than 100 first-class games."
What we're looking for:

• Identify grounds used before 1900
• Count how many of these pre-1900 grounds have \(<100\) first-class games
• Check if that count equals exactly one

In other words: Is there precisely one historic ground (pre-1900) that hasn't been heavily used?

Since we already identified all grounds with fewer than 100 games when analyzing Statement 2, we can build on that knowledge rather than starting from scratch.

Step 1: From our previously identified list of grounds with \(<100\) games, check which ones were first used before 1900.

Looking at the "First used" dates for these grounds, we can see that only the NTCA Ground (established in 1850) was used before 1900 and has fewer than 100 first-class games.

Statement 3 is True.

Teaching Note: By building on our previous work, we dramatically reduced the effort required. Instead of examining all 10 grounds again, we only needed to check the "First used" dates for the small subset of grounds we had already identified.

ANALYZING STATEMENT 1

Statement 1 Translation:
Original: "More than 50% of the cricket grounds have been used for more than 100 years."
What we're looking for:

• Identify grounds used for \(>100\) years (from first use until 2011)
• Count how many meet this criterion
• Check if the count exceeds \(50\%\) of all grounds (\(>5\) out of \(10\))

In other words: Have most cricket grounds been in use for over a century?

To solve this efficiently, we'll use a threshold approach rather than calculating exact years for each ground.

Step 1: Sort the table by "First used" in ascending order (oldest first).

Step 2: Calculate our threshold year: \(2011 - 100 = 1911\).
Any ground first used before 1911 has been in use for more than 100 years.

Step 3: Count how many grounds were first used before 1911.

Scanning our sorted data, we can count 6 grounds that were first used before 1911.
Since 6 out of 10 grounds (\(60\%\)) have been used for more than 100 years, this exceeds the \(50\%\) threshold.

Statement 1 is True.

Teaching Note: Using the threshold approach (finding grounds before 1911) was much more efficient than calculating the exact number of years for each ground and then comparing each result to 100.

Remember: In GMAT Table Analysis questions, sorting is almost always your first and most powerful tool. It transforms these problems from tedious calculation exercises into quick visual pattern recognition tasks!