The way i understand this is: first (left column) is for the longest runway available with no wind. The second column is for the most probable runway (but not necessarily the longest one) accounting for probable winds. The second column caters for uncertainty as this runway might change if the wind changes.
If you cannot make it into the longest runway, no wind, dry or wet, then you canīt dispatch as this is the life saver case. Then, for the most probable runway, as you might not make it to other runway if wind changes, then you need an alternate. Amsterdam with its multiple lay-out runways comes into my mind.
The contaminated case I am with you, the contamination might clear once you arrive, but just in case, there are 2 other options available.
Indeed it is written like hell, I think in EU text could be written easier to understand, but then where would all the bureaucrats and lawyers go?