[quote="thebigr002"]At a restaurant, a group of friends ordered four main dishes and three side dishes at a total cost of $89. The prices of the seven items, in dollars, were all different integers, and every main dish cost more than every side dish. What was the price, in dollars, of the most expensive side dish?
(1) The most expensive main dish cost $16.
(2) The least expensive side dish cost $9.
There are seven different dishes (4 main dishes and 3 side dishes), each with a different integer cost; we cannot use just two variables to represent the two types of dishes. Each of the four main dishes is more expensive than any of the side dishes. The seven dishes add up to $91. The question asks for the price of the most expensive side dish. This is a statistics question, so it will be useful to consider different cases.
(1) SUFFICIENT: Since this problem involves 7 different integers, some of which must be larger than others, it's a good idea to test extreme possibilities. We're told that the most expensive main dish is $16 so try maximizing the cost of the other three: $15, $14, and $13. In this case, the total cost of the four main dishes is $58, leaving $33 to split among the three side dishes. The prices of the three side dishes must be different integers and all must cost less than $13. Again, try maximum values first: $12, $11 and $10 are the largest possible prices for the three side dishes and these indeed sum to $33. However, note that this maximized case is the only case that will work – otherwise the 3 side dishes will not sum to $33 (and the total will not sum to $91). If we back up and try something other than the maximum values for the four main dishes, the main dishes will then sum to less than $58 and the lowest price of these main dishes will be something less than $13. This will mean we'll need the sum of the three side dishes to be greater than $33, and we'll have to achieve that with numbers smaller than 12, 11, and 10. That's impossible! Thus, $12 is the price of the most expensive side dish.
Conceptually, we could have started with the average of these 7 dishes that sum to $91, that is $91/7 or $13. With the greatest statistic at $16 (only $3 above the mean), we might have understood that the other 6 prices can’t be that far away from the mean (the mean is the balancing point for all of the statistics in the set). The set of consecutive integers from $16 to $10 would have been the first to try. After that worked (13 is the mean of these 7 integers and 7 x 13 = 91), we could have proved that all other cases would decrease the sum to less than $91.
(2) SUFFICIENT: Since this problem involves 7 different integers, some of which must be larger than others, it's a good idea to test extreme possibilities. We're told that the least expensive side dish costs $10, so this time try minimizing the cost of the other two: $11, and $12. The side dishes would then cost a total of $33, leaving $58 for the main dishes. Since the minimum values for each of the four side dishes, i.e. $13, $14, $15, and $16 already sum to $58 there is no way to choose any larger values for these prices, which also means that we also couldn’t have chosen any larger values for the price of the side dishes. Thus, $12 is the price of the most expensive side dish.
Conceptually, we could have started with the average of the 7 dishes that sum to $91, that is $91/7 or $13. With the smallest statistic at $10 (only $3 below the mean), we might have understood that the other 6 prices can’t be that far away from the mean (the mean is the balancing point for all of the statistics in the set). The set of consecutive integers from $16 to $10 would have been the first to try. After that worked (13 is the mean of these 7 integers and 7 x 13 = 91), we could have proved that all other cases would increase the sum to greater than $91.
Note that this is a C-trap. Knowing that the greatest and smallest values of the set of 7 different integers were only 6 apart would imply that they must be consecutive integers. However, it was possible to get the answer with each statement alone.