Iggy's Logic Quiz 7

Answer: Jason

There are a total of six matches, so everyone's final scores must add up to six. It is impossible to win the tournament with only two points, since someone else would have to have at least two. The winner had to have won every match.

If Rasul is truthful about beating everyone, then George's and Jason's second statements are false. That means George's and Jason's first statements are true, but they contradict each other so Rasul cannot be the winner to begin with. Rasul's first statement must be true, so Carlos did better than George.

Since Rasul and George can't be 1st, it was either Carlos or Jason. Carlos's first statement can't be true since they would have to tie for 1st. That means Carlos is truthful about losing to Rasul, and cannot be the winner.

The winner has to be Jason to avoid contradictions.
Jason beat everyone.
Rasul beat Carlos and George.
Carlos beat George.
George lost to everyone.

Answer: John

If Mike is the winner, then he's truthful that he finished two places away from Marc. Marc has to be third, so Rick finished one place away from Marc no matter what. Marc would be telling the truth that he finished one place away from Rick, which is contradicting. Since there cannot be two truth tellers, Mike cannot be the winner to begin with.

If Marc is the winner, then he finished one place away from Rick, who is 2nd. Rick is lying that John finished 3rd, so John would have to be last. Mike is the only person left to be 3rd, but then he's telling the truth that he finished two places away from Marc. Since there is a contradiction, Marc cannot be the winner.

If Rick is the winner, then he's truthful that John finished 3rd. Marc is lying that he finished one place away from Rick, so Marc has to be last. Mike is the only person left to be 2nd, but then he's telling the truth that he finished two places away from Marc. Since there is a contradiction, Rick cannot be the winner.
John has to be the winner to avoid contradictions.

Answer: Herman

If Herman's first statement is true, then he's over 27. This makes Farley's second statement false. Farley's other statements now have to be true, so Farley is under 21. This is contradicting because Farley can't be five years younger than a 27-year old. Herman's first statement is absoulelty false, so it's true that Farley is older than him.
Warren's last statement cannot be true, because then he's the youngest and the oldest. Warren's last statement is false, so he's not the oldest or youngest.
This means Farley has to be the oldest and Herman is the youngest.

Answer: Jan

If Jim is truthful, then the order is Jim-someone-Jan-someone. Joy has to be lying, so Joe wasn't second. The order would be Jim-Joy-Jan-Joe. This is impossible because now Joe is truthful when he's supposed to be lying. This is contradicting, so Jim is definitely lying.
If Joy is truthful, then the order is Joy-Joe-someone-someone. There will always be a contradiction no matter who is 3rd. If Jan is 3rd, then Jim's false statement is now true. If Jim is 3rd, then Jan is telling the truth when she should be lying. This means Joy cannot be truthful to begin with, so Joe isn't 2nd.
If Joe is truthful, then Joy is directly before Jan. This means Jim is either 2nd or last. Jim can't be 2nd because then Jan's statement is true. The order would have to be Joe-Joy-Jan-Jim. There is another contradiction because now Jim's false statement is true. Joe has to be lying to avoid contradictions. The winner can only be Jan for there to be no contradictions.

Answer: Kate robbed Lori

Lori can't be truthful, because that would make both Glebb and Kate's statements true. Lori is lying, so Connor didn't rob her.
If Kate is the 2nd liar, then Connor robbed Glebb. This is impossible because Glebb and Connor are the truth tellers, which means Kate robbed Glebb, not Connor. Since there is a contradiction, Kate cannot be the 2nd liar.
Kate is definitely truthful, so Connor didn't rob Glebb. Connor already didn't rob Lori so Connor had to have robbed Kate.

If Glebb is the 2nd honest person, then Kate robbed Lori, Glebb robbed Connor, and Lori robbed Glebb.
If Connor is the 2nd honest person, then Kate robbed Glebb, Glebb robbed Lori, and Lori robbed Connor.

There are no contradictions in both scenarios, so the honesty of Connor and Glebb's statements cannot be figured out. Based on what I've figured out, all the incorrect choices are 100% true. "Kate robbed Lori," is the only choice that could possibly be false.

Answer: Emma or Connor

If Bud is the truthful one, then all others are lying. That means Emma voted for Connor, which is impossible since Connor can't lose the election with two votes. Bud has to be lying. Reese cannot be the truthful person, since he can't win the election with one vote. Two people couldn't have voted for Reese if he lost the election. That means nobody voted for Reese.

If Connor won the election, he must have at least two votes. Reese and Emma had to have voted for Connor since Bud couldn't have. Connor must have two votes, and Reese already must have 0. This means Bud and Emma have one vote each. Bud couldn't have voted for himself, so he voted for Emma. This contradicts Connor's true statement, so Connor couldn't have won the election.

Emma is the only person left to have won the election. Emma has at least two votes, and Reese still has to have 0. Bud must've voted for Emma since Connor is lying. Emma had to have voted for Bud since she can't vote for anyone else. If Reese also voted for Bud, then Bud can't lose the election. Reese couldn't have voted for Bud, and must've voted for Emma or Connor.

Answer: Glebb and/or Tori

Since Glebb's statement is challenging Toparnis's statement, exactly one of them is lying. This means if Tori is truthful, Lori must be lying to make two liars. If Tori is lying, then there are already two liars. Lori has to be a 3rd liar in order for Tori's statement to be a lie.

Since Lori is lying in both scenarios, Lori has to be lying no matter what. This means Lori didn't shoot Toparnis. Glebb and/or Tori shot Toparnis.

Answer: Eric

Joe could not have drawn 3, because people with odd numbers are lying, and 3 is prime. Joe could not have drawn 4, because people with even numbers are telling the truth, and 4 is not prime. Joe either has 1 or 2.

Since 4 is the only composite number, Eric has to be lying, so Eric has 1 or 3. Chris is telling the truth that Eric has an odd number, so Chris has 2 or 4.

If Chris has 2, then Joe has 1, Eric has 3, and Sam has 4. Sam would have to be lying since 2 is not a square number, which is impossible since a liar cannot have an even number.
Chris must have 4, so Sam is telling the truth and must have 2. Joe would have to have 1, and Eric would have to have 3.

Answer: John

If Paul is lying, then Tito must have the most money, so Tito would also have to be lying, and John and Eric would both have to be telling the truth. This can't be possible, because if Eric's statement is true, then Tito's statement couldn't possibly be false. This means that Paul must have been telling the truth to begin with.

Paul definitely has more money than Tito, which means that Tito has the least amount of money, and Tito is telling the truth. John must have more money than Eric, so John has the highest money amount, and Eric has the second highest.

Answer: John

If John is lying, then he guessed 4, and Jay would also have to be lying since nobody guessed 6. This would mean that the closest guesser guessed 5 or 7, since they had to have guessed closer than John. Since only Jacob and Joe are left to be the closest guessers, one of them must be telling the truth, but since neither of them claimed to have guessed 5 or 7, both of them must be lying, so John couldn't have been lying to begin with. John has to be the closest guesser.