FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE
Letter from the President
Nr 49
By Prof. Bruno Grandi, FIG President May 2011
Oh, that Code!
The more seasoned among us remember back to the first Code. A twelve-page opus crafted by
Gander, Lapalu and Hentges, it gave structure to Men's Artistic Gymnastics and mapped out
judging in three distinct categories: difficulty, combination and execution. That was back in 1949.
Today, the Code reaches out to cover all FIG disciplines; it governs everything, infiltrating
gymnastics like a metastasis that spreads and traps the sport in its deadly net. Originally created to
serve the development of our sport, the Code has mutated into a time bomb that we are wholly
unable to contain. Worse, it is a pitfall to judges and gymnasts alike, and creates situations that are
often impossible to navigate. Remember Athens!
The time has come for us, the technicians, judges and leaders in sport, to gather round a single
table and revisit the Code; to re-equip our discipline with the structure and spirit originally inherent
to it. This is the endgame of the FIG Symposiums for Rhythmic Gymnastics in Zurich (SUI) at the
end of April, for Artistic and Trampoline in mid-June and for Aerobic and Acrobatic in September.
Simplify the Codes; we all agree on this point. Keep in mind the essence of Roman law, the first
legal system in the history of Man and which is still active today. According to our predecessors,
excessive detail is what dilutes and suffocates justice. Too many laws annihilate law itself!
Starting in 2005, we took successful steps toward standardising our Codes; a commendable
action, to be sure, but a far cry from being enough. What we need is complete and unequivocal
reform if we hope to have a Code that serves to further develop our sport. We must simplify, not
complicate. What is the essential reason for the Code? What is it made to do? What is the
meaning of its existence? The answer is found in history, whose most basic message is that in
order to move forward into the future, one often needs to take a brief look into the past.
At the 1948 Olympic Games in London, judging in gymnastics was scandalous! Judges were using
criteria to evaluate exercises specific only to their own countries. It was a free for all. Such chaos!
A Code was then created to clarify and classify criteria to maintain a standardised approach to
judging. Unity was finally re-established.
A mere twelve pages in 1949 compared to hundreds today, not counting the thousands of symbols
that go with them! How can a judge effectively react, evaluate and decide in mere seconds and
under the pressure that goes hand in hand with, say, an Olympic Final? Impossible; it is beyond
human capacity.
We need a Code, a point of reference, which will bring structure to the evaluations brought by our
judges and allow us to employ the Fairbrother system. Only by doing this will we be able to avoid
situations such as were experienced in Athens and London. We have the tools, IRCOS for one,
which can aid in attributing an accurate technical score if used properly. But we must accept the
fact that the Artistic score is largely a product of a more subjective, and certainly human,
evaluation. That is the variable in our equation; fallible but not unjust. And if we are to lose
ourselves in the nimbus of objectivity, we have reference judges in the wings to set our course
straight.
Thank you for your attention.
78
FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE