yea #5 was really misplaced, the only method is to bash out the possibilities. you first list the fractions as
1/14
2/13
3/12 --> 1/4 (*)
4/11
5/10 --> 1/2 (*)
6/9 --> 2/3 (*)
7/8
8/7
9/6 --> 3/2 (*)
10/5 --> 2 (*)
11/4 (*)
12/3 --> 4 (*)
13/2 (*)
14/1 --> 14 (*)
All fractions of interest are denoted with an asterisk. Then you group the fractions by similar denominators

(1/4,11/4) The only possible sum here is 1/4+11/4 = 3.

(1/2,3/2,13/2) We can double each fraction to get 1,3,13. When we add two fractions out of three from this set, we get 2,7,8.

(2,4,14) We double each to get 4,8,28. We then add two distinct whole numbers to get 6,16,18.

Our list of fractions is now 3,1,3,13,2,7,8,4,8,28,6,16,18. But we have counted 3 and 8 twice, so our actual list with no repeats is 1,3,13,2,7,8,4,28,6,16,18, giving us 11 total possibilities.

yeah i feel like Bs tend to be pretty misplaced

uh 5 was just bash

16 was also bash ("oh this is probably going to be too small" etc)

p5 should've been p15 haha - really tough and bashy. you have to list all fractions knock out the ones you know won't work and then basically bash cases tbh.

yeah expecting lower cutoff too; is 94.5 safe?

Well, glad to know I'm not crazy and 5 is just odd :p

@OlympusHero Hmm I don't consider myself much of a cutoffs expert, but judging by past cutoffs I do think that your odds are good. It seems like cutoff for 12A/B is rarely ever greater than 94.5, and I don't think that this test was historically easy.

apparently it was rly hard lol