Aerial Future Star 2018  Adult Competition
March 24, 2018

Registration: Begins December
Entry Deadline: March 1st, 2018

DESCRIPTION

Ninja Lounge invites all clubs who have the Aerial Circus discipline to participate in the 2018 Aerial Future Star Youth and Adult Competition that will be celebrated at Ninja Lounge, 14401 NE 19th Ave, North Miami. This event will occur March 24th (ADULTS) and March 25th (YOUTH), 2018. A signed waiver is required: When you register we understand that your participation is voluntary and you have consulted your family and coaches.

  • Each performer MUST have an entrance (Ex: floor routine, may start in the apparatus).
  • Each pose must be held for at least 3 seconds to be counted by the judges.
  • Knots are prohibited!
  • Each floor act should be maximum ¼ of the entire act.
  • Performance needs to be ¾ above the ground.
  • Duration of act should be 3-5 minutes long.

Categories:

8-12 years old (Sunday Competiton)

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/aerial-future-star-2018-youth-competition-registration-39191938142?ref=enivtefor001&invite=MTM5NjU2NzIvdmVyb25pY2FAbmluamFsb3VuZ2UuY29tLzA%3D&utm_source=eb_email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=inviteformalv2&utm_term=attend

13-17 years old (Sunday Competiton)

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/aerial-future-star-2018-youth-competition-registration-39191938142?ref=enivtefor001&invite=MTM5NjU2NzIvdmVyb25pY2FAbmluamFsb3VuZ2UuY29tLzA%3D&utm_source=eb_email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=inviteformalv2&utm_term=attend

18 + years old (Saturday Competition)

Events:

Silks

Special Act (Lyra, Spanish web, trapeze, straps, rope, etc)

Judging Criteria

◦ Difficulty (20%): Unique, innovative, or difficult transitions, moves, tricks, skills, and sequencing both on and off the apparatus.

◦ Execution (20%): Performing with technicality, flexibility and strength, both on and off the apparatus.

◦ Movement Artistry (20%): High versatility of movement that exhibits grace, fluidity, and ease (in keeping with the theme/style of the piece) both on and off the apparatus.

◦ Performance Artistry (20%): Musicality, expression, storytelling ability, and audience engagement both on and off the apparatus.

◦ Enjoyment-factor (20%): “I liked it!” “I would buy a ticket to a show to see this applicant perform live.” The audience gets a chance to judge the performances.

Tip: Difficulty & Execution are the elements that make a perfect photograph. Movement Artistry & Performance Artistry are the elements that make a perfect video.

Awards:

Each category will have an award consisting of a trophy/medal for the first three places + CASH PRIZES!

Some technical information you need to know.

  • Height from the hardware to the floor is 17 feet
  • The applicant has a choice of bringing her own apparatus or using our apparatus.
  • If the applicant chooses to bring his/her apparatus, this shall be inspected and MUST be brought at least 24 hours in advance to be hung.
  • There will be mats available for all artists.

*DISCLAIMER: THERE MUST BE 12 ACTS MINIMUM FOR THE COMPETITION TO PROCEED. IN THE EVENT THERE ARE FEWER THAN 12 ACTS SIGNED UP, WE WILL REFUND ENTRY AND TICKET FEES.

For any questions, please contact us.

Contact Information:

Veronica Tirado

Director of Competition

veronica@ninjalounge.com

954.284.1823

Judges Criteria:
Preface:
This body of work is owned by The World FreeRunning Parkour Federation.
Created by WFPF Manager Sam Parham, and Head Coaches Justin Sheaffer &
Vinnie Coryell.
This is the judging guidelines for WFPF competition. WFPF reserve the right to
update / amend these guidelines at their discretion if it is deemed beneficial to
develop the system in place further.
Judges cannot have pre-conceived bias for or against an athlete for any reason.
It is important that each Judge involved in competition understands the
importance of ‘staying in their lane’. This system only works, provided that the
‘Execution’ Judge, focuses only on ‘Execution’, and doesn’t try to bridge their score
in relation to any other criteria being covered by other judges…
Working example 1.0:
An athlete can perform a series of incredibly difficult skills achieving a ‘9’ score for
difficulty, but if he/she stumbled some of the landings with hands down, somewhat
out of control, they would be docked by the ‘execution’ judge. The Difficulty Judge
should still award the ‘9’ deserved for the difficult level of tricks.
Aim:
The aim of this system, is to achieve a judging criteria that is as close to objectivity
and is as quantifiable as possible.
To attempt to remove human subjectivity and qualitative results, where both
realistic and feasible.

To create a scoring system that is entirely justifiable and for the most part un-
questionable.

Criteria:
– Difficulty
– Execution
– Flow
– Versatility
We reject the notion of ‘creativity’ as a judging criteria – which is entirely subjective and essentially is
something that every Freerunner possesses in their own way.
Difficulty:
Definition: “Movements that are considered particularly hard to accomplish”
Each competitor begins with a score of ‘0’.
For each somersault rotation the athlete is awarded a half point. (Double rotations / twists can
accumulate 1.5 points.)
Repeating movements achieves no additional score (unless for example a wall 360 is performed
on opposite sides). – Judge discretion to award additional half point on any such particularly
difficult move / combination.
Working Example: 2.0:
A Kong probably wouldn’t be any points. A Kong front / handspring could be a half point. A Kong
Gainer could be 1 point. A Kong Gainer 360 could be 2 points.
As you can see from above, there is a level of subjectivity and judge discretion, but the same

judge on difficulty throughout should cover consistency and will always be linked back to the
justification of specific movements to avoid any personal athlete bias.
Execution:
Definition: “The actual carry out and delivery of the movements”
Each competitor begins with Execution score of ‘10’.
For each move, the judge determines if the athlete landed controlled or not.
• Good landing (can include hands down and/or roll) = 0 deduction.
• Stumble and hand down = 1⁄2 point deduction.
• Crash and bail = 5 point deduction.
Working Example: 3.0:
If an athlete executes a double B-Twist, lands controlled and rolls. This is considered good
execution and 0 points are deducted from their 10 score. However, if they land, stumble slightly
and then roll, this is considered slightly out of control and as such they will be deduction the 1⁄2
point. It is possible for the landing to be heavily out of control but still be saved by a roll or use of
hands, and as such the judge can award a 1 or 2 point deduction as opposed to the full ‘crash and
bail’ 5 point deduction.
Versatility:
Definition: “Ability to adapt or be adaptable to the many different course areas and functions”
Parkour / Tricking / Breakdance etc….
Each competitor begins with a score of ‘0’.
A score of 2 points is awarded for hitting each section of the course.
• Bar
• Ledge/drop
• Vault
• Wall
• Floor
Athletes should note that it is not acceptable to simple ‘touch’ or ‘pass through’ a particular area.
Movements must be satisfactorily executed within each area to achieve the 2 point score.
There may be a case where a 1 point score is awarded if the athlete does something basic and
simple in a particular section.
Working Example: 4.0:
If an athlete executes a series of strides across the bars, this is unlikely to count as satisfactory
execution in that area. The judge may offer a 1 point score for this, but that is at their discretion.
Realistically for the athlete to comfortably secure the 2 point score, they could stride to precision
the bar, drop to hang position. Swing lache gainer 360 dismount.
Flow:
Definition: “Consecutive movements without break in flow/movement.”
Each competitor begins with a score of ‘10’.
• 1 point deduction every time the athlete stops for a ‘noticeable’ period.
• 1/2 point additional deduction each additional second wasted at that spot.
• Note: shoe wipe / chalking of hands – judges discretion if excessive, may result in 1 or 2
point deductions also.

Ideally a judge would like to see an athlete that has planned his / her run effectively to ensure that
things such as chalking of hands are done prior to the run. Equally to see a competitor spread their
pacing and stamina to ensure endurance consistently throughout the allotted time period.