How much does performing below the bar on 1 dimension but well on everything else impact offer chances in McKinsey final round?

Hi all - I recently went through the McKinsey BA interview process and completed my final round yesterday. My R1 was very strong and I had very minimal feedback and was told my casing fundamentals were all very strong, including quant skills (was able to solve these on my own with minimal/no help from interviewer) 

However with my R2, my math wasn’t the greatest and I think I struggled doing them in-person vs. virtual which I’m used to. For the most part I had the approach down but execution wasn’t the greatest and interviewers had to jump in to help out at certain points. I wouldn’t say all 3 interviews were equally bad but definitely not as good as my R1. Despite this, I did have several spikes across PEI, exhibits, and frameworks that stood out across interviewers and would say each case overall went quite well. Rapport with interviewers was also really good for each (I work at another consulting firm right now so it was pretty easy to bond with them) 

I guess my question with all of that is if 1 dimension isn’t the best for 1 round (when it was great on the other round) and all other dimensions were at minimum with multiple spikes across all of them, am I screwed? Will my R2 interviewers look at my R1 results and see a discrepancy? I know R2 is what matters most and the importance of quant skills, it’s normally a strength for me and I really just had a bad day at the worst possible time and I’m worried it’s going to tank my chances.