The second scenario we derived during our set-up is more restrictive than the first scenario we derived. We do not mention N or P in the first scenario because our scenario is too open to determine where these variables could go, unlike the more limited second scenario.
Rule #2 tells us that L must be placed in the last game. We can place L in Game 4 in Scenario 1 and still have an open spot in that game. However, we already have S in Game 4 in Scenario 2, so placing L in the other spot closes that game.
Rule #1 tells us that T cannot play in the first or third games. This only leaves the second or fourth games as options for T. The fourth game in Scenario 2 is full, so T must be placed in the second game there. However, the fourth game still has an open spot in Scenario 1, so T has options there. Drawing out these options is unnecessary, so we do not mark T, leaving it open.
Rule #3 tells us that N does not go in the same game as P. Scenario 2 only has two different games open, so we can split N and P up accordingly. Since Scenario 1 could have room in any of the games, we do not mark N and P.
Does that make sense? Please let us know if you have any other questions and best of luck with your studies!
