AER Specific Judges Rules 2017-2020

2017-03-17 22:19:13
最后编辑:徐小辉 于 2017-03-17 22:45:46
The FIG has approved the 2017 FIG General Judges’ Rules, which are applicable to all competitive disciplines. The specific rules and clarifications listed below apply only to this discipline and are in compliance with the General Judges’ Rules. 
ARTICLE 1 JUDGES’ COURSES Each Intercontinental and International Course, as well as the Federation requested courses, will last 5 days. (Arrival and departure days not included).  The Course will include a theory examination on the Code of Points and the Technical Regulations and a practical examination on video. 
1.1  Intercontinental Courses – Each Federation will be permitted to send a maximum of 4 judges to attend the Course.  – New and current FIG AER TC members, along with the AER Continental Union TC Presidents, are in addition to these quotas. – Judges participating must be Category 1, 2 or 3. – Judges sanctioned (sanctions as per FIG Statutes Art. 43.2 except point a) during the period starting 01.01.2013 to the date of the course may not participate in an Intercontinental judges’ Course. – All judges who wish to raise or maintain their category must take the examination.  – Category 1 may be achieved at the Intercontinental Judges’ Course only. – If the minimum passing grade is not achieved at the Intercontinental Course, the judge may retest at an International Course. 
1.2 International Judges’ Courses (A and B) – Judges with Category 1, 2, 3, 4 and judges with the highest national brevet may participate. The number of judges is limited to 10 judges per Federation per course. Should places be available after the registration deadline, additional judges may be accepted among the judges registered by their federation as “reserves”.  – Participants are able to qualify up to Category 2. – Judges who failed or wish to achieve a higher score may retest at another International Judges’ Course. 
1.3 Federation requested judges’ courses (C) The Federation requested judges’ courses are organized by national federations, upon request and approval of FIG. These courses are conducted for participants who want to get an international category 4 brevet. They are open to judges with international brevet or with minimum highest national level. Participants are able to achieve only Category 4. 
1.4  Examination Retest A judge who wishes to achieve a higher score may retest at another International Judges’ Course.  A judge who failed and wishes to obtain a brevet has to attend the entire course and take the examination. – Judges who wish to retest must submit the retesting application form to the FIG Office and the AER TC President prior to the International Course (retest) – Former Cat. 1 judges: With repetition of both Theory and Practical exams Category 2 is the maximum that can be obtained, provided the judge has fulfilled the necessary criteria for Category 2.  – With successful repetition of the Theory and Practical, all judges will be awarded the category, as was indicated by all standards achieved on the second examination.    
ARTICLE 2 EXAMINATION The candidates can only be identified by their number, which is determined by a draw prior to any examination; no country or name is attached to any examination paper. 
2.1 Summary of Evaluation Methods for Examinations 
2.1.1  Theory Examination  Multiple-choices (60 minutes) 100 questions drawn out of 300 questions from Technical regulations and Code of points.  – 40 questions on COP (Senior, AG, AER Dance, AER Step) – 30 questions on Difficulty (value of elements, value of combination of elements) – 20 questions on Execution – 10 questions on  Artistic All wrong answers (1 point per wrong answer) will be added to give the final results according to the RESULTS TABLE (see below). No documents are allowed, including dictionaries 
2.1.2 Practical Examination 10 exercises must be evaluated in Difficulty, Execution, Artistic and Chair of Judges’ Panel according to the table in each part: Difficulty, Execution, Artistic and Chair of Judges panel (CJP) 
DIFICULTY EXECUTION ARTISTIC CJP 2 IM 1 IM 1 IM 1 IM 2 IW 1 IW 1 IW 1 IW 2 MP 2 MP 2 MP 2 MP 2 TR 2 TR 2 TR 2 TR 2 GR 2 GR 2 GR 2 GR  1 AD 1 AD 1 AD  1 AS 1 AS 1 AS 
The candidates are allowed to use the Code of Points and personal notes. 
Maximum time for evaluation and listing of required components of : – D jury is 90 sec  – E jury and A jury is 60 seconds. – CJP jury is 60 seconds. 
2.1.3 Practical D-jury 
10 exercises (2 per category) 
Candidates will list Element Values (0.3 – 1.0) and combination of elements Candidates will lose (1) point for each incorrect values of element and combination value, with a tolerance of 0.1 point for the jumps All wrong answers will be added to give the final results according to the Result table (see below). 
2.1.4 Practical E and A-jury 
10 exercises in Execution and 10 exercises in Artistic.  
Final score is based on deviation from the expert mark on each exercise and judge score according to the allowed tolerance deviation E / A - Jury Scores Tolerances  (used for examination & in competitions) 
E Score   /    A Scores Allowed deviation by judge   without penalty 
9.60-10.00 0.10 
9.00-<9.50 0.20 
8.50-<8.99 0.30 
8.00-<8.49 0.40 
7.50-<7.99 0.50 
7.00-<7.49 0.60 
<6.99 0.70 
2.1.5 Practical CJP jury 
10 exercises.  
Final score is based on deviation from the expert mark on each exercise and judge score; 
2.2. Examination Evaluation Table  The points and the scales below have been confirmed and determined after the Intercontinental Judges course and will remain the same for the remainder of the cycle.   
Cat. Theory Difficulty Chair (CJP) Execution Artistic Excellent 
 0 - 5  wrong answers 0 – 13  wrong answers Max. deviation  0.0 – 0.5 Max. deviation  0.0 – 0.5 Max. deviation  0.0 – 0.5 Very Good 
 6 - 10 wrong answers 0 - 13  wrong answers Max. deviation  0.6 – 1.0 Max. deviation  0.6 – 2.0 Max. deviation  0.6 – 1.0 Good 
 11 - 15 wrong answers 14 - 20  wrong answers  Max. deviation  1.1 – 1.5 Max. deviation  2.1 – 2.5 Max. deviation  1.1 – 2.0 
16 - 20 wrong answers 
21 – 50  wrong answers 
Max. deviation  1.6 – 2.5 
Max. deviation  2.6 – 3.0 
Max. deviation  2.1 – 3.0 
21 or more  wrong answers 
51 or more wrong answers and / or inability to write down correctly an exercise and produce a final score. 
2.6 or more deviation 
3.1 or more deviation 
3.1 or more deviation 
 2.3 Minimum Standards to achieve or maintain a Category (from General Judges’ Rules) 
ARTICLE 3 JUDGES’ EVALUATION The Judges’ Evaluation Program (JEP) serves as a tool for the AER TC  – to control the objectivity of the judges during the competition  – to analyse the judges work after the competition (post competition control) – to establish an overall evaluation of the judges during the cycle The evaluation of the judges’ work over a period of one Olympic cycle serves to award and discipline judges.  For more details, refer to JEP rules available. When the JEP system is not available, a judge is assessed throughout the competition by the FIG TD. 
3.1 A/E and R- Jury Evaluation An A/E and R-Jury Evaluation will be conducted “during the competition”  Should bias be indicated in the “During Competition” report (A/E and R Judges) then Post Video Control by the TC will be required to confirm if the bias can be substantiated and the judges work therefore deemed unsatisfactory. 
Theory Examination 
Practical Examination 
Difficulty Artistic Execution Chair Eligible Course 
Cat.  1   Very Good Excellent  Very Good Very Good Excellent Only at Intercontinental Courses Cat.  2 Good 
 Very Good Very Good   Very Good 
 Very Good At Intercontinental And  International Courses Cat. 3  Pass  Good Good Good Pass 
Cat.  4 Pass  Pass Pass Pass Pass 
For the purpose of A/E and R judges’ analysis during competitions, see A/E-Jury Tolerances (Art.2). 
3.2  D-Jury Evaluation During the entire cycle the AER TC will also make an accurate evaluation of the D-judges, taking into consideration:  – relevant mistakes in determination of the D-score – slowing down the competition by the D-jury – any signs of team/individual bias  
3.3  CJP-Jury Evaluation During the entire cycle the AER TC will also make an accurate evaluation of the CJP-judges, taking into consideration:  – relevant mistakes in determination of the Lift evaluation or CJP Deductions – any signs of team/individual bias. 
ARTICLE 4  JUDGES NOMINATION, SELECTION AND DRAW The judges’ nomination, selection and draw procedure is based on the principles in the Technical Regulations.  The CJP, D, R, Artistic and Execution judges in the panel must be from different federations. 
If a NF rejects the draw/nomination as CJP, D or R Judge, this judge may not be selected to another position for the same competition. The judges’ draw for all the FIG competitions, including the draw for CJP and D Judges, have to respect the following procedure: – The judges are drawn by federation – The drawn is done by level: level 1 first, then level 2, … up to one judge per federation – Neutral judges have priority for Finals (except level IV judges for 1 to 3 group competitions. – Neutral judges have priority by higher level – Every Federation must be drawn (if possible) No judges from the same country in a panel (if possible) 
Pos. Number How to select Obs 
CJP 2 (1/ panel) Draw from Cat. 1 Judges,    
Draw during a TC Meeting 6 months prior the event (for World Championships and World Games only) 
DIF  4 (2/ panel) 
Draw from Cat. 1 and 2 Judges, but priority to Cat. 1  Considering the best results in the D examination and the experience. 
Draw during a TC Meeting,  6 months prior the event Cannot be same nationality as CJP (for World Championships and World Games only) 
REF 8 (2 RE and 2 RA / panel) 
Appointed from Cat. 1 and 2 Judges, (best results in the E or A examination or JEP evaluation).  
Nomination Proposal by TC, and appointed by Presidential  com.  3 months prior to the competition  
The order of the draw is the following: 
                          Jury A       Jury B  
 1.  Chair (exception: WCh & World Games)  Chair (exception: WCh & World Games) 2.  Diff  (exception: World Ch & World Games)  Diff (exception: WCh & World Games) 3.  Diff  (exception: WCh & World Games)  Diff  (exception: World Ch & World Games) 4.  Execution  1     Execution  5.  Artistic  1     Artistic   6.  Execution  2     Execution  7.  Artistic  2     Artistic   8.  Execution  3     Execution  9.  Artistic  3     Artistic    10.  Execution  4     Execution  11. Artistic   4     Artistic   12.  Time      Time 13.   Line      Line The draw for the qualification and the finals will take place at the judges briefing the day of the concerned competition. 
ARTICLE 5 MISCELLANEOUS AND FINAL PROVISIONS Refer to the 2017 FIG General Judges’ Rules for the following topics – General Principles  – Examination Principles  – Conditions to obtain or maintain Category for the cycle 14th 2017 - 2020  – Judges’ Brevet and Judges’ Logbooks  – FIG Academy (L- 3) Coaches International Judges’ Course (Level 3 only)  – Competition Groups, Judges’ courses and eligibility  – Recognition/Awards, Sanctions and Appeals of Judges – For FIG Official Competitions  
ARTICLE 6 FINAL PROVISIONS This 2017 – 2020 FIG Judges’ Rules – Specific Rules for Aerobic Gymnastics, have been approved by the Presidential Commission at its meeting on July 1st 2016 and updated at the issue of the Intercontinental Judges Course. They enter into effect on January 1st 2017, but apply to the Intercontinental Judges’ Course held in December 2016 as well.  
Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique 
Bruno Grandi  André Gueisbuhler  Sergio Garcia FIG President Secretary General  AER-TC President