A group of five friends have $87 dollars between them. Each one only

Ans: D
Stmnt 1: by definition of median and the fact that of the 5 friends, 3 are at median value implies, of the remaining two one has to be below the median and the other above..Dolores cannot be the one below the median as per stmnt 1 which states that the 5th pal has an amount lesser than the median. hence logical conclusion..dolores is the one above the median. ( mathematically 13,15,15,15,29)
sufficient
Stmnt 2: since andy and betty have a combined sum of 30$ and dolores has 29$..thus the other 2 pals can together have 87-(29 +30) =28$ at max. an amount lesser than what dolores has with her.
sufficient

in these we should give highest possible values to any other value to test for max..
1) statement one gives us four values.. 3 have say x and fourth x-2.... if we take dolores is having median value.. total median value =3*29=87... but one is given 2 dollars less... not possible so median value has to be less than 29... hence dolores has max money...sufficient

2)two friends have 30 in total but each has more than 5.. so max one of them can have is 24 .. so rest three have remaining 57 but dolores has 29 so remaining two will have 57-29=28... so none can have more than dolores... sufficient

MAGOOSH OFFICIAL SOLUTION:

A crucial numerical fact to recognize is that 87 = 3*29. In other words, Dolores’ share is 1/3 of the entire pot.

Statement #1: three people share the same median value. Suppose Dolores were one of those three friends. Then, each would have $29, and together the three of them would have 3*29 = $87. A fourth would have $27, and we are already way over the amount of the whole group. It’s not possible for Dolores to have the median value or to be less than the median, so the only other possibility would be for Dolores to have the value greater than the median – i.e. the maximum value. The answer to the prompt question is a clear “yes.” This statement allows us to determine a definitive answer to the prompt question. This statement, alone and by itself, is sufficient.

Statement #2: First of all, neither Andie nor Betty could have as much as Dolores has. If Andie has just $6, then Betty could be as high as $24, but Betty can’t go any higher, because Andie must be above $5 and their sum must be $30. So, Andie & Betty each must be lower than Dolores. Now, between the three of them, Andie & Betty & Dolores, they must have $30 + $29 = $59, leaving only $87 – $59 = $28 for the other two people. If the other two people have $28 together, neither one can have as much as Dolores. Thus, Dolores has to have the most. This statement allows us to determine a definitive answer to the prompt question. This statement, alone and by itself, is sufficient.

Answer = (D)

I am not a native speaker, and I don't know what "tied for" means. I have checked the two most common used dictionaries, Oxford and Cambridge, in my country, but still couldn't find its meaning. I thought the sentence means that the sum of three amount is the median.

Hello from the GMAT Club BumpBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.