Based on the context of the sentence, we can tell that the third blank is probably related to the characteristic warned against in the second blank; we can also infer that the first blank is probably a less extreme version of the second blank.

For the first blank, "staunch," meaning loyal, and "candid," meaning forthright, both could work as descriptions of an attitude toward a politician's beliefs. "Obtuse," meaning insensitive, "craven," meaning cowardly, and "ecumenical," meaning relating to Christian churches as a group, do not work at all. For the second blank, both being excessively "forthright," meaning straightforward, and "obdurate," meaning unyielding, both could work as characteristics to be cautioned against. We are still left with "staunch . . . obdurate . . . intransigence" and "candid . . . forthright . . . transparency" as options. "Intransigence," meaning stubborn refusal to compromise, works nicely as the opposite of "[knowing] when to compromise and when to stand their ground."

Based on the fact that we know the player scored the game-winning goal, and that this stands in some relation (blank one) to the soccer player's extreme athletic ability, we can infer that the first blank will describe some action having some positive connotation. We can also tell that the final two blanks stand in some opposing relationship to each other (he seemed uncomfortable with "something" because he was "some other thing"). "Evinced," meaning indicated, and "accentuated," meaning emphasized, both could work in blank one, as both would make sense as something that would come about as a result of a freshman player scoring a game-winning goal. "Undermined," meaning subverted, completely contradicts the tone of the sentence. "Cauterized," meaning burnt, especially burnt a wound to help it begin to heal, and "invalidated," meaning contradicted, also do not work given the context. As such, we know our only two options are "evinced . . . exalted . . . unostentatious" and "accentuated . . . coveted . . . circumspect."

Regarding the second blank, "exalted" means praised, which would make sense as an action the coach would take after a player scored an important goal. "Coveted," meaning yearned for, perhaps doesn't fit perfectly, but also could potentially fit. Moving to the final blank, "unostentatious," meaning humble, would make sense given the context; however "circumspect," meaning risk-averse, does not fit in the passage well at all. As such, we know our answer is "evinced . . . exalted . . . unostentatious."

"Auspicious" is an adjective that means fortunate or prosperous, "mendicant" as an adjective means prone to begging, and an "albatross," outside of being a seabird, is a longstanding, personally burdensome item.

The first blank is followed by a contrast word ("but") and a negative consequence ("struggling with tax laws"), so we know that "auspicious" is a possibility. The second blank is paired with a method by which money can be whittled away, so "begging" or money seeking relatives makes sense as a choice here.

"Abstemious" means moderate and responsible in one's eating and drinking, a "comestible" is a foodstuff, and "salubrity" is promoting healthful, energetic behavior.

The use of a semicolon is a clue that the two clauses will have similar and complementary themes.

"Assiduous" means diligent, "recalcitrant" means resistant to outside control, and "object" (used as a verb) means to express an objection or statement of disaproval.

The first blank comes at the end of a list of positive qualities in a student, so the "assiduous" makes sense as a third item in that list. Now, the second blank comes at the end of a clause beginning with the contrast conjunction "but," so we know that it will be a negative, or at least not actively positive word. The second two blanks are clearly connected, and going through the list "recalcitrant" and "object" make the most sense. A "recalcitrant" student would specifically resist authority by "object[ing]."

For the first blank, we need a verb that means something like discouraged. Either "daunted," "deterred," or "dissuaded" could work. For the second blank, we need a verb that means something like hesitated; either "wavered" or "oscillated" could fit. For the last blank, we need a verb that conveys how Riley went back on his initial promise; between "reneged" and "adulterated," "reneged" is the better option, so the correct answer is "daunted . . . wavered . . . reneged."

Clearly, the relationship between the first two blanks is one of intensification. The word that goes in the first blank must be a weaker (but related) form of the word that goes in the second blank. Likewise, we can tell that Matthew's outlook is one of disgust. Therefore, the option that includes "dislike . . . abhorred" is the best for these first two blanks. (The option with "despise . . . detested" does not function for the intensification and hence is not acceptable.) The word "evinced" can mean bore evidence of, which is exactly what his disgust did—at least in his friends' eyes.

Clearly, the troops did not undertake their march. The sentence indicates this by the use of the past tense in several places ("would have greatly" and "such difficulties would have endangered"). Therefore, the best option is "aborted . . . impeded . . . exposed." To "abort" something is merely to stop it—which is what they did by not marching. To "impede" means to make difficult. This describes what would happen due to the difficult ("inclement") weather. Likewise, it does make sense that such impeding would leave the people exposed for some time. The only tempting wrong option for this is likely "open." Indeed, the whole set of answers "daring . . . hindered . . . open" is likely tempting, for this would be a tempting plot and would have been hindered.  However, it is clear that the plot was not undertaken, for the sentence states that it would have been tempting and would have been dangerous, but it was not undertaken.

The best clue in this sentence is the opening conjunction "although." This establishes a contrast between Thomas' energetic nature and what seems to be a less-than-energetic approach to gardening. The three options that remain based on this are "dither," "putter," and "wander." This must be synonymous with the thought expressed as part of the second blank (or at least relatively synonymous). The friends marvel at the fact that he cannot do something. Not being able to complete something would indicate that Thomas does not do much work. To "dither" is to avoid making any decisive choices. Thus, the pair of "dither" and "complete" is excellent, given that a dithering person might not complete anything. While "rouse" often describes the process of making someone wake up, it can mean more generally to bring to activity out of inactivity.

Since Peter was unsuccessful, we cannot say that he succeeded in his initial plans. For this reason, the wrong answer that includes "planned . . . annihilate" is somewhat tempting, for "planned" does not indicate that he succeeded; however, it is most likely that Peter altered his plans after the lack of success. Therefore, the option containing "recalibrate" (meaning readjust) is the best. The first two words—"attempted . . . ambush"—likewise work well.