Community in Bowls’ (CIBCrew) Judging Framework

Community in Bowls’ (CIBCrew) Judging Framework

Photo: Brad Gunnett, featuring Hayley Havick, @havoc719 

We’ve had a lot of questions about our CIB Crew judging framework for Rollpocalypse, and it's something we’re stoked to talk about! 

First, we should share that it’s work in progress. We’re stoked to get feedback, test the framework, get more feedback, and test it again and again. Over time, we’re looking to create a system that feels comprehensive and equitable, and we’ve started by creating a system that incorporates both objective and subjective perspectives from judges. 

Got feedback for us? Let us know by filling out our Feedback FormWe’ll collect feedback as we go, and appreciate hearing from you!

-CIB Crew

Community in Bowls’ (CIBCrew) Judging Framework for Roller Skating Competitions

Our CIB Crew’s Street and Bowl Judging Framework has been in development for the past two years and we are SO excited to share it with you. This framework is a tool to rank the performances of competitors during a bowl, ramp, or street competition. As we embark on this journey of roller skate competitions, this framework is likely to grow and change with the feedback of the community, and the growth and development of the sport. 

Judging a roller skating competition requires a comprehensive understanding of the mechanics of most roller skate maneuvers, as well as their constantly-evolving nature throughout the years of the sport. A judge must have the knowledge and insight to impartially distinguish and evaluate trick difficulty, complexity of lines, and multiple ways of possible executions on any given skateable terrain. Judges score the participants on the skills performed in the moment, and do not offer rank with respect to past performance or ability.

There are two major factors in our CIB Crew framework: Objective and subjective. Objective factors look at things such as: how fast a skater is going, how high an air is, how long a slide/grind is, the number of tricks in a run, etc. Subjective factors are based on the way each judge views the skater’s style, fluidity, and flow.The goal is to combine both of these factors to create a judging system that awards points for both tricks accomplished and skate style.

Each skater is evaluated on the number of tricks, and how they are able to execute those tricks. We would also recommend designing your run with flow in mind, and saving energy-focused  tricks such as fly outs or other aerial maneuvers saved to the end. 

Factors that could increase your score: 

  • Increased complexity
    • Adding grabs, performing combinations, switch-ups, height of air, length of slide/grind, alley oops, rotations in/out/within, etc can add complexity to your run as they add an increased difficulty.
    • *** It’s important to note that we are not necessarily creating a hierarchy of tricks–for example, saying inverts are more complicated than grinds. Especially in our initial use of this framework, we recognize that complexities look different depending on a skater’s style and trick focus.

Factors that could decrease your score: 

  •  Not landing tricks without an assist,  such as landing using your hands or landing using your toe stops. 
  • Repetitive tricks. 
  • Striding in between tricks on the flat. 
  • Completing fewer tricks. 

The judging panels will use the following criteria to formulate a single score based on the overall impression of an athlete’s performance within the parameters of the competition:

General Judging Criteria

  1. Difficulty and Variety of Performed Tricks

Obstacle Selection - Influences the trick selection and difficulty.

Trick Selection - Is influenced by obstacle selection and skater's capacity.

Originality and Innovation - A unique or innovative approach to the course terrain and featured obstacles.

  1. Quality of Execution

Quality of Trick Execution (objective)

Style of Execution - Fluidity, Power, Aggression, Personal Style (subjective)

Speed / Overall Velocity (objective)

Height / Distance (objective)

Quality of Landing (pre and post landing)

  1. Use of Course and Individual Obstacles

Quantity of tricks performed in runs or jam sessions - Each trick is scored in the run, with a possible value from 0-5 (See Scoring). These points are added and divided by the number of tricks in a run. So the higher the average trick score, the better the run. More tricks isn’t necessarily better; it’s the quality of the tricks in the run that count. Conversely, if an athlete executes considerably fewer tricks in a run than other competitors, this may impact the judge’s subjective score. 

Variety of used elements - Utilizing a variety of elements, as opposed to performing multiple tricks on the same element, also impacts the score as it highlights how the skater is able to demonstrate their use of space and environment to their advantage. 

Connecting tricks in lines - Shows that a skater knows how to continue the flow of their run in a consistent and an uninterrupted manner.

  1. Flow and Consistency

The values of difficulty, execution, and the use of course and obstacles are viewed together as a whole when formulating the overall impression score. So, flow and consistency are important to the run, as opposed to simply executing a collection of tricks. Trying to think of the tricks comprehensively as connecting to one another will help set the skater up for a successful run. 

  1. Repetition

Judges will be looking for skaters to complete a variety of tricks. Repeating the same tricks will negatively impact the skaters score. 

  1. Scoring

For every trick executed by a skater within a run, judges provide a score of 0-5, five being a very well-executed trick or a trick of high complexity that is well executed. Decimals may be used if desired, and judges may use a score of 0 for a trick if they choose. 

Following the run, the point total is divided by the possible total points for the run (every trick has a possible high score of 5) and multiplied by 100. This provides the objective score. A skater’s objective score is averaged across judges and provided with an averaged objective score for the run. 

Judges are also asked to provide a subjective score that could provide additional insight into that judge’s impression of the skater’s score. A subjective score that is higher than the objective total could mean a judge feels the scoring system didn’t capture the energy or style provided, and can be used as a discussion point for final rounds. Similarly, a score lower than the objective score could signal an overly technical performance or a performance that did not resonate with the judges in terms of style. Both objective and subjective scores are averaged for a final run score.  

  1. Judges

CIB will always provide an odd number of judges for competition to avoid ties and reduce judging bias as much as possible.


Wanna see the score card?



Leave a comment

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published