Strengths: Has excellent control over complex direction changes, with a great sense of rhythm that isn't achieved through filler but through genuine progression.
To Improve: The wiper at 0:09 felt a bit abrupt, and the ending was a bit disappointing, but I believe you’ve got more amazing stuff coming in the future.

Strengths: A very balanced combo with rich visual effects.
To Improve: I hope to see more standout highlights, and the ending could be better arranged to leave a stronger impression.

Strengths: The choice of tricks is very diverse, including parallel world, triangle pass 345, the arm counters, and parallel arm spin (though I’m not sure if that’s the right name for it).
To Improve: I think a different filming angle could better showcase the effect of parallel world, and the execution could use some improvement as well. The current trick selection still mainly falls within the realm of power tricks, so I’m looking forward to seeing whether there will be more refined elements in R2.

Strengths: It’s clear that you have a broad understanding of linkages, and the way you combine them is exceptionally well done. You've improved a lot since the last time I saw your combo. there’s virtually no filler, and every second delivers a fresh visual experience.
To Improve: I think in WT, it's also important to take DIFFICULTY into account. Among the top-tier spinners, I feel you’re relatively lacking in that aspect, but this combo is just so well-constructed and beautifully presented.

Strengths: I think your timing for direction changes is very clever, giving the combo a unique visual feel without making the rhythm feel off. The sequence before 0:05 is presented really well.
To Improve: You're a relatively well-balanced spinner across all categories. If I had to point out something to improve, I’d say adding more standout highlights could help boost your score in the short term.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#5 haranaa: 29.5 -> 29.6
#6 Mustaf: 29.5 -> 29.5
In terms of overall structure, I find Haranaa’s presentation to be more diverse. Mustaf’s combo feels more one-dimensional, and the ending lacks design and feels abrupt. There is definitely room for improvement.

Strengths: The hypermodern linkages are presented quite well.
To Improve: There are overly simple fillers between the hypermodern linkages (for example, 0:07–0:09, 0:11–0:12, and after 0:14), and the ending feels very abrupt. It could use more arrangement. I’m looking forward to seeing more elements beyond just hypermodern linkages.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#5 haranaa: 29.5 -> 29.6
#6 Mustaf: 29.5 -> 29.5
In terms of overall structure, I find Haranaa’s presentation to be more diverse. Mustaf’s combo feels more one-dimensional, and the ending lacks design and feels abrupt. There is definitely room for improvement.

Strengths: Every catch after a release is timed perfectly, and the combo is very well-structured.
To Improve: After 0:09, it feels more like filler. I’d love to see more elements outside the realm of power tricks.

Strengths: There are some relatively clear highlights, and they’re presented very well.
To Improve: Breaking away from Cowabunga’s influence is your biggest challenge right now. The linkages leading up to the highlights are a bit too simple (for example, 0:01–0:03 and 0:07–0:11).

Strengths: The counter at 0:04 is executed very cleanly, and the first half has a tight rhythm.
To Improve: There doesn’t seem to be much original content, and the ending is not well presented.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#9 Temuyin: 27 -> 27.3
#10 monsoon: 27 -> 27.2
#11 Disk: 27 -> 27.1
#12 B1ack: 27 -> 27
Temuyin’s structure and rhythm are very tight, making me look forward to what kind of combo he’ll bring in R2. There’s barely any unnecessary filler in the middle, although the ending wasn’t presented very well. Monsoon's structure shows relatively diverse aspects, but the tricks used don’t consistently deliver a sense of surprise to the viewer, which is a bit of a pity. Disk shows strong thematic consistency, but the combo feels somewhat repetitive, and the transition from the earlier knuckle theme to the ending feels too abrupt. As for B1ack, personally, after Saltient, I no longer expect to see more impressive fingercross combos in WT, though the combo itself is still solid.

Strengths: The highlight from 0:09 to 0:11 is well arranged in detail, and your trick base is quite rich.
To Improve: There are too many overly simple fillers (for example, 0:00–0:03 and 0:06–0:08), and the ending could use more arrangement.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#9 Temuyin: 27 -> 27.3
#10 monsoon: 27 -> 27.2
#11 Disk: 27 -> 27.1
#12 B1ack: 27 -> 27
Temuyin’s structure and rhythm are very tight, making me look forward to what kind of combo he’ll bring in R2. There’s barely any unnecessary filler in the middle, although the ending wasn’t presented very well. Monsoon's structure shows relatively diverse aspects, but the tricks used don’t consistently deliver a sense of surprise to the viewer, which is a bit of a pity. Disk shows strong thematic consistency, but the combo feels somewhat repetitive, and the transition from the earlier knuckle theme to the ending feels too abrupt. As for B1ack, personally, after Saltient, I no longer expect to see more impressive fingercross combos in WT, though the combo itself is still solid.

Strengths: The thematic consistency is strong.
To Improve: There are some overly simple fillers (for example, 0:01–0:02 and 0:05–0:06), and the transition from the earlier knuckle theme to the ending doesn’t feel very natural.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#9 Temuyin: 27 -> 27.3
#10 monsoon: 27 -> 27.2
#11 Disk: 27 -> 27.1
#12 B1ack: 27 -> 27
Temuyin’s structure and rhythm are very tight, making me look forward to what kind of combo he’ll bring in R2. There’s barely any unnecessary filler in the middle, although the ending wasn’t presented very well. Monsoon's structure shows relatively diverse aspects, but the tricks used don’t consistently deliver a sense of surprise to the viewer, which is a bit of a pity. Disk shows strong thematic consistency, but the combo feels somewhat repetitive, and the transition from the earlier knuckle theme to the ending feels too abrupt. As for B1ack, personally, after Saltient, I no longer expect to see more impressive fingercross combos in WT, though the combo itself is still solid.

Strengths: For a fingercross combo, this is very well arranged. It’s tight and has almost no filler.
To Improve: You need to showcase something beyond fingercross. I believe that for most of us, ever since Saltient, it's been hard to feel truly impressed by fingercross combos, even though they still hold an advantage in terms of DIFFICULTY.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#9 Temuyin: 27 -> 27.3
#10 monsoon: 27 -> 27.2
#11 Disk: 27 -> 27.1
#12 B1ack: 27 -> 27
Temuyin’s structure and rhythm are very tight, making me look forward to what kind of combo he’ll bring in R2. There’s barely any unnecessary filler in the middle, although the ending wasn’t presented very well. Monsoon's structure shows relatively diverse aspects, but the tricks used don’t consistently deliver a sense of surprise to the viewer, which is a bit of a pity. Disk shows strong thematic consistency, but the combo feels somewhat repetitive, and the transition from the earlier knuckle theme to the ending feels too abrupt. As for B1ack, personally, after Saltient, I no longer expect to see more impressive fingercross combos in WT, though the combo itself is still solid.

Strengths: A very diverse selection of tricks, including the plane transition and finger balance starting from 0:05, along with various integrated applications of fishtails.
To Improve: There are too many overly simple fillers (for example, 0:03–0:05, 0:07–0:08, 0:10–0:13). I think your highlights need to be more densely packed.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#13 uuN: 26.5 -> 26.7
#14 Human: 26.5 -> 26.6
#15 KURINTO: 26.5 -> 26.5
uuN has a very diverse selection of tricks. Although I feel there are still too many highlights that lack impact, along with some unnecessary fillers, compared to the other two, I’m more curious to see what new things he’ll bring in R2. Human has excellent rhythm control, but I would expect WT participants to have a more diverse trick base, and he made a noticeable mistake near the end. KURINTO has two clear highlights, but there are too many unnecessary fillers, and the combo feels a bit repetitive.

Strengths: The timing and rhythm of every direction change are arranged exceptionally well. Almost every second in the first half delivers a unique visual experience.
To Improve: Starting from 0:09, the level drops significantly compared to the earlier part, creating a noticeable contrast, and the ending is really not well presented. I'm looking forward to seeing more elements outside the realm of power tricks in R2.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#13 uuN: 26.5 -> 26.7
#14 Human: 26.5 -> 26.6
#15 KURINTO: 26.5 -> 26.5
uuN has a very diverse selection of tricks. Although I feel there are still too many highlights that lack impact, along with some unnecessary fillers, compared to the other two, I’m more curious to see what new things he’ll bring in R2. Human has excellent rhythm control, but I would expect WT participants to have a more diverse trick base, and he made a noticeable mistake near the end. KURINTO has two clear highlights, but there are too many unnecessary fillers, and the combo feels a bit repetitive.

Strengths: There are clear highlights that are well presented, and the overall sense of rhythm is also very good.
To Improve: Visually, I find it a bit repetitive, and aside from the highlights, most of it feels like simple filler. While those fillers do help maintain your rhythm, it feels more like something a CV spinner would do. For me, WT calls for tightly packed highlights and a rich trick base, which I think is something you could consider.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#13 uuN: 26.5 -> 26.7
#14 Human: 26.5 -> 26.6
#15 KURINTO: 26.5 -> 26.5
uuN has a very diverse selection of tricks. Although I feel there are still too many highlights that lack impact, along with some unnecessary fillers, compared to the other two, I’m more curious to see what new things he’ll bring in R2. Human has excellent rhythm control, but I would expect WT participants to have a more diverse trick base, and he made a noticeable mistake near the end. KURINTO has two clear highlights, but there are too many unnecessary fillers, and the combo feels a bit repetitive.

Strengths: There are some clear highlights, and I think it’s important for people to understand that presenting this type of linkage so well is genuinely very difficult.
To Improve: I’d love to see more variation within the linkages that define your original style, rather than forcing in one or two extremely obvious highlights, which end up making the passes in your original style feel visually repetitive. Both 0:14 and the ending are not well presented.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#16 Imbocd: 25.5 -> 25.8
#17 Froog: 25.5 -> 25.7
#18 Sweg: 25.5 -> 25.6
#19 llvvng: 25.5 -> 25.5
Imbocd has a number of solid highlights, though there is some repetitiveness due to his style. However, I believe he has the ability to incorporate highlights beyond his usual style, so I’m looking forward to seeing his performance in R2. Froog showcases some unique wiper trick choices, and I hope to see highlights outside of the wiper category as well. Sweg, as always, has excellent EXECUTION, but there are some unnecessary fillers. In WT, I would like to see more attempts at pushing boundaries. llvvng presents his highlights very well within otherwise standard linkages, but I feel that’s not quite enough for WT, and the tension in the ending could be built up more effectively.

Strengths: There are many unique wiper sequences.
To Improve: It feels a bit lengthy, and aside from the uniqueness, the main focus of the combo is hard to grasp. I suggest adding a lot more difficult sequences and clear highlights.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#16 Imbocd: 25.5 -> 25.8
#17 Froog: 25.5 -> 25.7
#18 Sweg: 25.5 -> 25.6
#19 llvvng: 25.5 -> 25.5
Imbocd has a number of solid highlights, though there is some repetitiveness due to his style. However, I believe he has the ability to incorporate highlights beyond his usual style, so I’m looking forward to seeing his performance in R2. Froog showcases some unique wiper trick choices, and I hope to see highlights outside of the wiper category as well. Sweg, as always, has excellent EXECUTION, but there are some unnecessary fillers. In WT, I would like to see more attempts at pushing boundaries. llvvng presents his highlights very well within otherwise standard linkages, but I feel that’s not quite enough for WT, and the tension in the ending could be built up more effectively.

Strengths: The EXECUTION is excellent.
To Improve: I think, like KURINTO, you tend to rely on too much filler to build a refined sense of rhythm. While those fillers do help with rhythm to some extent, it feels more like something a CV spinner would do. For me, WT requires tightly packed highlights and a rich trick base, and I think that’s something you could also consider.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#16 Imbocd: 25.5 -> 25.8
#17 Froog: 25.5 -> 25.7
#18 Sweg: 25.5 -> 25.6
#19 llvvng: 25.5 -> 25.5
Imbocd has a number of solid highlights, though there is some repetitiveness due to his style. However, I believe he has the ability to incorporate highlights beyond his usual style, so I’m looking forward to seeing his performance in R2. Froog showcases some unique wiper trick choices, and I hope to see highlights outside of the wiper category as well. Sweg, as always, has excellent EXECUTION, but there are some unnecessary fillers. In WT, I would like to see more attempts at pushing boundaries. llvvng presents his highlights very well within otherwise standard linkages, but I feel that’s not quite enough for WT, and the tension in the ending could be built up more effectively.

Strengths: 0:06 is really well done.
To Improve: The proportion of filler is too high. I think 0:00 to 0:03 and 0:10 to 0:13 should be replaced entirely. Of course, this is an excellent combo for a CV, but for WT25, I hope you can increase the density of highlights and reduce the reliance on overly refined rhythmic layering, because this is a competition.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#16 Imbocd: 25.5 -> 25.8
#17 Froog: 25.5 -> 25.7
#18 Sweg: 25.5 -> 25.6
#19 llvvng: 25.5 -> 25.5
Imbocd has a number of solid highlights, though there is some repetitiveness due to his style. However, I believe he has the ability to incorporate highlights beyond his usual style, so I’m looking forward to seeing his performance in R2. Froog showcases some unique wiper trick choices, and I hope to see highlights outside of the wiper category as well. Sweg, as always, has excellent EXECUTION, but there are some unnecessary fillers. In WT, I would like to see more attempts at pushing boundaries. llvvng presents his highlights very well within otherwise standard linkages, but I feel that’s not quite enough for WT, and the tension in the ending could be built up more effectively.

Strengths: The visual effects at 0:03 and 0:09 are nice.
To Improve: For me, the density of highlights feels a bit too low. After 0:10, I stopped feeling surprised, and I think the entire combo has a strong sense of being stitched together. 0:00 to 0:04 is Block 1, 0:04 to 0:09 is Block 2, 0:09 to 0:14 is Block 3, and 0:14 to 0:17 is Block 4. The transitions between these blocks are not very well integrated.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#20 DumBananaMike: 24.5 -> 24.7
#21 wanadoo: 24.5 -> 24.6
#22 SebasPs: 24.5 -> 24.5
Although DumBananaMike’s highlights include some filler, I think there are elements where he’s clearly trying something new, so I’m still looking forward to what he brings in R2. Wanadoo’s combo features a few well-executed counters and nicely placed fingercross elements, but as a WT combo, it feels somewhat plain. As for SebasPs, personally, after Saltient, I no longer expect to see more impressive fingercross combos in WT, and in his combo, it’s apparent that he struggles to arrange the linkages in a coherent way.

Strengths: 0:05, 0:10, and 0:12 are all solid highlights.
To Improve: Aside from the highlights, there isn’t much worth mentioning. I think you need to significantly reduce the amount of filler. This is certainly a solid CV combo, but it still feels somewhat unsuitable for WT.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#20 DumBananaMike: 24.5 -> 24.7
#21 wanadoo: 24.5 -> 24.6
#22 SebasPs: 24.5 -> 24.5
Although DumBananaMike’s highlights include some filler, I think there are elements where he’s clearly trying something new, so I’m still looking forward to what he brings in R2. Wanadoo’s combo features a few well-executed counters and nicely placed fingercross elements, but as a WT combo, it feels somewhat plain. As for SebasPs, personally, after Saltient, I no longer expect to see more impressive fingercross combos in WT, and in his combo, it’s apparent that he struggles to arrange the linkages in a coherent way.

Strengths: Your fingers are very flexable.
To Improve: In your combo, I didn’t really see anything impressive beyond fingercross. I also feel that your fingercross linkages lack clear structure or logic, and instead mainly showcase physical advantages. You need to present something outside of fingercross. I believe that for most people, ever since Saltient, it has been difficult to feel truly impressed by fingercross combos, even though they still hold an advantage in terms of DIFFICULTY.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#20 DumBananaMike: 24.5 -> 24.7
#21 wanadoo: 24.5 -> 24.6
#22 SebasPs: 24.5 -> 24.5
Although DumBananaMike’s highlights include some filler, I think there are elements where he’s clearly trying something new, so I’m still looking forward to what he brings in R2. Wanadoo’s combo features a few well-executed counters and nicely placed fingercross elements, but as a WT combo, it feels somewhat plain. As for SebasPs, personally, after Saltient, I no longer expect to see more impressive fingercross combos in WT, and in his combo, it’s apparent that he struggles to arrange the linkages in a coherent way.

Strengths: The rhythm control is very good.
To Improve: I think the DIFFICULTY should be improved, and the ending needs more arrangement as well.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#23 slnt: 23.5 -> 23.7
#24 aike: 23.5 -> 23.6
#25 SheiXX_: 23.5 -> 23.5
Aside from the part near the ending, slnt’s combo has almost no filler, and the rhythm is very well controlled. I feel like he has a clearer sense of what he’s doing. Aike’s performance is solid but unremarkable, with no standout highlights but also no major mistakes. It makes me wonder whether he can deliver a significantly better combo in R2 than in R1. SheiXX_ shows strong thematic consistency and presents it well, but there is too much unnecessary filler throughout. I feel that as a WT combo, it’s not quite enough.

Strengths: A very clean presentation.
To Improve: There doesn’t seem to be much originality, and the entire combo feels quite plain. I hope to see more highlights and original elements.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#23 slnt: 23.5 -> 23.7
#24 aike: 23.5 -> 23.6
#25 SheiXX_: 23.5 -> 23.5
Aside from the part near the ending, slnt’s combo has almost no filler, and the rhythm is very well controlled. I feel like he has a clearer sense of what he’s doing. Aike’s performance is solid but unremarkable, with no standout highlights but also no major mistakes. It makes me wonder whether he can deliver a significantly better combo in R2 than in R1. SheiXX_ shows strong thematic consistency and presents it well, but there is too much unnecessary filler throughout. I feel that as a WT combo, it’s not quite enough.

Strengths: The rhythm is well handled.
To Improve: There are too many fillers added just for the sake of rhythm (for example, 0:00 to 0:03, 0:07 to 0:11, and 0:13 to 0:18). I think WT requires a denser concentration of highlights.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#23 slnt: 23.5 -> 23.7
#24 aike: 23.5 -> 23.6
#25 SheiXX_: 23.5 -> 23.5
Aside from the part near the ending, slnt’s combo has almost no filler, and the rhythm is very well controlled. I feel like he has a clearer sense of what he’s doing. Aike’s performance is solid but unremarkable, with no standout highlights but also no major mistakes. It makes me wonder whether he can deliver a significantly better combo in R2 than in R1. SheiXX_ shows strong thematic consistency and presents it well, but there is too much unnecessary filler throughout. I feel that as a WT combo, it’s not quite enough.

Strengths: The development of the 4p2h is quite good.
To Improve: The ending is too abrupt, and the overall execution is not particularly impressive. I would hope to see all four pens doing different things, rather than just two sets of 2p1h, as that takes away the meaning of 4p2h.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#26 Criswea: 23 -> 23.3
#27 Miuk: 23 -> 23.2
#28 anarchy: 23 -> 23.1
#29 Czern_43: 23 -> 23
Although Criswea has many moments where the left and right hands are doing the same thing, I’m personally quite excited to see what 4p2h might bring in the upcoming rounds. Miuk’s combo in the second half shows a lot of variation, but the earlier 2h1p part isn’t particularly surprising. anarchy incorporates a lot of variation into otherwise standard linkages, but I believe WT calls for more distinct highlights. As for Czern_43, I can basically see exactly what’s going on in his fingercross linkages even when played at normal speed, and personally, ever since Saltient, I’ve no longer expected to see more impressive fingercross combos in WT.

Strengths: The sequence in the second half is very rich.
To Improve: I think the 1p2h section in the first half can be removed entirely, as it doesn’t add any value. The transition between the first and second halves is also too abrupt. Only the second half is worth mentioning.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#26 Criswea: 23 -> 23.3
#27 Miuk: 23 -> 23.2
#28 anarchy: 23 -> 23.1
#29 Czern_43: 23 -> 23
Although Criswea has many moments where the left and right hands are doing the same thing, I’m personally quite excited to see what 4p2h might bring in the upcoming rounds. Miuk’s combo in the second half shows a lot of variation, but the earlier 2h1p part isn’t particularly surprising. anarchy incorporates a lot of variation into otherwise standard linkages, but I believe WT calls for more distinct highlights. As for Czern_43, I can basically see exactly what’s going on in his fingercross linkages even when played at normal speed, and personally, ever since Saltient, I’ve no longer expected to see more impressive fingercross combos in WT.

Strengths: Added a variety of visual effects to otherwise standard linkages, making them more dynamic and rich.
To Improve: The section at 0:14 is poorly arranged and feels too forced. This is a solid CV combo, but in WT, you’ll need more DIFFICULTY and CREATIVITY.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#26 Criswea: 23 -> 23.3
#27 Miuk: 23 -> 23.2
#28 anarchy: 23 -> 23.1
#29 Czern_43: 23 -> 23
Although Criswea has many moments where the left and right hands are doing the same thing, I’m personally quite excited to see what 4p2h might bring in the upcoming rounds. Miuk’s combo in the second half shows a lot of variation, but the earlier 2h1p part isn’t particularly surprising. anarchy incorporates a lot of variation into otherwise standard linkages, but I believe WT calls for more distinct highlights. As for Czern_43, I can basically see exactly what’s going on in his fingercross linkages even when played at normal speed, and personally, ever since Saltient, I’ve no longer expected to see more impressive fingercross combos in WT.

Strengths: 0:09 is very surprising.
To Improve: I can basically see exactly what’s happening in the fingercross linkages even when played at normal speed. I need to see more beyond fingercross, especially if it’s not a complete advantage for you.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#26 Criswea: 23 -> 23.3
#27 Miuk: 23 -> 23.2
#28 anarchy: 23 -> 23.1
#29 Czern_43: 23 -> 23
Although Criswea has many moments where the left and right hands are doing the same thing, I’m personally quite excited to see what 4p2h might bring in the upcoming rounds. Miuk’s combo in the second half shows a lot of variation, but the earlier 2h1p part isn’t particularly surprising. anarchy incorporates a lot of variation into otherwise standard linkages, but I believe WT calls for more distinct highlights. As for Czern_43, I can basically see exactly what’s going on in his fingercross linkages even when played at normal speed, and personally, ever since Saltient, I’ve no longer expected to see more impressive fingercross combos in WT.

Strengths: There are a few clear highlights, and the trick base is relatively diverse.
To Improve: I think the combo arrangement feels a bit off. The transitions between highlights are quite forced, as if they were separately created sections stitched together in an unnatural way.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#30 ca510: 22.5 -> 22.7
#31 Leekai: 22.5 -> 22.6
#32 Brainer: 22.5 -> 22.5
ca510 has a few clear highlights and presents a more diverse range compared to the other two. Leekai’s smoothness is truly impressive, but it makes me question whether he has a richer trick base to draw from, rather than just presenting linkages that aren’t particularly striking in a very refined way. Brainer, aside from the clear highlights in the second half, doesn’t offer much novelty in the rest of the combo, which makes me wonder if he has more to show beyond just power tricks.

Strengths: Extremely smooth, to the point where it almost feels like an illusion. 0:08 features an interesting transition.
To Improve: I think the 1p2h section in the first half can be removed entirely, as there’s nothing particularly noteworthy upon closer look. Near the ending, the CREATIVITY is still lacking, and things get a bit out of control.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#30 ca510: 22.5 -> 22.7
#31 Leekai: 22.5 -> 22.6
#32 Brainer: 22.5 -> 22.5
ca510 has a few clear highlights and presents a more diverse range compared to the other two. Leekai’s smoothness is truly impressive, but it makes me question whether he has a richer trick base to draw from, rather than just presenting linkages that aren’t particularly striking in a very refined way. Brainer, aside from the clear highlights in the second half, doesn’t offer much novelty in the rest of the combo, which makes me wonder if he has more to show beyond just power tricks.

Strengths: Visually well done, but it's too out of control.
To Improve: The transitions in the second half are too forced and feel unnatural in presentation. I think 0:00 to 0:12 can be replaced entirely, as there is no CREATIVITY present in that section.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
#30 ca510: 22.5 -> 22.7
#31 Leekai: 22.5 -> 22.6
#32 Brainer: 22.5 -> 22.5
ca510 has a few clear highlights and presents a more diverse range compared to the other two. Leekai’s smoothness is truly impressive, but it makes me question whether he has a richer trick base to draw from, rather than just presenting linkages that aren’t particularly striking in a very refined way. Brainer, aside from the clear highlights in the second half, doesn’t offer much novelty in the rest of the combo, which makes me wonder if he has more to show beyond just power tricks.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#33 FLow: 22 -> 22.4
#34 gsk8: 22 -> 22.3
#35 AsHiiii: 22 -> 22.2
#36 Beck: 22 -> 22.1
#37 Kanami 22 -> 22

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#33 FLow: 22 -> 22.4
#34 gsk8: 22 -> 22.3
#35 AsHiiii: 22 -> 22.2
#36 Beck: 22 -> 22.1
#37 Kanami 22 -> 22

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#33 FLow: 22 -> 22.4
#34 gsk8: 22 -> 22.3
#35 AsHiiii: 22 -> 22.2
#36 Beck: 22 -> 22.1
#37 Kanami 22 -> 22

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#33 FLow: 22 -> 22.4
#34 gsk8: 22 -> 22.3
#35 AsHiiii: 22 -> 22.2
#36 Beck: 22 -> 22.1
#37 Kanami 22 -> 22

-0.5 for 2hrs late.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#33 FLow: 22 -> 22.4
#34 gsk8: 22 -> 22.3
#35 AsHiiii: 22 -> 22.2
#36 Beck: 22 -> 22.1
#37 Kanami 22 -> 22

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#38 Tuanz: 21.5 -> 21.7
#39 Ergophobia 21.5 -> 21.6
#40 chillpan 21.5 -> 21.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#38 Tuanz: 21.5 -> 21.7
#39 Ergophobia 21.5 -> 21.6
#40 chillpan 21.5 -> 21.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#38 Tuanz: 21.5 -> 21.7
#39 Ergophobia 21.5 -> 21.6
#40 chillpan 21.5 -> 21.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#41 kres: 21 -> 21.4
#42 Sano: 21 -> 21.3
#43 Apple: 21 -> 21.2
#44 N1716: 21 -> 21.1
#45 hidesuwa: 21 -> 21

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#41 kres: 21 -> 21.4
#42 Sano: 21 -> 21.3
#43 Apple: 21 -> 21.2
#44 N1716: 21 -> 21.1
#45 hidesuwa: 21 -> 21

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#41 kres: 21 -> 21.4
#42 Sano: 21 -> 21.3
#43 Apple: 21 -> 21.2
#44 N1716: 21 -> 21.1
#45 hidesuwa: 21 -> 21

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#41 kres: 21 -> 21.4
#42 Sano: 21 -> 21.3
#43 Apple: 21 -> 21.2
#44 N1716: 21 -> 21.1
#45 hidesuwa: 21 -> 21

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#41 kres: 21 -> 21.4
#42 Sano: 21 -> 21.3
#43 Apple: 21 -> 21.2
#44 N1716: 21 -> 21.1
#45 hidesuwa: 21 -> 21

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#47 LongHei: 20 -> 20.4
#48 jaja: 20 -> 20.3
#49 Saria: 20 -> 20.2
#50 Madvillany: 20 -> 20.1
#51 Ness: 20 -> 20

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#47 LongHei: 20 -> 20.4
#48 jaja: 20 -> 20.3
#49 Saria: 20 -> 20.2
#50 Madvillany: 20 -> 20.1
#51 Ness: 20 -> 20

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#47 LongHei: 20 -> 20.4
#48 jaja: 20 -> 20.3
#49 Saria: 20 -> 20.2
#50 Madvillany: 20 -> 20.1
#51 Ness: 20 -> 20

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#47 LongHei: 20 -> 20.4
#48 jaja: 20 -> 20.3
#49 Saria: 20 -> 20.2
#50 Madvillany: 20 -> 20.1
#51 Ness: 20 -> 20

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#47 LongHei: 20 -> 20.4
#48 jaja: 20 -> 20.3
#49 Saria: 20 -> 20.2
#50 Madvillany: 20 -> 20.1
#51 Ness: 20 -> 20

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#52 Seyerkz: 19.5 -> 19.7
#53 karsten: 19.5 -> 19.6
#54 Colin_dAlaska: 19.5 -> 19.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#52 Seyerkz: 19.5 -> 19.7
#53 karsten: 19.5 -> 19.6
#54 Colin_dAlaska: 19.5 -> 19.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#52 Seyerkz: 19.5 -> 19.7
#53 karsten: 19.5 -> 19.6
#54 Colin_dAlaska: 19.5 -> 19.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#55 Agiota: 19 -> 19.2
#56 etro_ps: 19 -> 19.1
#57 epico: 19 -> 19

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#55 Agiota: 19 -> 19.2
#56 etro_ps: 19 -> 19.1
#57 epico: 19 -> 19

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#55 Agiota: 19 -> 19.2
#56 etro_ps: 19 -> 19.1
#57 epico: 19 -> 19

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#58 dronVN: 18.5 -> 18.7
#59 Flex: 18.5 -> 18.6
#60 MAksesOwicz: 18.5 -> 18.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#58 dronVN: 18.5 -> 18.7
#59 Flex: 18.5 -> 18.6
#60 MAksesOwicz: 18.5 -> 18.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#58 dronVN: 18.5 -> 18.7
#59 Flex: 18.5 -> 18.6
#60 MAksesOwicz: 18.5 -> 18.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#62 GhostNez: 17.5 -> 17.6
#63 Cub: 17.5 -> 17.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#62 GhostNez: 17.5 -> 17.6
#63 Cub: 17.5 -> 17.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#64 bio8: 17 -> 17.3
#65 Ashley: 17 -> 17.2
#66 TALlll: 17 -> 17.1
#67 Kesen: 17 -> 17

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#64 bio8: 17 -> 17.3
#65 Ashley: 17 -> 17.2
#66 TALlll: 17 -> 17.1
#67 Kesen: 17 -> 17

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#64 bio8: 17 -> 17.3
#65 Ashley: 17 -> 17.2
#66 TALlll: 17 -> 17.1
#67 Kesen: 17 -> 17

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#64 bio8: 17 -> 17.3
#65 Ashley: 17 -> 17.2
#66 TALlll: 17 -> 17.1
#67 Kesen: 17 -> 17

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#68 Starrysky: 16.5 -> 16.8
#69 Shadow: 16.5 -> 16.7
#70 _X_: 16.5 -> 16.6
#71 Yyyuuuuuuyuyu: 16.5 -> 16.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#68 Starrysky: 16.5 -> 16.8
#69 Shadow: 16.5 -> 16.7
#70 _X_: 16.5 -> 16.6
#71 Yyyuuuuuuyuyu: 16.5 -> 16.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#68 Starrysky: 16.5 -> 16.8
#69 Shadow: 16.5 -> 16.7
#70 _X_: 16.5 -> 16.6
#71 Yyyuuuuuuyuyu: 16.5 -> 16.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#68 Starrysky: 16.5 -> 16.8
#69 Shadow: 16.5 -> 16.7
#70 _X_: 16.5 -> 16.6
#71 Yyyuuuuuuyuyu: 16.5 -> 16.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#72 omoemon: 16 -> 16.1
#73 Yagaur: 16 -> 16

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#72 omoemon: 16 -> 16.1
#73 Yagaur: 16 -> 16

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#76 chichi: 13.5 -> 13.6
#77 haertak: 13.5 -> 13.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#76 chichi: 13.5 -> 13.6
#77 haertak: 13.5 -> 13.5

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#79 Amura: 12 -> 12.2
#80 faske: 12 -> 12.1
#81 Songmobi: 12 -> 12

-0.5 for the combo less than 10sec.

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#79 Amura: 12 -> 12.2
#80 faske: 12 -> 12.1
#81 Songmobi: 12 -> 12

[Tiebreak]
(Since the scores for DIFFICULTY, EXECUTION, and CREATIVITY have already been evaluated relative to all participants, I will use the CONSTRUCTION score as an adjustment to distinguish which spinner’s overall structure better matches what I believe a WT combo should demonstrate.)
(Comments are only for the top 32; I will just list the results for spinners outside the top 32. If you would like to know the reason for the tiebreak, feel free to DM me on Twitter.)
#79 Amura: 12 -> 12.2
#80 faske: 12 -> 12.1
#81 Songmobi: 12 -> 12