loreal-logo.jpg
BST_Logo_CMYK_Vert_001.png
logo-dundee.png
New_logo_MMS_003.png
Fibank_my-bank_blue-red.png
SASAKI_LOGO.png
motorola-logo.jpg
Petrol_YourPlace.png
freddy_logo.png
logo-aleksandrovska-bolnica.png

Bulgarian Rhythmic Gymnastics Federation ATTENTION! IMPORTANT! For the specialists and the fans of Rhythmic Gymnastics These proposals have been sent to all governing bodies in the FIG


10275946 648168211920694 4518125015379981900 n
Bulgarian Rhythmic Gymnastics Federation

ATTENTION! IMPORTANT!

For the specialists and the fans of Rhythmic Gymnastics

These proposals have been sent to all governing bodies in the FIG



Fundamental PROPOSALS, made by BRGF with regards to a change in the judging of RG and in the Code of Points



As a result from analysis made of the last RG competitions and the organized round tables during the FIG RG World Championships and with regards to Mr. Watanabe’s letter to all National Federations, the Bulgarian Rhythmic Gymnastics Federation presents to your attention fundamental ideas, aimed towards the preservation of the beauty and the identity of our sport, while keeping the evolutionary development of the sport, where BD and AD are concerned.



The suggestions made in this letter will provide the gymnasts with the possibility to show their best qualities, which will allow them to be competitive and to stand among the best. Some of them are presenting physical qualities, some – skill or artistry and others – musicality. Gymnasts with weaker physical qualities will be more stimulated to further develop themselves in other direction – more apparatus work or more accent on artistry and dance. These changes would lead to a rapid jump towards to evolution of the gymnastics, by increasing the attractiveness and the diversity of style and composition of the different athletes.



The Artistry evaluation (the most discussed in the past few years among the specialists) is of an extreme importance, because in a sport, which uses music, the choreography is what send an emotional message to the audience.



After the huge development of the gymnastics, where BD and AD are concerned, the Artistry was drastically left behind and was overlooked in the past years. It is our belief that this component of the evaluation should be in equality with the evaluations for BD /D1-2/ and AD /D3-4/.





Proposals to the different components of the Code of Points



Generalities

1.      Music - To be given the opportunity to use music with or without voice /words/ without any limitation in all routines.

2.      Judges

Way of judging

Achievement of maximal objectivity through adequately real-time judging, by using the contemporary technology.

Computerizing of the judging

·        Judging of the BD and AD elements in real time (while the gymnast is performing her routine) element by element.

For example: Balance Difficulty “penche” – the judge presses the number 5, pirouette for 1,2 – the judge presses the number 12 etc. x

·        The total sum of the values for the elements is entered directly into the main computer and forms the final evaluation, given by the judge.

·        In front of each and every judge, there is a video screen with the purpose to review the evaluation and to make possible the re-checking of the elements, which came under question or which she/he missed on evaluating. After that and if necessary, the judge has a few seconds to make a correction to her/his initial evaluation in order to now submit their final evaluation.

·        In some sports, ice-skating for example, there is a visualization of the evaluation during the performance (live) of Difficulty D1-2 and D3-4. That led to the joy of the numerous fans of this sport, who now believed that there is a fair play. Out colleagues from different countries showed in the social networks that a visualization of the evaluation of each element of the gymnast’s performance is possible. This would be very useful when the competition is being analyzed.

·        The judges are presented with previously prepared sheets (forms) for Artistry and Execution (as it is now).

Composition of the Judges’ Panels

We are proposing the number of the judges to be the same in all Panels 4 judges each panel, since the evaluations of the different panels have the same impact on the final evaluation. Each panel to be divided into two sub-groups, as each sub-group evaluates certain components. This will increase the objectivity in the judging of the different elements, it will ease the following of a certain routine and it will ensure more calmness for the judges.

            RGI:
           
For example:


            D1-4 Body Difficulty:

                        D1-2 evaluates Jumps and Balances

                        D3-4 evaluates Rotations and Waves

D5-8 Apparatus Difficulty:

                        D5-6 evaluates Risks with rotations

                        D7-8 evaluates the difficulty with the apparatus ( AD )

A1-4 Artistry:

                        A1-2 evaluates Composition and Variety

                        A3-4 evaluates the use of the music

E1-4 Execution:

                        E1-2 evaluates the faults with the body

                        E3-4 evaluates the faults with the apparatus.

RGG:
           
For example:

            D1-4 Body Difficulty:

                        D1-2 evaluates the BD

                        D3-4 evaluates the difficulty in exchanges (ED)

D5-8 Apparatus Difficulty:

                        D5-6 evaluates CR, CRR, CRRR

                        D7-8 evaluates R, CC, ,

A1-4 Artistry:

                        A1-2 evaluates Composition and Variety

                        A3-4 evaluates the use of the music

E1-4 Execution:

                        E1-2 evaluates the faults with the body

                        E3-4 evaluates the faults with the apparatus

            Organization of the judging

1.      The judges to be drawn on a general basis, so that Brevet 1 and Brevet 2 judges to be in each of the Judge panels.

2.      The judges in the same Panel should NOT be seated next to each other. Arithmetic mean should be the final evaluation, when there is acceptable difference between the judges.





The judges in the rhythmic gymnastics have been put in a more difficult position after the drastic evolution of our sport in the past 2 years. That is why we believe that the increase of their number on the judges’ table and their correct distribution amongst the Judges Panels would lead to their peace and calm to the more realistic evaluation of the gymnasts.

3.      Final score calculation

·        D1 – by addition;

·        D3 – by addition;

·        Artistry – by addition;

·        Execution – Technical faults – by penalties

·        The final evaluation is formed by the addition D1-2 + D3-4 + Artistry (these three evaluations are forming the final evaluation for Difficulty). This sum is deducted by the sum of the penalties for Technical faults.

For example:

D1-2         4.00 points

D3-4         6.00 points

A               8.00 points

Total for Difficulty:       18.0 points

E                2,50 points deducted for penalties

The final score: 18.00 – 2,50 = 15,50 points

·        The Technical faults should not influence the Artistry evaluation.

·        When forming the final evaluation there should not be dropping out of evaluations

This would lead to easier judging, to maximal objectivity and to more accessible and comprehensible evaluation for the audience, which will then increase the interest towards the Rhythmic Gymnastics.

*We are suggesting including the possibility for inquiries to be addressed to all components, which are forming the final evaluation – D1-2, D3-4, Artistry, Technical Faults, Lines and Time. All of them have the same gravity when forming the final evaluation.

I. Difficulty

Body Difficulty (BD) D1-2 

-          To be kept the number of Body difficulties (maximum 9)

-          We are recommending the reevaluation of values and to not be tolerated the body difficulties, which include excessive flexing of the spine. These difficulties lead to grave health problems, regarding not only the sports longevity, but also the athlete’s health outside the sport.

-          The Dance steps to be transferred to the Artistry Evaluation.

Apparatus Difficulty (AD) D3-4

-          To be limited to maximum 15 AD

-          To be kept the number of risks (maximum 5 risks)

-          The word “innovative” to be removed from the AD definition in the current Code of Points, so that only the second definition remains – “difficult work with the apparatus”.

-          The specificity of our sport, which differentiates it from the other gymnastics disciplines, is the work with apparatus. Furthermore each apparatus has its own specificity, but in all 4 apparatuses one of the most attractive things for the audience are the high throws of the apparatus. The precise execution of the throw and catch not only brings high risk for the gymnast, but also attractiveness and positive emotion for the spectators.

The message the sport is sending is aimed towards gathering a great number of audience and spectators worldwide, which are the most important factor after the talented athletes. In connection with this we are suggesting the high throws to be encouraged with accordance to the number of the additional rotations /the ones exceeding the minimally required/.

The rotations themselves to be distributed in groups according to the axis, around which they are being executed: horizontal or vertical. It is our opinion that the elements with rotation, executed around the horizontal axis require not only the loss of visual contact with the apparatus, but a longer time to be executed as well. What is more, we believe they are more attractive, unlike the exercises, executed around the vertical axis.

We are suggesting the following values:

Elements with rotation around the horizontal axis:

(Roll, Walkover, Illusion = 0,20 p.)

Elements with rotation around the vertical axis:

(Chainee, But roll, and other =0,10 p.)



Artistry:

The increase of actual rivalry and the attractiveness is of utmost importance to our sport. With regards to this the equalization of the Artistry evaluation with D1 and D3 evaluation will increase the importance of the former. In the world our sport is known as rhythmic gymnastics, which means exactly the combination of rhythm and music. Namely this is what going to provide an enormous chance for increasing the rivalry and the interest of the audience.

We are suggesting:

-          To be built up as bonuses different components for Artistry and not to take out points. That way there will be equality between the three scores D1-2, D3-4 and Artistry.

Artistry Table – EXAMPLES:

COMPOSITION

(Individuals)



Style – (guiding idea) and image

1.00

Dancing steps min. 2 (min 5 sec/ /3 steps = 1.5/)

0.5 each

Logical connections

0,5-1,0

Contrast in body movements (change of rate, rhythm, dynamics, accents)

0,5

Innovative interpretation of the overall routine - distinguishing one gymnast from the other or one group from the other. Innovative representation of the music theme (partial movement)

0,5



MUSIC (Individuals)



FACE – in harmony with the music

0,5

ARMS - Complete work of the arms following the work of the element

0,5

BODY - Innovative and unusual representation of an element *

0,5

APPARATUS -Innovative and unusual representation of an element *

0,5

Character – the movements interpret the style of the music

0,5

Rhythm – in sync with the music

0,5-1,0

VARIETY (Individuals)



Use of the floor

0,5

Modality of travelling

0,5

Levels

0,5

Directions

0,5

Apparatus (each fundamental group should be present)

0,5

Total sum individual

open

     




*Examples:

·        Agurguculese - the roll over her head

·        Kudriavzeva - ball rotation on the finger

·        Seleznyova – clubs

·        Taseva - hoop balance on the neck with rotation

COMPOSITION (Group)



Style – (guiding idea) and image

1.00

Dancing steps min. 2 (min 5 sec/ /3 steps = 1.5)

0.5 each

Contrast in body movements (change of rate, rhythm, dynamics, accents)

0,5

Originality                            

(innovative interpretation of the overall routine - distinguishing one gymnast from the other or one group from the other)

0,5

Innovative representation of the music theme

0,5

Synchronization in the work of the group

0,5 - 1,0

MUSIC (Individual and Group)



Rhythm – in sync with the music

0,5 - 1,0

FACE – in harmony with the music

0,5

BODY - Innovative and unusual representation of an element *

0,5

APPARATUS -Innovative and unusual representation of an element *

0,5

Character – the movements interpret the style of the music

0,5

VARIETY (Groups)



Formations and use of the floor

0,5

Close simultaneous synchronous play with travelling (5 gymnasts)

0,5

Collective work –

choral, contrast, cannon (all must be present)

0,5

Collaborations

- all kinds      

/C, CC, CR or CRR or CRRR/

0,5

Throws - different kind of throw

0,5

Exchanges                            

     - different throws and catches

0,5

Total sum group

open



*Examples:

·        Bulgarian Groups - hoops and ribbons 2011 Montpellier final

·        Italian Group routine - hoops and clubs originality 2019

GROUPS

            We are proposing:

1.      A change in the values of the following collaborations:

CR                   0,20 p

CR2                 0,30 p

CR3                 0,40 p

CRR                0,30 p

CRR2              0,40 p

CRR3              0,50 p

2.      Bonuses to be given for synchronized performance, since it is typical for the Group formations.

3.      Where the risk collaborations are concerned: bonuses to be given for each additional rotation – for example for each additional Roll or Walkover 0,10 points to be added.       

*If the distribution of the judges’ functions in the different Panels is accepted, we are supporting that the addition of the values in collaborations is kept, because only then it would be possible to correctly evaluate and follow them.

EXECUTION – TECHNICAL FAULTS

We are proposing that the penalties for visible faults should be increased, for example: dropping of the apparatus. These are the faults that have most influence on the perception of the audience in connection of the good performance. Therefore they should also influence the final ranking. These faults are in direct connection with the specifics of the sport. We are proposing the following:

-          Loss and retrieval without movement or by moving 1-2 steps – 0,50 p.

-          Loss and retrieval by moving 3 or more steps inside the floor – 1,00 p.

-          Loss and retrieval outside of the floor, regardless of the distance – 2,00 p.

-          Loss at the end of the routine and finishing without apparatus – 2,00 p.

-          Total loss of balance with fall – 1,00 p.

-          Involuntary wrappings around the body or part of it or around the stick with stopping during the routine – 0,50 p.

*These are faults, visible for the audience, which is currently having difficulties to understand the respective evaluations.

*We are suggesting that the Code of Points does not change every 4 years, but to be updated when necessary. Minimal changes are also to be made during the competition period in order to avoid the confusion that comes to judges, coaches and athletes before big and important competitions.













Последни новини ...





Пишете ни!
1000 оставащи символи