# Rules for the Jury

**The 15th International Edvard Grieg Piano Competition**

**I The Jury**

The task of the Jury is to assess the interpretive skills of each participant in the Competition, and to award prizes to the best candidates.

The Jury acts on the basis of the Competition Rules and the provisions of the present Rules of the Competition Jury.

The Competition Director appoints and dismisses the members of the Jury, as well as its Chairman.

The duties of the Chairman include presiding over the Jury’s work and representing the Jury when announcing results. In some special occasions mentioned below, when candidates after voting are in a tie, the Chairman will cast the deciding vote.

During their first meeting the Jurors will elect a Vice-Chairman from the Jury.

In case of the Chairman’s absence, or in cases where the Chairman due to partiality issues is prevented from voting, the Vice-Chairman will take over his/her responsibilities.

**II Impartiality**

The Jurors shall use their artistic and personal preferences and experience when casting their votes, and always – and with no exception – have the integrity of The International Edvard Grieg Competition in mind. Strict impartiality is expected in all cases.

The Director will publish the votes of the Jury after the competition has ended.

The term “Student” is understood as a participant who:

- is currently the Juror’s student at an institution or receives regular private lessons
- has been a student of the Juror in such terms during the last three years, i.e. after September 2
^{nd}2013, or had one or more private lesson(s) during the same period.

The term “student” does not include pianists who attended sporadically masterclasses held by a Juror.

Student relationships are presented in the Jury’s first meeting and will be known to all Jurors.

When casting the votes in the first and second rounds of the competition, a Juror will mark his/her student with the letter “S”, replacing all other voting marks for the actual candidate. A Juror cannot choose not to make this mark, as long as the candidate fills the definition of “student” mentioned above.

When counting the votes, the letter “S” represents the average sum given by the other Jurors for the actual candidate.

In the semi-final and the final round, separate rules for partiality occur.

**III Assessment**

**First Round**

There are no more than 30 candidates participating in the first round. Each Juror is requested to conscientiously give a "yes" vote to 12 candidates who will then continue to the second round. In addition to this, the Jurors are requested to award points to all 24 candidates as follows: Points shall be given on a scale from 1 to 25 where 25 is the best score, and where the 12 candidates that have received a "yes" vote from a Juror to proceed to the second round are awarded from 18 to 25 points by that Juror. It is possible to give the same number of points to more than one candidate.

When casting the votes in the first round of the competition, a Juror will mark his/her student with the letter “S”, replacing all other voting marks for the actual candidate. When counting the votes, the letter “S” represents the average sum of points given by the other Jurors for the actual candidate. If the average sum is 18 or more, the “S” is defined as a “Yes”. If the average sum is less than 18, the “S” will be defined as a “NO”.

The “S” replaces one of the 12 votes. Thus, the Juror who has a student among the candidates, is requested to give only 11 “Yes” to the other candidates. A Juror with two students must give both of them an “S”, and only have 10 “Yes” to distribute among the others, etc.

When a candidate has received an «S» from a Juror, the average of points given by the other Jurors should be counted and noted by the secretary, and the candidate will receive this number of points from the actual Juror . If these points are 18 or higher, the «S» should be counted as a «Yes» vote from the Juror. The added points will count in the same situations and on the same conditions as ordinary points given by other Jurors.

The 12 candidates who receive the highest number of "yes" votes will continue to the second round. In the event of a tie, in which the number of "yes" votes cannot determine which candidate(s) out of two or more with the same amount of votes should continue to the second round, the points will be taken into consideration in the following way: The number of points awarded to the tieing candidates by all Jurors will be added up, and the candidate(s) with the highest score(s) will then become one of the 12 candidates continuing to the second round.

In the event of this method resulting in a tie between two or more candidates and thus not being able to determine which candidate(s) shall proceed to the next round, the Chairman of the Jury shall request the Jurors to rank the candidates in question by giving, in the event of a tie between three candidates, 3 points to the best candidate, 2 to the second best and 1 to the third best, the range of the scale depending on the number of candidates involved in the tie. The candidate(s) with highest total of points will continue to the second round.

If, after this ranking, identical totals of points prevent a clear indication of which candidate(s) should proceed to the second round, the Chairman of the Jury shall cast the deciding vote(s). If one of the candidates who are in a draw is a student of the Chairman, the Vice-Chairman shall cast this vote.

**Second Round**

There are 12 qualified candidates participating in the second round. Each Juror is requested to conscientiously give a "yes" vote to 6 candidates who will then continue to the semi-final. In addition to this, the Jurors are requested to award points to all 12 candidates as follows: Points shall be given on a scale from 1 to 25 where 25 is the best score, and where the 6 candidates that have received a "yes" vote from a Juror to proceed to the semi-final are awarded from 20 to 25 points by that Juror. It is possible to give the same number of points to more than one candidate.

When casting the votes in the second round of the competition, a Juror will mark his/her student with the letter “S”, replacing all other voting marks for the actual candidate. When counting the votes, the letter “S” represents the average sum of points given by the other Jurors for the actual candidate. If the average sum is 20 or more, the “S” is defined as a “Yes”. If the average sum is less than 20, the “S” will be defined as a “NO”.

The “S” replaces one of the 6 votes. Thus, the Juror who has a student among the candidates, is requested to give only 5 “Yes” to the other candidates. A Juror with two students must give both of them an “S”, and only have 4 “Yes” to distribute among the others, etc.

When a candidate has received an «S» from a Juror, the average of points given by the other Jurors should be counted and noted by the secretary, and the candidate will receive this number of points from the actual Juror . If these points are 20 or higher, the «S» should be counted as a «Yes» vote from the Juror. The added points will count in the same situations and on the same conditions as ordinary points given by other Jurors.

The 6 candidates who receive the highest number of "yes" votes will continue to the semi-final. In the event of a tie, in which the number of "yes" votes cannot determine which candidate(s) out of two or more with the same amount of votes should continue to the semi-final, the points will be taken into consideration in the following way: The number of points awarded to the tieing candidates by all Jurors will be added up, and the candidate(s) with the highest score(s) will then become one of the 6 candidates continuing to the semi-final.

In the event of this method resulting in a tie between two or more candidates and thus not being able to determine which candidate(s) shall proceed to the semi-final, the Chairman of the Jury shall request the Jurors to rank the candidates in question by giving, in the event of a tie between three candidates, 3 points to the best candidate, 2 to the second best and 1 to the third best, the range of the scale depending on the number of candidates involved in the tie. The candidate(s) with highest total of points will continue to the semi-final.

If, after this ranking, identical totals of points prevent a clear indication of which candidate(s) should proceed to the semi-final, the Chairman of the Jury shall cast the deciding vote(s). If one of the candidates who are in a draw is a student of the Chairman, the Vice-Chairman shall cast this vote.

**Semi-final**

There are 6 qualified candidates participating in the semi-final. Each Juror is requested to conscientiously give a "yes" vote to 3 candidates who will then continue to the final. In addition to this, the Jurors are requested to award points to all 6 candidates as follows: Points shall be given on a scale from 1 to 25 where 25 is the best score, and where the 3 candidates that have received a "yes" vote from a Juror to proceed to the final are awarded from 22 to 25 points by that Juror. It is possible to give the same number of points to more than one candidate.

A Juror who has a student among the candidates in the semi-final, can not participate in the voting.

The 3 candidates who receive the highest number of "yes" votes will continue to the final. In the event of a tie, in which the number of "yes" votes cannot determine which candidate(s) out of two or more with the same amount of votes should continue to the final, the points will be taken into consideration in the following way: The number of points awarded by all Jurors to the candidates who are in a tie will be added up, and the candidate(s) with the highest score(s) will then become one of the 3 candidates continuing to the final.

In the event of this method resulting in a tie between two or more candidates and thus not being able to determine which candidate(s) shall proceed to the final, the Chairman of the Jury shall request the Jurors to rank the candidates in question by giving, in the event of a tie between three candidates, 3 points to the best candidate, 2 to the second best and 1 to the third best, the range of the scale depending on the number of candidates involved in the tie. The candidate(s) with highest total of points will continue to the final.

If, after this ranking, identical totals of points prevent a clear indication of which candidate(s) should proceed to the semi-final, the Chairman of the Jury shall cast the deciding vote(s). If one of the candidates who are in a draw is a student of the Chairman, the Vice-Chairman shall cast this vote.

**Final**

There are three qualified candidates participating in the final. Each Juror is requested to conscientiously rank the candidates for 1^{st} Prize, 2^{nd} Prize and 3^{rd} Prize. The forms are then collected and the votes are counted.

A vote for 1^{st} Prize gives 3 points, a vote for 2^{nd} Prize gives 2 points, and vote for 3^{rd} Prize gives 1 point. The candidate with the highest total number of points is the winner of the competition; the candidate with the second highest total of points takes second place and the candidate with the lowest total of points takes third place.

A Juror who has a student among the candidates in the final, can not participate in the voting. A Juror who could not vote in the semi-final due to a student among the candidates, will participate in the final voting if his/her student is not among the candidates in the final.

The prizes may not be shared. If three candidates tie for the first prize, each of the seven Jurors is requested to give one additional point to one of the tieing candidates. The candidate with the highest number of points then receives the first prize, or the candidate with the lowest number of points receives the third prize.

If still, or only, two candidates are in a tie for a specific prize, each of the seven Jurors is requested to give one additional point to one of the tieing candidates. The candidate with the highest number of points then receives this specific prize.

If the candidates, after this second round of additional points, are still in a tie, the Chairman of the Jury shall cast the deciding vote. If one of the candidates who are in a draw is a student of the Chairman, the Vice-Chairman shall cast this vote.

In the final it is also possible to evaluate the performance of candidates throughout the competition. Any such discourse shall be initiated by the Chairman of the Jury.

**Applicable to all rounds**

If formal dissent arises that cannot be resolved by the Jury itself, the Competition Director shall be consulted.

The numbers of points awarded during the first three rounds may be determined according to the following table of artistic standard of performance:

1-10: Poor performance

11-14: Average performance

15-17: Satisfactory performance

18-20: Good performance

21-23: Very good performance

24-25: Excellent performance