Judging Procedures
1983 STM | MOTION #1 |
Karen Woycenko moved that the National Proficiency Scale be adopted. |
1986 STM | MOTION #29 |
Elaine Jacobs moved that we adopt the system of giving the actual average score of the overall degree of excellence. |
1986 FTM | MOTION #7 |
Sandra Watt moved that a committee be struck to review our judging certification procedure, with a view to increasing numbers of certified officials and providing motivation. |
1989 FTM | MOTION #8 (Ratified - 1989 FBM - Motion #16) (AMENDED - 2000 FBM - Motion #14) |
Nancy Beachin moved that, if an athlete/duet enters and competes in a higher status level, either by error or intentionally, they will compete for comments only (no score given) and must revert back to the lower status level in that event. Effective Jan 1/00 |
1989 FTM | MOTION #38 (Ratified - 1989 FBM - Motion #16) | ||||||||||||||||||||
Myra Kirk moved that the following scale will be used as a Proficiency Scale for Levels A, B & C in Solo, Medley, Solo Dance and 2-Baton:
|
1993 STM | MOTION #40 (Ratified - 93 SBM - Motion #18) |
Ron Kopas moved that we eliminate the "grading system" for qualifying rounds and use the numeric scoring system only (in all rounds). |
1993 FTM | MOTION #10 (Ratified - 93 FBM) |
Tina Larson moved that the attached proficiency scale be adopted for Pre-Medley as presented by Myra Kirk. |
1993 FTM | MOTION # 29 (Ratified - 93 FBM) |
Lili Lepore moved that judges decisions are final. |
1994 FBM | MOTION #43 |
Betty Davis moved that the CBTF Technical Chairperson should not be used as the Head Judge (at Canadian Team Trials and Canadian Championships) and that she/he only be used to judge at Canadian Team Trials and Canadian Championships as an absolute necessity. |
1995 FTM | MOTION #18 (Ratified - 95 FBM ) (** EXTENDED TO 1996-97 SEASON - 96 FTM Prop #48; Ratified 96 FBM - Motion #13) |
Jennifer Meron moved that we accept 1995 Summer Group Commission Recommendation #14 as amended which reads:
* (See Proposal #48, 1996 FTM below) |
1996 FTM | PROPOSAL #9 (Ratified - 96 FBM - Motion #13) |
Jennifer Meron proposed that Basic Strut, Forward Motion and all Pre-Events be evaluated on a "grading system" rather than a competitive/placement system. Levels would then be eliminated from Basic Strut. Effective: Sept 1/97 |
1996 FTM | PROPOSAL #10 (Ratified - 96 FBM - Motion #13) |
Jennifer Meron proposed that for all Pre-Events, numerical scoring will be replaced by a descriptive term leading to a grade. The terms will be amended to: Excellent, Very Good, Good, Satisfactory. Effective Jan 1/97 |
1996 FTM | PROPOSAL #11 (Ratified - 96 FBM - Motion #13) | ||||||||||||
Jennifer Meron proposed that for all Pre-Events, all participants will receive a ribbon, regardless of the final grade.
Effective: Sept 1/97 |
1996 FTM | PROPOSAL #48 (Ratified - 96 FBM - Motion #13) |
Jennifer Meron proposed that critique tapes for group events continue to be directed to the coach (subsequent to one year trial). Effective Immediately (* Refers to Motion #18 - 1995 FTM) |
1997 FBM | MOTION #16 (AMENDED - Motion #15 - 98 FBM) (AMENDED - Proposal #6 - 99 WTM - Ratified - Motion #12 - 99 SBM) |
Leisha Strachan moved that athletes must receive a minimum score in order to progress to the next status level. An athlete in a Level C Event must receive a minimum score of 2.5 in that event to proceed to Level B-N. An athlete in a Level B-N Event must receive a minimum score of 4.0 in that event to progress to Level B-I. An athlete in a Level B-I Event must receive a minimum score of 6.0 in that event to progress to Level A. Once this score is achieved, the athlete must move to the next status level. The minimum score of 2.5 for progression from "C" to "B-N" will be implemented on January 1, 1998. The minimum score of 3.5 for progression from "B-N" to "B-I" and the minimum score for progression from "B-I" to "A" will be implemented on September 1, 1999. The need for the Protection Rule and number of first placement wins will be eliminated. |
2002 SBM | MOTION #9 |
Karen Gratton moved to accept Proposal #5 of the 2002 Winter Technical Meeting which reads:
|
2004 FBM | MOTION #20 |
Karen Gratton moved that Proposal #13, 2004 FTM (Recommendation #7, L2/M1 Course Workshop, Sept 2003) be accepted as follows:
|
2004 FBM | MOTION #21 |
Karen Gratton moved that Proposal #14, 2004 FTM (Recommendation #8, L2/M1 Course Workshop, Sept 2003) be accepted as follows:
|
2004 FBM | MOTION #34 |
Karen Gratton moved that Proposal #28, 2004 FTM be accepted as amended:
|
2006 SBM | MOTION #12 |
Karen Gratton moved that Proposal #8, 2006 STM be accepted as follows:
|
2006 SBM | MOTION #13 |
Karen Gratton moved that Proposal #9, 2006 STM be accepted as follows:
|
2009 FBM | MOTION #22 (2009 FTM - Prop#11) |
Karen Gratton moved that, for Theme Production, twirling is required and will be judged as to how it is incorporated into the routine to maintain the theme and enhance the general effect. Effective immediately |
2010 FBM | MOTION #18 |
Elan Paluck moved to accept Proposal 11 from the 2010 FTM - changes to group event feedback requirements - as follows:
|
2010 FBM | MOTION #19 |
Elan Paluck moved to accept Proposal 13 from the 2010 FTM - revised Theme Production Score Sheet and Penalty Sheet - as follows:
|
2012 FBM | MOTION #22 (2012 FTM Prop #8) |
Elan Paluck moved to accept the revisions to the CBTF score sheets and masters to include the penalty of 0.1 per drop. |
2012 FBM | MOTION #33 (2012 FTM Prop #18) |
Elan Paluck moved that the WBTF Role Models be adopted for use in Canada. Effective January 1, 2013 |