Classical music on piano, rock music on piano, classical music on violin.
Figure skating, speed skating, synchronized swimming.
Apple pie, meat pie, spaghetti Bolognese.
From each of these sets, which two things are easier to compare? (Yes, this is will be an essay about pen spinning...lol)
So it's already the 4th month of 2026! With the revival of WT in 2025, there is hope that PSO will be organised this year. A key aspect of PSO is the existence of themes. There are many discussions about whether certain trick variants should be themes; but not about the logical basis of themes as an entity.
What determines comparability?
How does one compare combos with incredibly different mechanics, visual effects, and apparent intent? Is it valid to compete in artforms where there is no clear goal (as opposed to games or sports with specific win conditions)? How can comparisons for sake of competing be improved?
As a WT25 judge, I am glad that klb and criswea did not battle - it would be very hard to compare the strongest power with the strongest 2p1h. The mechanics are very different, the effects are very different; so the skills to perform and implement material are very different. However, WT is a 'one size fits all' (or 'everyone is made to fit to one size') system - 1 winner progresses from each 1v1, which is judged by 1 set of criteria. There is room to say 'I value implementation of dramatic highlights more' (which favours klb), and 'I value the intellectual process of figuring out what mechanics are possible' (which favours criswea); but only 1 is allowed to pass. As such, incredibly different representations of different aspects of our artform are forced into comparison.
The format of PSO allows comparisons of this nature to be explored: themes can be used to award different areas of merit for different ways of spinning. The more concrete (and more superficial) benefit of PSO is that it can encourage exploration of unusual aspects of PS that are 'not practical' for WT; but in a more abstract sense, the comparability angle can hint at very fundamental elements of PS as an artform.
Some methods of considering themes that don't seem sensible:
Comparability is easier if we focus on the traditional criteria in isolation (maximise difficulty; maximise creativity; or maximise execution). However, I don't think this reflects the many interpretations and ideals in our artform. For example, a difficulty theme would still struggle to compare mumm3y and klb; and an execution theme would still struggle to compare 82Oth and nine. It is straightforward to explain how these spinners are different, but it is tough to make a competition framework that is able to reward the countless representations of 'peak in something'.
Are traditional trick-based themes practical when we consider how PS has evolved? Probably not. As PS has evolved, trick variants have become more integrated. For example (before 2012-2014 or so), 'power' and 'linkages' used to be separate; and 1p2h used to be very undeveloped - so 1p2h combos based on counters or wipers did not exist. However, for the past 7+ years, it has become common for power to use counters, or 1p2h to use wipers etc. The expansion of skillsets also shows how arbitrary trick-based separations are. For example, taps & counters have been put together because counters often have tap-like mechanics; but many triangle and dual pass sequences are also tap-like. And yet, counters (frequent direction changes) and pass sequences (usually in one direction for some time) are very different. In a more abstract sense, impressions have also diversified - a major premise of 'power tricks' (historically) was in the visual effect of power tricks being dynamic and powerful - but combos can be made with few strict power sequences that give very power-like impressions (e.g. the seasick-counter combo in my 12 year solo, my WT19 R5).
Does grouping themes by named trick families make combos more comparable? In some cases it may (fukrou and beige both use wipers while focusing on clean performance); but this fails when the apparent intent is different (beige and diobrando, who uses thumbcross wipers with technical focus). As such, the approach taken in JC2025 to separate by focus area (experimental, power, classical in a more abstract sense) may be more logical than separating by trick family or 'path' (e.g. wiper, counters, 2h) if we are aiming to make comparisons.
Focus areas as potential themes:
What themes might exist if we are choosing by focus area? What deeper considerations or elements of PS may be revealed? In art, there are inherent qualities of order (chaos), coherence (incoherence), fluidity (unevenness), stillness (dynamism). In PS, there is a continuum of focusing on effortless impression (while having less drastic changes to create a relaxed feeling) versus semi-controlled chaos (with unpredictable and exciting moments). I feel the former can be encompassed by a classical theme (e.g. nine, aimo, dary, rai, hash). Of course, even within these examples, there is huge variation in how emphasis and pacing is adjusted. Nonetheless, collectively they are very distinct from the large body of 'technical'-oriented spinning (which focuses less on effortlessness; and in some cases even desires dramatic and chaotic impressions).
Typically, practitioners who focus on more technical aspects (difficulty, mechanical density, novelty and conceptual significance) are less inclined towards highly polished renditions associated with the 'classical' theme. While there are many reasons for this, this supports the existence of 'classical' as a theme. Classical aligns well with historical ideals of PS, and fits the idea that mastery is associated with effortlessness. Does this sound very similar to 'aestheticism'? Probably, but I find the definition of aesthetics (in English language, outside PS context) to be associated with visuals. In PS, there are many visual considerations in 'technical' spinning - most notably, highly visual organic alien effects are performed by saltient, but saltient's spinning has completely different ideals to the 'classical' approach.
In contrast to the fluidity, effortlessness and subtlety of classical, 'power' is directly based in the use of large, flashy movements. To effectively use dynamic movements, specific considerations of structure are required (e.g. having most dramatic movements or direction changes at certain points give more impactful impression); as well as mastering the highly random nature of learning power-based mechanics and finding a setup that can capture large movements. As such, I feel 'power' aligns with the inherent considerations of highlight use (visually) and overcoming consistency barriers (mechanically), while having a very strong historical foundation based on work by spinnerpeem, menowa, and myself.
Of course, there is far more in non-classical(?) technical(?) spinning than just 'power' and use of large highlights. Previous PSO has 'complexity' as a theme, but many people joined it due to its overly vague nature, so it became like a small scale WT. Nonetheless, WT25 discussions revealed a key philosophical issue: how do we weigh incredibly sophisticated technical mechanic-based combos (sophisticated in terms of modifiers, trick variants, and supposed process of creating the breakdown) compared to ones that focus more on visual effects and impactful rendition of selected material? How would we compare mumm3y WT25 R6 or saltient WT21 R4 and R5; with klb WT25 R3 and criswea WT25 R5? These combos are strong in different regards, so they deserve to be rewarded for their different strengths (rather than be constrained by one size fits all criteria of WT). Therefore, a theme focusing on mechanical intricacy, which rewards sophisticated modifiers, trick variants and mechanics is worthwhile.
So what happens to all the trick-based themes, if we accept that separating combos by trick family may not be logical or practical? In typical competitions, combos heavily based on 1 trick (e.g. imbocd's pass-based combos) may be penalised for having less variety. This fits the idea that 'all parts of the combo add to the created effect', however, this definition inherently penalises those who aim at consistency of performing specific skills and end up with higher uniformity. As far as I'm aware, PS is quite unusual among juggling artforms in creating sophisticated breakdown, notation, and modifier systems which can give rise to dozens of variants of a base trick. As such, a trick specialist theme (in which a wiper-based combo may face a counter-based combo and a pass-based combo) where adherence to implementing specific trick variants is prioritised may have merit. While this may end up with different trick-based combos being less comparable, the traditional trick-based themes may not improve comparability either (beige - fukrou - diobrando comparison earlier in this article). Practically, a trick specialist theme also addresses the problems with having heaps of trick-based themes.
My previous points suggest that xpxh (2 or more mods, 2h) should not be a theme, since you can already enter make a trick specialist multi-pen combo, a power-based multi-pen combo, a counter-based 1p2h combo (e.g. my UPSB 4th), or a classical 2p2h combo (e.g. Laku Japen 21st). Do we want 2p+/2h combos that are not overtly focused on any trick variants to be confined to general competitions like WT? WT25 brought arguments about comparability of 2p+ with 1p combos, so a 2p+/2h theme may 'divert' some of the 'hard to compare' 2p+/2h combos away from the 1p combos. I feel this '2p+ has unfair advantage, so we should put 1p combos into protected zone so they don't get beaten up' is silly - avenues that allow more interesting approaches are attractive because it's a competition, and because practitioners are often curious about unexplored things, or just because they think it's cool. Regardless, having a xpxh theme would encourage further expansion and polishing of this interesting area, which exploded in 2025 after RPD's tutorials and PenU1. Does this seem like favouritism? Perhaps, especially when there isn't a fingercross/threads theme - just that fingercross and threads are perfectly aligned with the mechanical intricacy theme already.
If we presume xpxh is a theme, I feel it should be specified to more 'conventional' 2p+/2h done with regular mods (rather than 3-sided, magic-like elements etc); with a focus on technical skill and 'typical' priorities (rather than weighing too heavily on abstract conceptual significance or novelty for sake of novelty). While spinners who tend to use unusual elements tend to be xpxh spinners, it is hard to compare use of these unusual elements with more typical xpxh skills. Historically, body & environment and spinless have appeared as themes in previous WC. It would be interesting to see what modern skill levels and theories bring to spinning of this direction. Indeed, if we are to challenge beliefs about what may constitute PS, if we are to encourage adaptation of ideas from other forms of juggling and arts, a freeform theme should be put in. I believe that many more conceptually significant 'proofs' are waiting for us to make them - for example, my 18 year solo challenged traditional expectations that 1 combo must use mods of the same appearance (or the same number); and that motion of multiple mods in relation to each other can collectively create viable visual effects (even if the motion of each mod is trivial). In a more practical sense, it would be silly to make a 3-sided theme, a 'magic' theme, a standup theme (many existing standup combos are more like 'combos based on tricks that look good from front angle' and could have been done sitting on a chair), a string theme, a 'add PS to other forms of juggling' theme etc. The freeform theme serves as a collective space to encourage exploration of these unusual approaches to PS, which have far larger implications beyond merely adding a random object to the combo.
Some existing freeform combos: DBM 3p for Silva CV ; St 3p standup 'juggling' for JC ; St with nunchuck-like mod ; Baimai combo with shadows ; Baimai combo with cardistry
In light of above reasoning, can unmod be justified as a theme? Initially, I thought it could not be justified, since we don't have mod-based separations (we don't have different themes for 25cm mod, 20cm mod, symmetrical mod, asymmetrical mod etc). However, there are possibly 2 inherent justifications for unmod theme to exist. People who don't spin often make comments like 'that is a stick, not a pen', or 'can you do those tricks with a normal pen'. Besides the obvious specific skill adaptation to do tricks on regular pens, there is the more interesting challenge of understanding why certain tricks are suitable for doing on smaller object - this can challenge our ideas about what constitutes 'difficulty'. Historically, unmod spinners (e.g. aysh, first combo in Japen 1st) and minimal-mod spinners (Kam with RSVP v1, David Weis with taped pencil etc) played an important role; and PS as an activity would have started with someone spinning a regular pen before mods were made. Are these reasons of equivalent weight to the points supporting the other themes? Perhaps not, but it'd be very interesting to see what happens if high-level 'stick spinners' use regular pens (or smaller implements, like inktubes...lol).
So what do we end up with?
Classical - fluidity and effortlessness. Less weight on trick mechanics and difficulty. Examples: Nine WC22 R2 ; Aimo ; Dary (Serket) ; Laku Japen 21st ; Tmrw
Power - large highlights with power mechanics and technical skill. Maybe slightly less weight on creativity-related aspects. Examples: klb WT25 R3 ; 82Oth Christmas Cup ; tilt WT25 R1
Mechanical intricacy - sophisticated mechanical variations. Less weight on fluidity, rendition or technique perfection (note: tricks should still have proper mod-finger interactions, even if they are not done smoothly). Examples: Mumm3y WT25 R6 ; tilt WT25 R5 ; Saltient WT21 R4
Trick specialist - extensive use of variations of a specific trick family. While creativity and variety are still important, there will be less overt penalties for uniformity. Examples: Imbocd ; DarKT ; Froog
XPXH (2p+/2h) - Multipen and 2h with priorities like 'conventional' WT orientation. Maybe slightly less weight on execution-related aspects. Examples: Criswea WT25 R6 ; Mumm3y WT25 R4
Freeform - Using unusual elements (e.g. ideas from magic, juggling, dance, illusions, videography) and unusual objects (e.g. 3-sided, string, cup, bag, surface of bed etc). Focus is on different interpretations of PS, what things can be changed, and how PS is approached as an artform on a conceptual level. Less weight on technical difficulty and fluidity in typical sense (note: visual rendition is significant for many freeform approaches). Ideally, combos explore some deeper considerations beyond merely adding a random object to the combo. Examples: DBM for Silva CV ; St in JC ; Baimai combo with shadows ; mod swap solo combo
Unmod - Use of unmodified (or barely modified) pens/pencils - allow any ordinary pens smaller than say, a Tombow marker; would not limit to just Dr Grip and Stalogy. Evaluation may be similar to typical WT priorities, if this theme aims to evaluate capabilities of top spinners when they are no longer allowed to use mods. Examples: aoneko ; supertip combo ; Kima WC12 R2
If you read up to the end - thanks, I hope my words triggered some thinking! Thanks RPD for discussions regarding this topic last year, some of the logic and suggestions are based on his proposals.
