Problem C:
Turning tricky due to faulty judge data is not a credit of the question setter.
Isn't D Josephus Problem - although not a copy, but exactly same problem probably exists.
Problem F:
//The one below is copied from
http://online-judge.uva.es/p/v3/379.html
Given a specific board configuration your program will pick and model a specific move, over and over, until no more moves are available. Your program will then report the sum of the holes that still have pegs in them. At any point during the game there may be more than one possible move available. In such a case always model the move with the target hole of the moving peg as large as possible. If there is more than one move available to the largest possible target hole, then choose from those moves the one with the larger source hole.
//This one is copied from comb site
Given a specific board configuration your program will pick and model a specific move, over and over, until no more moves are available. Your program will then report the number of holes that still have pegs in them and their positions on the board. At any point during the game there may be more than one possible move available. In such a case always model the move with the target hole of the moving peg as large as possible. If there is more than one move available to the largest possible target hole, then choose from those moves the one with the larger source hole.
So they just don't want to write problem statements.
I guess in some case the name is same and in some case the problem name is different. I still think this is a bad way of problem setting and if
they did not ask the author or thanked him in webpage it is also not fair. The other bad thing is they copied problems from the same source (UVa)