Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

On July 30th, 2019 the success rate of Indian cricket team playing against Pakistan in the International events is 88%. If India will lose the next 50 events against Pakistan then the success rate of India will come down to 66%. What is the number of International events played between the two countries till 30th July?

On July 30th, 2019 the success rate of Indian cricket team playing against Pakistan in the International events is 88%. If India will lose the next 50 events against Pakistan then the success rate of India will come down to 66%. What is the number of International events played between the two countries till 30th July? Correct Answer 150

Let the number of international events played between India and Pakistan be 100x

Success rate of India = 88% = (88/100) × 100x = 88x

Success rate of Pakistan = 12% = (12/100) × 100x = 12x

If India will lose the next 50 events against Pakistan then the success rate of India will come down to 66%.

Total events = 100x + 50

According to the question,

12x + 50 = (100x + 50) × (34/100)

12x + 50 = 34x + 17

22x = 33

x = 1.5

100x = 150

∴ 150 international events were played between India and Pakistan till 30th July 2019 

Related Questions

There is a hint in this question and a statement is given later. Carefully read the excerpts provided and determine the statement based on that episode. The current Australian team has lost three of their last five Test series. They lost their last two Test series, one of which was against Pakistan, which is not considered to be a strong team now. Australia's two best batsman, Steve Smith and David Warner are currently suspended and their absence has weakened the Australian team. There is a lot of dissatisfaction and introspection about how their national team plays in Australia, how they show aggression on the field, how they do not show respect to the team against them, and neglecting the media at the most, and focusing only on winning only, the discussion on the future of the game is ongoing. There are. Australian cricket never reached such a low level. This is the best opportunity to knock them into their own house. In other words, if this India could not beat Australia in Australia in this series, then it would prove that the campaign around this team is only the same: the propaganda. Legislation: The current Australian team won two of the last five Tests they played. Choose the right one from the next option A - The statement is completely true. B - Statement is most true. C - There is no definitive definition based on C-statement. D- Statement is completely false.
On a certain date, Pakistan has a success rate of 60% against India in all the ODIs played between the two countries. They lost the next 30 ODIs in a rowto India and their success rate comes down to 30%. The total number of ODIs played between the two countries is
On a certain date, Pakistan has a success rate of 60% against India in all the ODI's played between the two countries. The lost the next 30 ODI's. In a row to India and their success rate comes down to 30%. The total number of ODI's played between the two countries is :
Read the passage and answer the questions that follow. Unsurprisingly, the latest conviction comes a month after the FATF, a global dirty money watchdog, urged Pakistan to complete an internationally agreed action plan to fight terror financing. In February 2018, Pakistan endorsed a UN list of terrorist organizations operating in the country and enforced a nationwide ban on them, including the LeT and the JuD, just before a meeting of the FATF. But the FATF still placed Pakistan on its “grey list” in June 2018, and demanded more actions from Islamabad to avoid being blacklisted, which could invite economic sanctions. Ever since, Pakistan, which cannot afford to be blacklisted, especially when its economy is in shambles, has moved against Saeed. The Anti-Terrorism Department’s FIRs against Saeed and his aides accuse the JuD of financing terrorism from its fund collections in the name of charity through NGOs. While the authorities’ move against Saeed is welcome, the question is whether these are genuine attempts to fight terrorism or half-hearted measures to dodge international pressure. There are doubts because Pakistan had used anti-India and anti-Afghan terrorist networks for strategic advantages. It was this dual policy of fighting terror at home while nurturing terror groups that target its rivals abroad that has been responsible for Pakistan’s predicament. If it is serious about fighting terrorism, Pakistan should crackdown on terror financing and terror infrastructure. The international community and organizations, including the FATF, should keep up the pressure until Islamabad shows tangible outcomes. According to the passage, why FATF did not remove Pakistan from the "grey list"?
There is a hint in this question and a statement is given later. Carefully read the excerpts provided and determine the statement based on that episode. The current Australian team has lost three of their last five Test series. They lost their last two Test series, one of which was against Pakistan, which is not considered to be a strong team now. Australia's two best batsman, Steve Smith and David Warner are currently suspended and their absence has weakened the Australian team. There is a lot of dissatisfaction and introspection about how their national team plays in Australia, how they show aggression on the field, how they do not show respect to the team against them, and neglecting the media at the most, and focusing only on winning only, the discussion on the future of the game is ongoing. There are. Australian cricket never reached such a low level. This is the best opportunity to knock them into their own house. In other words, if this India could not beat Australia in Australia in this series, then it would prove that the campaign around this team is only the same: the propaganda. Statement: India has a good chance of defeating Australia. Choose the right one from the next option A - The statement is completely true. B - statement is most true. There is no definitive definition based on C-statement. D-statement is completely false.
Read the passage and answer the questions that follow. Unsurprisingly, the latest conviction comes a month after the FATF, a global dirty money watchdog, urged Pakistan to complete an internationally agreed action plan to fight terror financing. In February 2018, Pakistan endorsed a UN list of terrorist organizations operating in the country and enforced a nationwide ban on them, including the LeT and the JuD, just before a meeting of the FATF. But the FATF still placed Pakistan on its “grey list” in June 2018, and demanded more actions from Islamabad to avoid being blacklisted, which could invite economic sanctions. Ever since, Pakistan, which cannot afford to be blacklisted, especially when its economy is in shambles, has moved against Saeed. The Anti-Terrorism Department’s FIRs against Saeed and his aides accuse the JuD of financing terrorism from its fund collections in the name of charity through NGOs. While the authorities’ move against Saeed is welcome, the question is whether these are genuine attempts to fight terrorism or half-hearted measures to dodge international pressure. There are doubts because Pakistan had used anti-India and anti-Afghan terrorist networks for strategic advantages. It was this dual policy of fighting terror at home while nurturing terror groups that target its rivals abroad that has been responsible for Pakistan’s predicament. If it is serious about fighting terrorism, Pakistan should crackdown on terror financing and terror infrastructure. The international community and organizations, including the FATF, should keep up the pressure until Islamabad shows tangible outcomes. From the passage, it can be inferred that the author is:
Read the passage and answer the questions that follow. Unsurprisingly, the latest conviction comes a month after the FATF, a global dirty money watchdog, urged Pakistan to complete an internationally agreed action plan to fight terror financing. In February 2018, Pakistan endorsed a UN list of terrorist organizations operating in the country and enforced a nationwide ban on them, including the LeT and the JuD, just before a meeting of the FATF. But the FATF still placed Pakistan on its “grey list” in June 2018, and demanded more actions from Islamabad to avoid being blacklisted, which could invite economic sanctions. Ever since, Pakistan, which cannot afford to be blacklisted, especially when its economy is in shambles, has moved against Saeed. The Anti-Terrorism Department’s FIRs against Saeed and his aides accuse the JuD of financing terrorism from its fund collections in the name of charity through NGOs. While the authorities’ move against Saeed is welcome, the question is whether these are genuine attempts to fight terrorism or half-hearted measures to dodge international pressure. There are doubts because Pakistan had used anti-India and anti-Afghan terrorist networks for strategic advantages. It was this dual policy of fighting terror at home while nurturing terror groups that target its rivals abroad that has been responsible for Pakistan’s predicament. If it is serious about fighting terrorism, Pakistan should crackdown on terror financing and terror infrastructure. The international community and organizations, including the FATF, should keep up the pressure until Islamabad shows tangible outcomes. What is the meaning of the word SHAMBLES in the passage?
Read the passage and answer the questions that follow. Unsurprisingly, the latest conviction comes a month after the FATF, a global dirty money watchdog, urged Pakistan to complete an internationally agreed action plan to fight terror financing. In February 2018, Pakistan endorsed a UN list of terrorist organizations operating in the country and enforced a nationwide ban on them, including the LeT and the JuD, just before a meeting of the FATF. But the FATF still placed Pakistan on its “grey list” in June 2018, and demanded more actions from Islamabad to avoid being blacklisted, which could invite economic sanctions. Ever since, Pakistan, which cannot afford to be blacklisted, especially when its economy is in shambles, has moved against Saeed. The Anti-Terrorism Department’s FIRs against Saeed and his aides accuse the JuD of financing terrorism from its fund collections in the name of charity through NGOs. While the authorities’ move against Saeed is welcome, the question is whether these are genuine attempts to fight terrorism or half-hearted measures to dodge international pressure. There are doubts because Pakistan had used anti-India and anti-Afghan terrorist networks for strategic advantages. It was this dual policy of fighting terror at home while nurturing terror groups that target its rivals abroad that has been responsible for Pakistan’s predicament. If it is serious about fighting terrorism, Pakistan should crackdown on terror financing and terror infrastructure. The international community and organizations, including the FATF, should keep up the pressure until Islamabad shows tangible outcomes. The purpose of the author in writing this passage seems to be
Read the passage and answer the questions that follow. Unsurprisingly, the latest conviction comes a month after the FATF, a global dirty money watchdog, urged Pakistan to complete an internationally agreed action plan to fight terror financing. In February 2018, Pakistan endorsed a UN list of terrorist organizations operating in the country and enforced a nationwide ban on them, including the LeT and the JuD, just before a meeting of the FATF. But the FATF still placed Pakistan on its “grey list” in June 2018, and demanded more actions from Islamabad to avoid being blacklisted, which could invite economic sanctions. Ever since, Pakistan, which cannot afford to be blacklisted, especially when its economy is in shambles, has moved against Saeed. The Anti-Terrorism Department’s FIRs against Saeed and his aides accuse the JuD of financing terrorism from its fund collections in the name of charity through NGOs. While the authorities’ move against Saeed is welcome, the question is whether these are genuine attempts to fight terrorism or half-hearted measures to dodge international pressure. There are doubts because Pakistan had used anti-India and anti-Afghan terrorist networks for strategic advantages. It was this dual policy of fighting terror at home while nurturing terror groups that target its rivals abroad that has been responsible for Pakistan’s predicament. If it is serious about fighting terrorism, Pakistan should crackdown on terror financing and terror infrastructure. The international community and organizations, including the FATF, should keep up the pressure until Islamabad shows tangible outcomes. As per the passage, which word can replace CONVICTION grammatically and contextually?
The following questions have three statements. Study the question and the statements and decide which of the statement(s) is/are necessary to answer the question. Among 400 cricket players, find the players who played in IPL 1 and IPL 2 but not in IPL 3. Statement I: 180 players played in IPL-1 out of which 25 players played in only IPL-1. Statement II: 230 players played in IPL-2 out of which 45 players played in only IPL-2. Statement III: 290 players played in IPL-3 out of which 110 players played in only IPL-3.