Ok so for the last 10 months or so I've been on a crusade to update the IFPA freestyle routine rules so that they're the same as what actually happens in competition. Now according to IFC procedure the changes can only be voted on at the annual meeting and need to be presented to the IFC a few months before then. This means we have very little time to confirm these rules and I'm having a lot of trouble getting feedback from people. So if you could read through these rules and give as detailed feedback as possible that would be fantastic. Also feel free to ask questions. Cheers.
Edit: Serious replies only please.
--------------
507.01 – Judges
A panel of judges evaluates each routine. The judges are composed of non competitors deemed suitable by the tournament director. It is advised that judges are experienced with the system and with freestyle footbag. Each judge shall be independent of the other judges and shall not discuss decisions until after the results have been submitted. The desired amount of judges is 4 to 6.
507.02 – Judging Aids
A panel of judging aids shall assist the judges. This shall comprise of the following:
a) Time keeper: record the time taken for the routine
b) Drop counter: record the number of drops compiled in the routine
c) Add counter: record the total amount of adds compiled in the routine
d) Contact counter: record and total the amount of contacts in the routine
e) Runner: relay information and results between the judges and the appropriate people.
If capable – it is allowed for aids to fill more than one positions.
507.03 – Judging Scores
The judges shall judge the routines based on two criteria:
a) Technical Merit:
Technical merit refers the difficulty of the tricks and combinations performed by the competitor, the variety of tricks and combinations demonstrated, the execution of moves and combinations and the general form demonstrated.
b) Artistic Merit:
Artistic Merit refers to artistic variety of the tricks and combinations performed by the competitor, the relationship between the competitor and the music, including the timing of moves and music, the rhythm of the routine, choreography, the start and finish of the routine, the use of space, time, environment and music, the competitor's appeal to the audience, the artistic impression, including style and originality and the overall impression of the routine.
Each judge shall award a score from 0 to 6 for each criteria taking into account the following guidelines:
a) Technical merit:
0.0 = extremely poor
1.0 = poor
2.0 = weak
3.0 = reasonable
4.0 = good
5.0 = very good
6.0 = perfect
b) Artistic merit:
0.0 = extremely poor
1.0 = poor
2.0 = weak
3.0 = reasonable
4.0 = good
5.0 = very good
6.0 = perfect
Note that judges can award scores of any decimal place that they feel is necessary although are expected to show common sense.
507.04 Ranking Players
Each player shall be ranked on each individual criterion with the player receiving the highest score for the criterion being placed in first position etc. by each individual judge. The rank position given by each judge will then be totalled together to give each player a final score. Players are then ranked from lowest score to highest score. The player with the lowest score is awarded first place.
In the result of a tie the individual judging ranks are analysed and the player with the highest quantity of ranks at the lowest value of the tied player shall be awarded the higher finish of the tied players. Players with identical rank scores shall be mutually be awarded the position.
New Freestyle Routine Rules - Feedback Wanted!
-
max
- Australofrenchbrityorkus
- Posts: 3751
- Joined: 24 Apr 2002 00:12
- Location: Bondi Beach, Australia
- Contact:
Nice concise and to the point. Just concering judges and judging aides:
- What is the *minimum* number of judges required.
- Are judging aides mandatory?
- Can judges still be competitors to other events of the same tourney (intermediate / open freestyle)?
I'm asking this for smaller run tournies
- What is the *minimum* number of judges required.
- Are judging aides mandatory?
- Can judges still be competitors to other events of the same tourney (intermediate / open freestyle)?
I'm asking this for smaller run tournies
Maxime Boucoiran
French ConneXion
BFC
French ConneXion
BFC
-
krawallier
- Fearless
- Posts: 534
- Joined: 08 Oct 2003 16:24
- Location: berlinKREUZBERG
- Contact:
this does not reflect reality at most bigger tourneys i've been too.The judges are composed of non competitors
important thing that should be in there:
it has to be the same judging panel within one pool in freestyle - but the panel can change from pool to pool. this way competitors can (cause in reality they have to do so) judge other pools, though they compete in the same competition.
also i think there should be a ranking from the most important to least important aid:
runner
time keeper
drop counter
add/contact counter
can't think of anything else. your work is very appreciated!
max kerkhoff
fcfootstar
! 30TH ANNUAL IFPA WORLD FOOTBAG CHAMPIONSHIPS 2009 - BERLIN !
fcfootstar
! 30TH ANNUAL IFPA WORLD FOOTBAG CHAMPIONSHIPS 2009 - BERLIN !
I disagree. A competitor who is judging a different pool might score a person lower in hopes of not having to compete against them in the later stages of the competition.krawallier wrote:it has to be the same judging panel within one pool in freestyle - but the panel can change from pool to pool. this way competitors can (cause in reality they have to do so) judge other pools, though they compete in the same competition.
Hello, my name is Iain George.
-
krawallier
- Fearless
- Posts: 534
- Joined: 08 Oct 2003 16:24
- Location: berlinKREUZBERG
- Contact:
well, then you come up with enough judges for a big competition...
at euros and worlds, a third to half of the judges normally are competitors...
and it is going to be the same in frankfurt.
i agree with your fear that there is a risk of strategic judging... but there is no other solution at the moment.
i would just state in the rules that the judging panel ought not to change within one pool
- automatically this leaves only players who are in other pools or don't compete....
EDIT: just thought about it again:
the problem that there are too few non-competitor judges really only exists in first round, but there a judge might change the ranking within the pool, but the seeding for semi-finals is so complex, that there is no way he can change anything for his advantage - giving a good player a lower score might result in him beeing seeded lower and ending up in the same pool as the judge, or other way around...
eg: honza is a judge and gives felix such low scores that he ranks 2nd in his pool instead of winning, that in semis, honza ends up being in the same pool as him and thus kicked out of competition... so the unfair judging didn't help him at all... hypothetical, of course
at euros and worlds, a third to half of the judges normally are competitors...
and it is going to be the same in frankfurt.
i agree with your fear that there is a risk of strategic judging... but there is no other solution at the moment.
i would just state in the rules that the judging panel ought not to change within one pool
- automatically this leaves only players who are in other pools or don't compete....
EDIT: just thought about it again:
the problem that there are too few non-competitor judges really only exists in first round, but there a judge might change the ranking within the pool, but the seeding for semi-finals is so complex, that there is no way he can change anything for his advantage - giving a good player a lower score might result in him beeing seeded lower and ending up in the same pool as the judge, or other way around...
eg: honza is a judge and gives felix such low scores that he ranks 2nd in his pool instead of winning, that in semis, honza ends up being in the same pool as him and thus kicked out of competition... so the unfair judging didn't help him at all... hypothetical, of course
max kerkhoff
fcfootstar
! 30TH ANNUAL IFPA WORLD FOOTBAG CHAMPIONSHIPS 2009 - BERLIN !
fcfootstar
! 30TH ANNUAL IFPA WORLD FOOTBAG CHAMPIONSHIPS 2009 - BERLIN !
Hey thanks alot for the responces. Also thanks for the praise although it's uneccessary. You can thank me when I actually achieve something.
- Judging aides are definitely not mandatory. At last Aus champs that basically used these rules we had a timekeeper and that was all. We also only had three judges.
- I would interpret these rules to say that judges can compete in any event that they are not judging. I gather that needs some clarification but the intention was to stipulate that you cannot judge yourself or your competitors. Ideally judges wouldn't compete at all and that's certainly what I've tried to enforce in Australian competitions but certainly if it's neccessary than it's better that competitors judge than if nobody does.
Regarding the brief debate between Iain and Max K - at this stage the aim is to give the sport and the IFC some more legitimacy rather than to direct how tournaments are run. Definitely in the future the IFC will have strong control on our tournaments are run but at this stage no IFPA sanctioned tournament has used the freestyle routine rules for the last 4 years or so - my goal is to update the rules - not to let my own personal views get in the way of this.
I think ideally we'd all agree that judges shouldn't compete at all but sadly at the moment that isn't really a possibility. Certainly I think tournament directors/head judges should aim for judges that do not compete at all and I made sure that was a reality at the last aus champs and I'm fairly confident that will occur again at this coming aus champs and future aus champs. Certainly I personally believe that judges are more important than competitors and if neccessary would always judge instead of competing and would not compete if I judged - however it's important to stick to reality. If I spent 6 months working on a routine and went to worlds and discovered they were short on judges when it had always been my intention to compete I would probably judge and compete despite my reservations against this.
I'll post the amended document shortly!
- There is minimum according to the rules. Obviously it's good to follow the recommendations but if less than 4 are all that is available the tournament can still get IFPA sanctioning - in fact so long as you let the sanctioning committee know any changes you can still pretty much use whatever rules you like.Max B wrote:- What is the *minimum* number of judges required.
- Are judging aides mandatory?
- Can judges still be competitors to other events of the same tourney (intermediate / open freestyle)?
- Judging aides are definitely not mandatory. At last Aus champs that basically used these rules we had a timekeeper and that was all. We also only had three judges.
- I would interpret these rules to say that judges can compete in any event that they are not judging. I gather that needs some clarification but the intention was to stipulate that you cannot judge yourself or your competitors. Ideally judges wouldn't compete at all and that's certainly what I've tried to enforce in Australian competitions but certainly if it's neccessary than it's better that competitors judge than if nobody does.
Good point. Even though it should be assumed - I think it's a good word to add incase people have problems with the judging - for lodging protests etc. Hopefully tournament directors should do a good enough job that it shouldn't be an issue but it's good to be clear and open with things like this.Iain wrote:under 507.01, there is one important word missing. UNBIASED.
too tired to come up with other things, will post back later
Sorry I can see that the clause on aids needs more clarification. Judges can do the job of aids - as could players - although again I'd say that it would be inappropriate for aides to aid in the judging of their direct competitors (ie in the same pool as they are competing). Aides are recommended but not neccessary.anssi wrote:Judges aren't allowed to do the stuff that belongs to the aids? Can other players be aids?
I think I've answered these requests apart from the order of aides. I'll also add a clause about these. Basically saying that the aides are only required if the head judge/tournament director thinks that they are neccessary.max k wrote:Quote:
The judges are composed of non competitors
this does not reflect reality at most bigger tourneys i've been too.
important thing that should be in there:
it has to be the same judging panel within one pool in freestyle - but the panel can change from pool to pool. this way competitors can (cause in reality they have to do so) judge other pools, though they compete in the same competition.
also i think there should be a ranking from the most important to least important aid:
runner
time keeper
drop counter
add/contact counter
can't think of anything else. your work is very appreciated!
Regarding the brief debate between Iain and Max K - at this stage the aim is to give the sport and the IFC some more legitimacy rather than to direct how tournaments are run. Definitely in the future the IFC will have strong control on our tournaments are run but at this stage no IFPA sanctioned tournament has used the freestyle routine rules for the last 4 years or so - my goal is to update the rules - not to let my own personal views get in the way of this.
I think ideally we'd all agree that judges shouldn't compete at all but sadly at the moment that isn't really a possibility. Certainly I think tournament directors/head judges should aim for judges that do not compete at all and I made sure that was a reality at the last aus champs and I'm fairly confident that will occur again at this coming aus champs and future aus champs. Certainly I personally believe that judges are more important than competitors and if neccessary would always judge instead of competing and would not compete if I judged - however it's important to stick to reality. If I spent 6 months working on a routine and went to worlds and discovered they were short on judges when it had always been my intention to compete I would probably judge and compete despite my reservations against this.
I'll post the amended document shortly!
Re: New Freestyle Routine Rules - Feedback Wanted!
507.01 – Judges
A panel of judges evaluates each routine. Each judge shall be independent of the other judges and shall not discuss decisions until after the results have been submitted. The desired amount of judges is 4 to 6. It is advised that judges are experienced with the system and with freestyle footbag. Judges are not allowed to compete in the pool or final that they are judging and it is recommend that they do not compete in the event if possible.
507.02 – Judging Aids
A panel of judging aids shall assist the judges if desired. This shall comprise of the following:
a) Runner: relay information and results between the judges and the appropriate people.
b) Time keeper: record the time taken for the routine
c) Drop counter: record the number of drops compiled in the routine
d) Add counter: record the total amount of adds compiled in the routine
e) Contact counter: record and total the amount of contacts in the routine
If capable – it is allowed for aids to fill more than one positions. Aids are not allowed to compete in the pool or final that they are involved with and it is recommended that they do not compete in the event if possible.
507.03 – Judging Scores
The judges shall judge the routines based on two criteria:
a) Technical Merit:
Technical merit refers the difficulty of the tricks and combinations performed by the competitor, the variety of tricks and combinations demonstrated, the execution of moves and combinations and the general form demonstrated.
b) Artistic Merit:
Artistic Merit refers to artistic variety of the tricks and combinations performed by the competitor, the relationship between the competitor and the music, including the timing of moves and music, the rhythm of the routine, choreography, the start and finish of the routine, the use of space, time, environment and music, the competitor's appeal to the audience, the artistic impression, including style and originality and the overall impression of the routine.
Each judge shall award a score from 0 to 6 for each criteria taking into account the following guidelines:
a) Technical merit:
0.0 = extremely poor
1.0 = poor
2.0 = weak
3.0 = reasonable
4.0 = good
5.0 = very good
6.0 = perfect
b) Artistic merit:
0.0 = extremely poor
1.0 = poor
2.0 = weak
3.0 = reasonable
4.0 = good
5.0 = very good
6.0 = perfect
Note that judges can award scores of any decimal place that they feel is necessary although are expected to show common sense.
507.04 Ranking Players
Each player shall be ranked on each individual criterion with the player receiving the highest score for the criterion being placed in first position etc. by each individual judge. The rank position given by each judge will then be totalled together to give each player a final score. Players are then ranked from lowest score to highest score. The player with the lowest score is awarded first place.
In the result of a tie the individual judging ranks are analysed and the player with the highest quantity of ranks at the lowest value of the tied player shall be awarded the higher finish of the tied players. Players with identical rank scores shall be mutually be awarded the position.
A panel of judges evaluates each routine. Each judge shall be independent of the other judges and shall not discuss decisions until after the results have been submitted. The desired amount of judges is 4 to 6. It is advised that judges are experienced with the system and with freestyle footbag. Judges are not allowed to compete in the pool or final that they are judging and it is recommend that they do not compete in the event if possible.
507.02 – Judging Aids
A panel of judging aids shall assist the judges if desired. This shall comprise of the following:
a) Runner: relay information and results between the judges and the appropriate people.
b) Time keeper: record the time taken for the routine
c) Drop counter: record the number of drops compiled in the routine
d) Add counter: record the total amount of adds compiled in the routine
e) Contact counter: record and total the amount of contacts in the routine
If capable – it is allowed for aids to fill more than one positions. Aids are not allowed to compete in the pool or final that they are involved with and it is recommended that they do not compete in the event if possible.
507.03 – Judging Scores
The judges shall judge the routines based on two criteria:
a) Technical Merit:
Technical merit refers the difficulty of the tricks and combinations performed by the competitor, the variety of tricks and combinations demonstrated, the execution of moves and combinations and the general form demonstrated.
b) Artistic Merit:
Artistic Merit refers to artistic variety of the tricks and combinations performed by the competitor, the relationship between the competitor and the music, including the timing of moves and music, the rhythm of the routine, choreography, the start and finish of the routine, the use of space, time, environment and music, the competitor's appeal to the audience, the artistic impression, including style and originality and the overall impression of the routine.
Each judge shall award a score from 0 to 6 for each criteria taking into account the following guidelines:
a) Technical merit:
0.0 = extremely poor
1.0 = poor
2.0 = weak
3.0 = reasonable
4.0 = good
5.0 = very good
6.0 = perfect
b) Artistic merit:
0.0 = extremely poor
1.0 = poor
2.0 = weak
3.0 = reasonable
4.0 = good
5.0 = very good
6.0 = perfect
Note that judges can award scores of any decimal place that they feel is necessary although are expected to show common sense.
507.04 Ranking Players
Each player shall be ranked on each individual criterion with the player receiving the highest score for the criterion being placed in first position etc. by each individual judge. The rank position given by each judge will then be totalled together to give each player a final score. Players are then ranked from lowest score to highest score. The player with the lowest score is awarded first place.
In the result of a tie the individual judging ranks are analysed and the player with the highest quantity of ranks at the lowest value of the tied player shall be awarded the higher finish of the tied players. Players with identical rank scores shall be mutually be awarded the position.