Just because someone has an opinion doesn't mean it's debatable. 1 + 6 + 7 is 14. There is no room for people expressing their "creativity and come up with different approaches."

sorry I have just marked a comment as spoiler by mistake. You say to determine A and B (A < B). Others have said 1-3-7 ratios still hold for this kata. both things are true?

Seems that it's already approved.

Get it

That's a know issue. I approved this translation myself and it seems to be invisible
https://github.com/Codewars/codewars.com/issues/1068

In my opinion ...

That means that this comment shouldn't be marked as an Issue - it should be marked as a Suggestion instead. Issues are for obvious problems with the Kata itself that need to be fixed to be of acceptable quality.

Personally, I found the test cases quite comprehensive. Even when it was hard to add random assertions to this Kata (due to the nature of the problem itself), the Kata author still went with it and made the greatest effort to introduce randomness to the test fixture to prevent hardcoded solutions from passing. As for the edge cases you mentioned, I think it's fair to allow a bit of wiggle room in the user solution so solvers can exercise their creativity and come up with different approaches.

Marking this as resolved for approval (if the other Issues on this Kata can be resolved as well).

Congratulations! :)

Well, those two tests are the most complex and the real essence of this kata.
My suggestion is concentrate on the lazy dog test first, as it gives you the expected result and allows you to see what exactly goes wrong.

As for the phrase you mentioned, it seems pretty detailed to me. Sorry, I'm not a native English speaker, so my poor grammar could confuse you. Could you please explain what looks unclear to you there?