Debating on: T Instructor/commentator: Charles Comments:
- Good job and thanks for going first!
- You can develop your arguments a little bit more. How exactly does it hurt fairness, how exactly does it hurt education? You have the essence, but need to say more
- Your arguments are a little bit repetitive. You can certainly condense things more
2NC
- I like your 'the aff always has a choice - they can choose not to answer the CP.' That's the swag I was talking about. It's particularly good because it's combined with an actual argument. The snarkiness is a great feature
- Nice over-enunciation of breadTH and depTH
- You should try to reduce the internal monologue-external expression thing. Don't let the judge hear your concerns about your own arguments. Definitely focus on this over the institute.
Date of debate:6/29
Debating on:CPs Instructor/commentator:Baker Comments:
-make sure to have an interpretation of what a legitimate cp that your cp meets to frame the debate
-lead with your offense then move to your defense
-make sure to impact fully the reasons why you think your theory arguments are correct
Date of debate: 7/2
Debating on: 2NC on States CP and Case Instructor/commentator: Quigley Comments: Goals: Word economy and efficiency, sticking to the line by line -Need to reexplain the argument not just say "Mitchell ev" -When you are refering to numbers its unclear if these are numbering yours or responding to theirs. Say "2AC #1" etc and even better reference -On the case, do more evidence comparison and -Use all your time! -I wanna see you grandstand about the solvency for the states CP, I think you could get that done faster and more persuasively -When you just read your speech, it is so low energy, its harder to flow and pay attention unless
Date of debate: 7/6
Debating on: Practice Debate B Instructor/commentator: Kernoff Comments:
CX: I wouldn't bother asking how much the plan will cost - it's pretty clear that it will cost a lot and you are not going to get much of a commitment to the aff. If you want to prove it costs a lot, ask some questions about how many railroads they'll build.
2NC: You should redo this speech. I really like how you numbered your arguments - it made it very easy to flow. In the 2NC, your main way of organizing arguments should be based on what 2AC argument they respond to. Use "they say...". You had some really good analytical arguments and explanation of your evidence - like why uniformity is bad. You should clearly distinguish between flows - spending and the states CP are different and are getting really mixed up.
2NR: You have good flows but it doesn't look like you are using them! You did a good job extending your case arguments. Spending and the states CP are still getting really mixed up - remember, these are separate!
Date of debate: 7/7
Debating on: Practice Debate D Instructor/commentator: Nick Comments:
- Good start to cross-x with the focus on qualifications - try to continue with this line of questioning or ask about other pieces of evidence rather than throwing "softball" questions like "why is the federal government key?". A more targeted line of questioning allows you to get the answers you want without simply giving the 1A the opportunity to ramble about what they've just read.
- Try to use all of your cross-x time. You might want to question their ability to address climate change; i.e. how would the aff reduce developing country (China and India) emissions
- Remember to flash or e-mail your speech before you get ready to speak
- Make sure you're clear about when you've switched flows during your speech
- With the extra time in your speech, you could extend a greater number of case arguments or read more evidence to further substantiate the claims you're making
- On the counterplan you need to flag when you're answering each unique solvency deficit as well as answer each of the theory arguments
- Start the 2NR with your offense first (the disad), and then the case arguments. Regardless of what happened earlier in the debate, you should practice extending case arguments and debating the disad.
- Have some energy, keep your head up - even if you think you're behind in a debate, never show it and use all your speech time to do everything you can anyway
Date of debate: 7/7
Debating on: Practice Debate Instructor/commentator: Gjerpen Comments:
1AR: You do a good job of extending important 2AC arguments, but you and Peter should make sure you're both on the same page for what arguments he wants to extend in the 2AR. You should make sure to extend the perms on both the kritik and CP flows because they're the arguments that are more strategic and under covered by the neg block. You should also extend your offense on the spending DA about why HSR is economically better than the status quo so you have better arguments to go for in the 2AR.
REDO: Good job extending the permutation with an explanation of how the federal government's funding is more stable, which is a reason why the perm is a better option than the CP alone. Talk about your 1AC advantages more - explain why if the CP and kritik alternative can't solve for all of the aff, that's a reason why the economy and warming advantages are disadvantages to those negative positions.
Date of debate: 7/9
Debating on: Tournament rd. 4 Instructor/commentator: Charles Comments:
You need to divide up the block long before you did. It was three minutes into 2NC prep before you sorted it out. This should mostly happen before the debate.
2NC
- You failed to cover the politics DA. You need to make sure to cover all the stuff that you say you're going to get to. Especially since they had almost no answer to this. You could really easily win on it!
- Good job on the Africa advantage. You're right to go after the terrorism impact based on the notion that uranium happens to be in the ground there.
- Don't let Peter answer all the questions in CX. Jump in.
- You need to answer all the arguments on the CP. You just picked a couple, but there is some other stuff there, too.
2NR - You do a really good job picking one or two key arguments on each advantage to seriously minimize them. That's fantastic. Do a little more on these and you will really cut into the aff a lot
- Good strategic decision to not go for the CP. You can just focus in on the DA and the case.
- Pretty good job on the spending DA to win the arguments about cost. But the problem here is that you're not really winning a full argument here. Why does it MATTER if the plan costs money? You say that it matters if the deficit goes up. Why? Say more. This is the only really significant problem with the 2NR - it doesn't really tell the judge how to vote. Why should the DA matter more than the case?
- Give us some more energy. You sound a lot less energetic in the speeches than you do in the rest of life. Get more of that into the debate!
Date of debate:
Debating on: Instructor/commentator: Comments:
Date of debate:
Debating on: Instructor/commentator: Comments:
Date of debate: 6/21/12
Debating on: High speed rail aff Instructor/commentator: Mikaela Comments: Great first speech!Good job answering 1NC arguments line by line. Don't forget the first one! Great use of 1AC evidence.
EXAMPLE
Date of debate: June 23 Debating on: Constellation aff Instructor/commentator: Nicole Comments:
Awesome job! Best 1AC ever!
Table of Contents
Date of debate: 6/25
Debating on: TInstructor/commentator: Charles
Comments:
- Good job and thanks for going first!
- You can develop your arguments a little bit more. How exactly does it hurt fairness, how exactly does it hurt education? You have the essence, but need to say more
- Your arguments are a little bit repetitive. You can certainly condense things more
2NC
- I like your 'the aff always has a choice - they can choose not to answer the CP.' That's the swag I was talking about. It's particularly good because it's combined with an actual argument. The snarkiness is a great feature
- Nice over-enunciation of breadTH and depTH
- You should try to reduce the internal monologue-external expression thing. Don't let the judge hear your concerns about your own arguments. Definitely focus on this over the institute.
Date of debate:6/29
Debating on:CPsInstructor/commentator:Baker
Comments:
-make sure to have an interpretation of what a legitimate cp that your cp meets to frame the debate
-lead with your offense then move to your defense
-make sure to impact fully the reasons why you think your theory arguments are correct
Date of debate: 7/2
Debating on: 2NC on States CP and CaseInstructor/commentator: Quigley
Comments:
Goals: Word economy and efficiency, sticking to the line by line
-Need to reexplain the argument not just say "Mitchell ev"
-When you are refering to numbers its unclear if these are numbering yours or responding to theirs. Say "2AC #1" etc and even better reference
-On the case, do more evidence comparison and
-Use all your time!
-I wanna see you grandstand about the solvency for the states CP, I think you could get that done faster and more persuasively
-When you just read your speech, it is so low energy, its harder to flow and pay attention unless
Date of debate: 7/6
Debating on: Practice Debate BInstructor/commentator: Kernoff
Comments:
CX: I wouldn't bother asking how much the plan will cost - it's pretty clear that it will cost a lot and you are not going to get much of a commitment to the aff. If you want to prove it costs a lot, ask some questions about how many railroads they'll build.
2NC: You should redo this speech. I really like how you numbered your arguments - it made it very easy to flow. In the 2NC, your main way of organizing arguments should be based on what 2AC argument they respond to. Use "they say...". You had some really good analytical arguments and explanation of your evidence - like why uniformity is bad. You should clearly distinguish between flows - spending and the states CP are different and are getting really mixed up.
2NR: You have good flows but it doesn't look like you are using them! You did a good job extending your case arguments. Spending and the states CP are still getting really mixed up - remember, these are separate!
Date of debate: 7/7
Debating on: Practice Debate DInstructor/commentator: Nick
Comments:
- Good start to cross-x with the focus on qualifications - try to continue with this line of questioning or ask about other pieces of evidence rather than throwing "softball" questions like "why is the federal government key?". A more targeted line of questioning allows you to get the answers you want without simply giving the 1A the opportunity to ramble about what they've just read.
- Try to use all of your cross-x time. You might want to question their ability to address climate change; i.e. how would the aff reduce developing country (China and India) emissions
- Remember to flash or e-mail your speech before you get ready to speak
- Make sure you're clear about when you've switched flows during your speech
- With the extra time in your speech, you could extend a greater number of case arguments or read more evidence to further substantiate the claims you're making
- On the counterplan you need to flag when you're answering each unique solvency deficit as well as answer each of the theory arguments
- Start the 2NR with your offense first (the disad), and then the case arguments. Regardless of what happened earlier in the debate, you should practice extending case arguments and debating the disad.
- Have some energy, keep your head up - even if you think you're behind in a debate, never show it and use all your speech time to do everything you can anyway
Date of debate: 7/7
Debating on: Practice DebateInstructor/commentator: Gjerpen
Comments:
1AR: You do a good job of extending important 2AC arguments, but you and Peter should make sure you're both on the same page for what arguments he wants to extend in the 2AR. You should make sure to extend the perms on both the kritik and CP flows because they're the arguments that are more strategic and under covered by the neg block. You should also extend your offense on the spending DA about why HSR is economically better than the status quo so you have better arguments to go for in the 2AR.
REDO: Good job extending the permutation with an explanation of how the federal government's funding is more stable, which is a reason why the perm is a better option than the CP alone. Talk about your 1AC advantages more - explain why if the CP and kritik alternative can't solve for all of the aff, that's a reason why the economy and warming advantages are disadvantages to those negative positions.
Date of debate: 7/9
Debating on: Tournament rd. 4Instructor/commentator: Charles
Comments:
You need to divide up the block long before you did. It was three minutes into 2NC prep before you sorted it out. This should mostly happen before the debate.
2NC
- You failed to cover the politics DA. You need to make sure to cover all the stuff that you say you're going to get to. Especially since they had almost no answer to this. You could really easily win on it!
- Good job on the Africa advantage. You're right to go after the terrorism impact based on the notion that uranium happens to be in the ground there.
- Don't let Peter answer all the questions in CX. Jump in.
- You need to answer all the arguments on the CP. You just picked a couple, but there is some other stuff there, too.
2NR
- You do a really good job picking one or two key arguments on each advantage to seriously minimize them. That's fantastic. Do a little more on these and you will really cut into the aff a lot
- Good strategic decision to not go for the CP. You can just focus in on the DA and the case.
- Pretty good job on the spending DA to win the arguments about cost. But the problem here is that you're not really winning a full argument here. Why does it MATTER if the plan costs money? You say that it matters if the deficit goes up. Why? Say more. This is the only really significant problem with the 2NR - it doesn't really tell the judge how to vote. Why should the DA matter more than the case?
- Give us some more energy. You sound a lot less energetic in the speeches than you do in the rest of life. Get more of that into the debate!
Date of debate:
Debating on:Instructor/commentator:
Comments:
Date of debate:
Debating on:Instructor/commentator:
Comments:
Date of debate: 6/21/12
Debating on: High speed rail affInstructor/commentator: Mikaela
Comments: Great first speech! Good job answering 1NC arguments line by line. Don't forget the first one! Great use of 1AC evidence.
EXAMPLE
Date of debate: June 23Debating on: Constellation aff
Instructor/commentator: Nicole
Comments:
Awesome job! Best 1AC ever!