Mutt
Once again you are wrong.
However your example neatly shows what this thread has been about ie that V1 is a zone of decision rather than a single figure.
Your example shows V1s for 0% and 20% de-rate.
I said V1min will rise with increasing de-rate; and V1max will fall and thus eventually meet at the balanced field V1. Yet yours both do the reverse. Why?
The reason is both V1 figures are nothing to do with V1. The lower figure is following down Vmcg until it meets the rising 'V1min'. Similarly the higher figure is tracking Vr until again it meets the falling V1max.
If you had carried on to 40% 60% 80% derate, this pattern would have reversed to conform to what I proposed.
A good real life example.
I guess also that strictly speaking you were correct since in practice you can't always de-rate enough to get a balanced field because of operational limitations.