Rules for the Jury

The 16th International Edvard Grieg Piano Competition

 

For Rules for the Pre-qualification Jury, click here.

 

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, the Vice-Chairman will take over his/her responsibilities. 

The Director and the Secretary are present at the Jury meetings.  

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

The counting of votes is carried out by the Director and the Secretary, in presence of the Jury, after collecting the forms from the Jurors. 
 
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 Competition is open to all pianists of all nationalities born in the years 1985-2001, but with the following exceptions: 

- The applicant is a former 1st prize winner at the Competition. 
- The applicant is a close relative of a Juror. 
- The applicant is currently a Juror’s student at an institution or receives regular private lessons from a Juror. 
- The applicant has been a student of a Juror in such terms after 1 September 2013, or had one or more private lessons with a Juror during the same period.

Participants who are accepted to the Competition in Bergen are not allowed to take any lesson or participate at any masterclass with a Juror from the date of the application until the end of the Competition.  
 
III Assessment 

  1. 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 participating 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.  

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 by all Jurors to the actual candidates will be added up, and the candidate(s) with the highest score(s) will then become the one (or the ones) 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 the 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). 

  1. 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.  

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 by all Jurors to the actual candidates will be added up, and the candidate(s) with the highest score(s) will then become the one (or the ones) 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 the 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). 

  1. 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.  

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 actual candidates will be added up, and the candidate(s) with the highest score(s) will then become the one (or the ones) 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 the 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 final, the Chairman of the Jury shall cast the deciding vote(s). 

  1. Final

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

A vote for 1st Prize gives 3 points, a vote for 2nd Prize gives 2 points, and a vote for 3rd 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. 

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

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. 

  1. Special prizes

There will be given a special prize for the best performance of Synne Skouen’s commissioned piece performed in the 2nd round, and a special prize for the best performance of a complete opus originally written for solo piano by Edvard Grieg performed in the 2nd round or in the Semi-final. 

One candidate is allowed to compete for the “Grieg prize” with performances of one or more opuses. For that reason, the rules below consequently refer to “performances” instead of “candidates”. 

The voting procedure for these two prizes will be as follows: 

Each Juror is requested to conscientiously rank the three best performances for best performance, second best performance and third best performance. The forms are then collected and the votes are counted.  

A vote for best performance gives 3 points, a vote for second best performance gives 2 points, and a vote for third best performance gives 1 point. The performance with the highest total of points will win the prize.  

The prizes may not be shared. If two or more performances are in a tie for a prize, each of the seven (“Grieg prize”) or eight (“Skouen prize”) Jurors is requested to give one additional point to one of the performances which are in a tie. The performance with the highest total of points is the winning performance. 

If the performances, after this second round of additional points, are still in a tie, the Chairman of the Jury shall cast the deciding vote. 

f.   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 

Jurors can raise and discuss general questions about principles for evaluation, but discussions about individual musical performances or artistic interpretations are not allowed.


 

Rules for the Pre-qualification Jury 

The 16th International Edvard Grieg Piano Competition

 

I The Jury 

The task of the Jury is to select the candidates to be invited to the 16th International Edvard Grieg Piano Competition. 

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

The Competition Director appoints and dismisses the members of the Pre-qualification Jury, as well as its Chairman and its Secretary. The Competition Director is also responsible for the Rules of the Pre-qualification Jury, and for ensuring that these rules are followed. The Director also publishes the results of the pre-qualification. 

The duties of the Chairman include presiding over the work of the Pre-qualification Jury. In some special occasions mentioned below, when candidates after voting are in a tie, the Chairman will cast the deciding vote. 

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

The Secretary is present at all times, organizing and presenting the videos of the candidates.  

The counting of votes is carried out by the Director and the Secretary, in presence of the Jury, after collecting the forms from the Jurors. 
 
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 Competition is open to all pianists of all nationalities born in the years 1985-2001, but with the following exceptions: 

- The applicant is a former 1st prize winner at the Competition. 
- The applicant is a close relative of a Juror. 
- The applicant is currently a Juror’s student at an institution or receives regular private lessons from a Juror. 
- The applicant has been a student of a Juror in such terms after 1 September 2013, or had one or more private lessons with a Juror during the same period. 
 
Participants who are accepted to the Competition in Bergen are not allowed to take any lesson or participate at any masterclass with a Juror from the date of the application until the end of the Competition.  
 
III Assessment 

Each Juror is requested to conscientiously award points to all applicants in a scale from 1 to 25, where 18-25 corresponds to a “yes”, and 1-17 corresponds to a “no”. The Juror will also fill in the corresponding “yes” or “no”. 

The numbers of points awarded 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 

Each juror is asked to give at least 40 "yes" votes, but no more than 45.  

Candidates with a "yes" vote from three Jurors are “in”, except if the number of these candidates is higher than 30. In that case the total of points of the candidates with a "yes" vote from three Jurors will decide which candidates will be selected to the competition: The 30 candidates with the highest total of points will be selected without further ranking. 

If two or more candidates with three "yes" votes have received the same total of points, and thus are in a tie, these candidates will be ranked by the highest number of points given: The candidates with the highest number of points given, will be selected for the competition. 

If two or more candidates are still in a tie, the second highest number of points given will be taken into consideration. If the candidates are still in a tie, the Chairman will make the decision.  

If, after this procedure, the number of candidates who are “in”, is still lower than 30, the points of the candidates with two "yes" votes will be taken into consideration. The candidates will be ranked by their points, following the same procedures as the ones described above, until all 30 candidates are selected for the Competition. 

If, this procedure does not successfully select 30 candidates, and the number of candidates who are “in” is still lower than 30, the points of the candidates with a "yes" vote from one juror will be taken into consideration. The candidates will be ranked by their points, following the same procedures as the ones described above, until all 30 candidates are selected for the Competition. 
 
IV Other regulations 

The Secretary provides the Jury with two forms for the Jurors, with the numbers and names of the candidates. The candidates are presented in order of the time they started their application.   

One form is used to give votes and points for each candidate. This form will be collected by the Director. The name of the Juror is printed on the form. 

A second form is for taking notes. This form is not collected. 

Discussions are allowed during the pre-qualification. Jurors can raise and discuss general questions related to quality judgements, technical aspects of recordings and principles for evaluation, but discussions about individual musical performances or artistic interpretations should be limited. 

All recordings must be listened to, but not necessarily to the end. 

After listening to all candidates, the Jury may listen to selected candidates for a second time. Any Juror can ask for such a second presentation of a candidate.  

After the votes have been collected by the Director, no changes can be made. 

When the Pre-qualification Jury has finished the selection of 30 candidates for the Competition, and the results are clear, the 30 candidates will be listed, and the list signed by the members of the Jury, the Director and the Secretary.  

The Director will inform the candidates and publish the results of the Pre-qualification. The votes of the Pre-qualification Jury will not be published.