Debating on: Case Clash Instructor/commentator: Crowe Comments:
Perfect rate of delivery. Watch the ‘ums’ a little bit.
You said “railroads are stable now so it doesn’t really matter” – use slightly more professional language to relate the implication of this, rather than “so it doesn’t really matter” say something like “which makes the affirmative plan unnecessary."
Good extended analysis in the 2NC on some of your points – you seem very good at making what seems like a small argument sound much more important. The trick is
It looks like there are multiple arguments you want to make on each point, so organization is critical. Reference their argument first (succinctly) and then you can number your answers. Good flowing makes this much, much easier.
You said “I don’t know why the public would need to do it." Instead of leaving it at that, make the more OFFENSIVE claim that they DON'T need to do it.
Date of debate: 6/23
Debating on: T mini debate Instructor/commentator: Nicole Comments:
2nc: a good way to save some time is to avoid the " my opponent says" reference. He says/she says are quicker
your use of numbering sounds like you're numbering your arguments instead of referencing hte 2ac arguments. make your signposting "2ac 5 ground 1. they get good ground . ."
Try to avoid evidence comparisons just based off of your dictionary being better than theirs - those rarely win debates.
You need to spend a little more time talking about what kinds of affs they justify and why that's so bad.
2nc redo:
good job with your reference of 2ac and work on linebyline. Huge improvement
Statements like " my evidence is more reliable bc theirs is from dictionary.com and mine is from the governemnt" - try to reverse the order to make it more efficient/argumentative. so "Prefer my legal definition over her dictionary definition."
Great job improving the limits discussion with so many examples.
Date of debate: 6/25
Debating on: T Instructor/commentator: Charles Comments:
- Great job. You've got the essentials here. You might want to get some more arguments prepared for those debates where it's necessary, but in a lot of debates 10-15 seconds will be plenty of time.
- You have a lot of filler words. You could be more precise. For example: "it's unfairly advantageous for the neg."
2NC
- Nice job on time skew. You've incorporated some of the things we talked about very well here. It's always appreciated when people pay attention!
- I would like to see a little bit more depth on the education arguments.
1AR
- Good job on reciprocity. Would like to hear a little bit more on this, though. how is a CP unique?
- Try to engage the 2NC a bit more.
Date of debate: 6/28
Debating on: States CP + federalism DA Instructor/commentator: Mikaela Comments:Try not to bend over your evidence when reading it; that constrains your diaphragm and prevents you from speaking well. Hold it up higher, if necessary. Highlight your evidence down a little more. 2AC -- Good speech! Add some analytical arguments on both the DA and the CP. You don't need to explain evidence right after reading it -- save your explanations for the rebuttals. 1AR – Try to extend more arguments and spend less time talking about the date of evidence. Focus more on extending 2AC arguments rather than reacting quite so much to the block. 2AR – Extend the permutation on the CP in more depth. Explain your uniqueness argument more beyond answering her postdating argument. Need to explain how the CP links to the DA. Great work overall!
Date of debate: 6/30
Debating on: K Mini Debate 2AC/1AR Instructor/commentator: Quigley Comments:
-Write out your analytic arguments on your flow so that you dont get repetitive and to make sure you get out all of the arguments you need in the 2AC
-I want you to explain and extend you 1AR arguments based on the 2AC structure and refer to the cards by citation and warrant, don't be reactive to the things she said. Be more organized by argument group
-Good use of your econ decline impact but I want you to continually explain each arg that you extend in the context of the Aff. For example spin the aff as a benevolent use of captialism that intends to help those most suffering by building better infrastructure
Date of debate:6/29
Debating on:CPs Instructor/commentator:Baker Comments:
-avoid over narrating your theory arguments - more often then not, its one of the more technical aspects of policy debate
-try incorporating some substructure into your arguments
Date of debate: 7/2
Debating on: Practice Debate A - HSR Instructor/commentator: Kernoff Comments:
2NC: Great job going line by line and reading evidence in appropriate places. Work on adding some impact comparison and evidence comparison. Be sure to answer every 2AC argument. You aren't reading federalism so don't bother talking about whether the perm solves it. Great job pointing out that a card is from 09.
2NR: You should redo this speech tonight. Great job extending arguments that were set up earlier in the debate on the case. You should go to the case last, especially since you have a CP. Put your offense first! Good job kicking out of politics so you had more time for spending. Be sure to extend the right kind of aff argument so they can't win a turn. I like how you argued that your spending impacts will happen faster. Good job answering their uniqueness and link takeouts on spending - spend more time answering the argument that it's good for the economy.
Date of debate:7/6
Debating on:Practice Debate B Instructor/commentator:Baker Comments:
1AC
-try to keep your head to the side or above your laptop so your voice isn't blocked by it
-when reading quickly, try to minimize the time the break between cards takes you
CX of the 1AC
-try to balance the cross-x of the 1AC, while the 1N can ask questions most of the time it should be primarily the 2N for prep time concerns
-avoid open ended questions that aren't for clarification;try to get them to say answers that you are looking for
1NC
-try to maintain a consistent pace when reading; don't tense up
-also try to get to the case with more time
CX of the 1NC
-make sure every question has a possible impact for you in the debate
2AC
-don't forget to give an order for your speech
-in the 2AC, prioritize based upon the need to access your aff - the order should generally be the case, advocacies (including the k), then disads
-good use of theory arguments in the 2ac, but don't forget to check the status of the advocacies before the 2AC
-perhaps some more evidence on the states cp
CX of the 2AC
-ask fewer clarification questions
-pay attention to the other team's answers and generally what's occurring during the cross-x
2NC
-you have to concede arguments that make the disad logically impossible in order to kick out of it - just link defense is insufficient
-resist the temptation to provide underviews for cards you just read as they are repetitive
-give yourself insurance plans, make multiple arguments to respond to the 2ac
1NR
-it's ethics, not "ethNics" you're trying to pronounce
-make sure to not get bogged down in the theory arguments with the k
-try to take more of the disad in your speech
1AR
-if the other team properly kicks out of an argument, unless you have a straight turn, you dont need to extend your arguments
-try not to conflate theory arguments with substance - theory arguments say what we should and should not be debating but substance relates to the question of whether or not the resolution is good
2NR
-don't forget to give an order for your speech
-make sure to explicitly kick out of arguments from the block in the 2NR that you aren't going for
-spend more time on the permutation debate in the 2NR
-its okay to work as a team to give the best rebuttal possible, but make sure to split up parts of the debate before prep and then each write a section with the 2NR taking almost all of the debate
2AR
-other than in select instances where theory is your only chance, always try to extend substantive arguments in the 2AR
-try to fill all of the time provided
-make sure your theory arguments assume the choices made in the 2NR - in this debate, you're going for fifty state fiat bad when the 2NR implicitly kicks the states CP
Date of debate: 7/6
Debating on: Practice Debate C Instructor/commentator: Yamamura Comments:
Good, clean, and fast 1AC. You might want to try reading an advantage two or less, and instead adding a little bit more depth to some of the other advantages. For example, the terrorism advantage didn’t really have an impact you read in the 1AC, and you might have used that time elsewhere.
Make sure you look at the judge after your 1AC cross-ex while answering questions. Also be sure to be able to explain the warrants behind some of your aff impacts, such as why hegemony solves war.
Good 1AR – you were very good about extending all of your 2AC cards, and answering the key block arguments. I would try to explain or extrapolate on your cards a little bit more than just rereading the 2AC tags, to adjust to the negative blocks.
Date of debate:7/6
Debating on:Practice Debate Redo Instructor/commentator:Baker Comments:
-good job kicking out of arguments explicitly, but don't conceed the other teams offensive theory arguments
-don't forget to reference and apply previously read evidence whenever possible
-use substance to influence framework debates
-concentrate more on connecting the big picture between your arguments and the aff
Date of debate: 7/7
Debating on: Practice debate D Instructor/commentator: Charles Comments:
- You need to prepare CX questions before the debate. You didn't really have anything to ask, but you had all night last night to read the 1AC and come up with a couple questions.
2NC
- Good job kick out of some arguments. Those are probably the right ones and you do it correctly
- Try to work on extending warrants, not just claims. You say that spending hurts the economy, but never explain WHY.
- You do fine on the impact level of the politics DA but don't extend the uniqueness or the link. You have to answer every single 2AC argument.
- Your explanation of the CP just doesn't make any sense. You are acting as if the plan is to build some specific road or technology. In which case there could be a prize. But you can't easily establish a prize to build a bank. It doesn't make sense.
2NR
- Good 2NR choice. Nice argument recognition.
- You also do a good job of identifying every single 1AR argument and making sure you've got a reasonably good response to them. That is the first and most important thing for closing off 2AR avenues.
- Your kickouts of spending and politics are not really done right. It won't matter very much here since you're just going for the capitalism K, but you can't concede 'no impact to the economy' since they didn't say that. And the argument you're conceding on politics is really a link turn. It doesn't have uniqueness but you need to SAY that.
- You're getting distracted by a relatively pointless debate about Marx and Communism. I don't see why it's relevant that Communism works in small circumstances, for example. You do need to win that there is a plausible alternative to capitalism in some form or another.
- How is timeframe possibly an impact argument in favor of voting negative? You need to avoid using silly debate impact jargon here. Just frame this as an inevitably argument.
- It's true that the 1AR didn't extend the permutations. That said, you need to do more to protect yourself against the 2AR dancing around this a little bit. You have to anticipate what the 2AR will try to do, not just respond to the 1AR.
- You are right that you have a lot of evidence why capitalism is bad and they only have an analytic. But that doesn't necessarily mean you win. You have to actually prove to the judge's satisfaction that your argument is true. Which means you need to win a warrant.
- For your re-do, the most important thing is to lay out the mechanisms by which capitalism produces bad results.
Re-do
- Better job kicking out of the DAs. I would also just make a larger general claim that the K outweighs any impact they could win on the policy realm. That is going to be huge regardless of what happens with the DAs, since you need to outweigh the case, too.
- For the impact stuff, the most important answer to the 'Non-unique: capitalism has existed a long time' argument is that there are structural impacts built into the world, which are ongoing and really bad. You mention this as 'suffering' which is a nice start, but elaborate on this. Get on your high horse. Capitalism wrecks the environment, causes global warming, causes poverty, civil wars, AIDS, etc.
- For the perm, you should also just answer the arguments you think they might make. You're doing more to anticipate the 2AR, which is good, but go even further. Make preemptive arguments.
- I'd like to hear more about the 'alternative' debate - effectively, you want to win that the plan is net worse, try or die, etc. style arguments. But these need to be better supported.
Date of debate: 7/7
Debating on: Practice Debate E Instructor/commentator: Kernoff Comments:
1AC: Your heg advantage doesn't have an impact. I would pick heg OR terrorism and boslter one or the other with a few extra cars. Good answer to cross-ex questions.
2AC: You need to be flowing the WHOLE time! You need a flow to give a 1AR and you need to back flow for your partner. It is Aamer's responsibility to get the cards he needs for the 2AC and your responsibility to have a good flow of the 2AC.
1AR: You need to flow the case on separate pages so you can give the specific case order. I don't understand your argument on the states CP about private companies working together. Good job going line-by-line and extending specific arguments from the 2AC. You don't have that much time to explain your arguments in the 1AR but try to include a brief warrant for each argument. You should give your 1AR by yourself - you don't need Aamer! Good use of peak oil to answer their Russian oil DA. You should extend conditionality since you are in trouble on the case and CP. Good coverage - you had a lot to answer!
Date of debate: 7/9
Debating on: Tournament round #2 Instructor/commentator: Mikaela Comments: You should be the one cross-exing the 1NC!
1AR – on case you need to be much more efficient. You are making good arguments but it’s taking too much time. Write 1AR blocks for common case arguments. I don’t think you should extend the terrorism advantage; it wasn't extended in the 2AC, and it isn't really getting you anywhere. Also, the turn you read to the oil DA has no terminal impact – why does it matter if backstopping diminishes Iran's influence? It might be more effective just to make defensive arguments.
On T, you need more than one argument, and your aff doesn't meet the interpretation you do extend -- needs a different approach. When you get to politics, I know you don't have much time, but try to extend warrants to your arguments.
Date of debate: 7/9
Debating on: Tournament Round 3 Instructor/commentator: Quigley Comments: I voted Affirmative because the negative did not sufficiently develop any of their positions. On capitalism, I think the Aff wins a combination of the permutation and some of their capitalism good evidence. On elections, the 2NR did not respond to several of the 1AR's specific arguments which would have made it hard to vote on that an the CP. It is also just hard to conceptualize how to make my decision when there a multiple worlds in the 2NR.
Date of debate: 7/10
Debating on: Tournament round #5 Instructor/commentator: Aaron Tam Comments: Should read the 1ac to find more problems and cx questions Take more prep for the 2nc if you're not ready it is better than going up and being confused as to what to say You should give a clear story of cap in the 2nr at every level - link, impact and alt. Only addressing the impact doesn't mean that it will win. If the 2ar gets up and wins link or the alt they would win.
Date of debate:
Debating on: Instructor/commentator: Comments:
Date of debate:
Debating on: Instructor/commentator: Comments:
Date of debate:
Debating on: Instructor/commentator: Comments:
Date of debate:
Debating on: Instructor/commentator: Comments:
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: 6/21
Debating on: Case ClashInstructor/commentator: Crowe
Comments:
Perfect rate of delivery. Watch the ‘ums’ a little bit.
You said “railroads are stable now so it doesn’t really matter” – use slightly more professional language to relate the implication of this, rather than “so it doesn’t really matter” say something like “which makes the affirmative plan unnecessary."
Good extended analysis in the 2NC on some of your points – you seem very good at making what seems like a small argument sound much more important. The trick is
It looks like there are multiple arguments you want to make on each point, so organization is critical. Reference their argument first (succinctly) and then you can number your answers. Good flowing makes this much, much easier.
You said “I don’t know why the public would need to do it." Instead of leaving it at that, make the more OFFENSIVE claim that they DON'T need to do it.
Date of debate: 6/23
Debating on: T mini debateInstructor/commentator: Nicole
Comments:
2nc: a good way to save some time is to avoid the " my opponent says" reference. He says/she says are quicker
your use of numbering sounds like you're numbering your arguments instead of referencing hte 2ac arguments. make your signposting "2ac 5 ground 1. they get good ground . ."
Try to avoid evidence comparisons just based off of your dictionary being better than theirs - those rarely win debates.
You need to spend a little more time talking about what kinds of affs they justify and why that's so bad.
2nc redo:
good job with your reference of 2ac and work on linebyline. Huge improvement
Statements like " my evidence is more reliable bc theirs is from dictionary.com and mine is from the governemnt" - try to reverse the order to make it more efficient/argumentative. so "Prefer my legal definition over her dictionary definition."
Great job improving the limits discussion with so many examples.
Date of debate: 6/25
Debating on: TInstructor/commentator: Charles
Comments:
- Great job. You've got the essentials here. You might want to get some more arguments prepared for those debates where it's necessary, but in a lot of debates 10-15 seconds will be plenty of time.
- You have a lot of filler words. You could be more precise. For example: "it's unfairly advantageous for the neg."
2NC
- Nice job on time skew. You've incorporated some of the things we talked about very well here. It's always appreciated when people pay attention!
- I would like to see a little bit more depth on the education arguments.
1AR
- Good job on reciprocity. Would like to hear a little bit more on this, though. how is a CP unique?
- Try to engage the 2NC a bit more.
Date of debate: 6/28
Debating on: States CP + federalism DAInstructor/commentator: Mikaela
Comments: Try not to bend over your evidence when reading it; that constrains your diaphragm and prevents you from speaking well. Hold it up higher, if necessary. Highlight your evidence down a little more.
2AC -- Good speech! Add some analytical arguments on both the DA and the CP. You don't need to explain evidence right after reading it -- save your explanations for the rebuttals.
1AR – Try to extend more arguments and spend less time talking about the date of evidence. Focus more on extending 2AC arguments rather than reacting quite so much to the block.
2AR – Extend the permutation on the CP in more depth. Explain your uniqueness argument more beyond answering her postdating argument.
Need to explain how the CP links to the DA.
Great work overall!
Date of debate: 6/30
Debating on: K Mini Debate 2AC/1ARInstructor/commentator: Quigley
Comments:
-Write out your analytic arguments on your flow so that you dont get repetitive and to make sure you get out all of the arguments you need in the 2AC
-I want you to explain and extend you 1AR arguments based on the 2AC structure and refer to the cards by citation and warrant, don't be reactive to the things she said. Be more organized by argument group
-Good use of your econ decline impact but I want you to continually explain each arg that you extend in the context of the Aff. For example spin the aff as a benevolent use of captialism that intends to help those most suffering by building better infrastructure
Date of debate:6/29
Debating on:CPsInstructor/commentator:Baker
Comments:
-avoid over narrating your theory arguments - more often then not, its one of the more technical aspects of policy debate
-try incorporating some substructure into your arguments
Date of debate: 7/2
Debating on: Practice Debate A - HSRInstructor/commentator: Kernoff
Comments:
2NC: Great job going line by line and reading evidence in appropriate places. Work on adding some impact comparison and evidence comparison. Be sure to answer every 2AC argument. You aren't reading federalism so don't bother talking about whether the perm solves it. Great job pointing out that a card is from 09.
2NR: You should redo this speech tonight. Great job extending arguments that were set up earlier in the debate on the case. You should go to the case last, especially since you have a CP. Put your offense first! Good job kicking out of politics so you had more time for spending. Be sure to extend the right kind of aff argument so they can't win a turn. I like how you argued that your spending impacts will happen faster. Good job answering their uniqueness and link takeouts on spending - spend more time answering the argument that it's good for the economy.
Date of debate:7/6
Debating on:Practice Debate BInstructor/commentator:Baker
Comments:
1AC
-try to keep your head to the side or above your laptop so your voice isn't blocked by it
-when reading quickly, try to minimize the time the break between cards takes you
CX of the 1AC
-try to balance the cross-x of the 1AC, while the 1N can ask questions most of the time it should be primarily the 2N for prep time concerns
-avoid open ended questions that aren't for clarification;try to get them to say answers that you are looking for
1NC
-try to maintain a consistent pace when reading; don't tense up
-also try to get to the case with more time
CX of the 1NC
-make sure every question has a possible impact for you in the debate
2AC
-don't forget to give an order for your speech
-in the 2AC, prioritize based upon the need to access your aff - the order should generally be the case, advocacies (including the k), then disads
-good use of theory arguments in the 2ac, but don't forget to check the status of the advocacies before the 2AC
-perhaps some more evidence on the states cp
CX of the 2AC
-ask fewer clarification questions
-pay attention to the other team's answers and generally what's occurring during the cross-x
2NC
-you have to concede arguments that make the disad logically impossible in order to kick out of it - just link defense is insufficient
-resist the temptation to provide underviews for cards you just read as they are repetitive
-give yourself insurance plans, make multiple arguments to respond to the 2ac
1NR
-it's ethics, not "ethNics" you're trying to pronounce
-make sure to not get bogged down in the theory arguments with the k
-try to take more of the disad in your speech
1AR
-if the other team properly kicks out of an argument, unless you have a straight turn, you dont need to extend your arguments
-try not to conflate theory arguments with substance - theory arguments say what we should and should not be debating but substance relates to the question of whether or not the resolution is good
2NR
-don't forget to give an order for your speech
-make sure to explicitly kick out of arguments from the block in the 2NR that you aren't going for
-spend more time on the permutation debate in the 2NR
-its okay to work as a team to give the best rebuttal possible, but make sure to split up parts of the debate before prep and then each write a section with the 2NR taking almost all of the debate
2AR
-other than in select instances where theory is your only chance, always try to extend substantive arguments in the 2AR
-try to fill all of the time provided
-make sure your theory arguments assume the choices made in the 2NR - in this debate, you're going for fifty state fiat bad when the 2NR implicitly kicks the states CP
Date of debate: 7/6
Debating on: Practice Debate CInstructor/commentator: Yamamura
Comments:
Good, clean, and fast 1AC. You might want to try reading an advantage two or less, and instead adding a little bit more depth to some of the other advantages. For example, the terrorism advantage didn’t really have an impact you read in the 1AC, and you might have used that time elsewhere.
Make sure you look at the judge after your 1AC cross-ex while answering questions. Also be sure to be able to explain the warrants behind some of your aff impacts, such as why hegemony solves war.
Good 1AR – you were very good about extending all of your 2AC cards, and answering the key block arguments. I would try to explain or extrapolate on your cards a little bit more than just rereading the 2AC tags, to adjust to the negative blocks.
Date of debate:7/6
Debating on:Practice Debate RedoInstructor/commentator:Baker
Comments:
-good job kicking out of arguments explicitly, but don't conceed the other teams offensive theory arguments
-don't forget to reference and apply previously read evidence whenever possible
-use substance to influence framework debates
-concentrate more on connecting the big picture between your arguments and the aff
Date of debate: 7/7
Debating on: Practice debate DInstructor/commentator: Charles
Comments:
- You need to prepare CX questions before the debate. You didn't really have anything to ask, but you had all night last night to read the 1AC and come up with a couple questions.
2NC
- Good job kick out of some arguments. Those are probably the right ones and you do it correctly
- Try to work on extending warrants, not just claims. You say that spending hurts the economy, but never explain WHY.
- You do fine on the impact level of the politics DA but don't extend the uniqueness or the link. You have to answer every single 2AC argument.
- Your explanation of the CP just doesn't make any sense. You are acting as if the plan is to build some specific road or technology. In which case there could be a prize. But you can't easily establish a prize to build a bank. It doesn't make sense.
2NR
- Good 2NR choice. Nice argument recognition.
- You also do a good job of identifying every single 1AR argument and making sure you've got a reasonably good response to them. That is the first and most important thing for closing off 2AR avenues.
- Your kickouts of spending and politics are not really done right. It won't matter very much here since you're just going for the capitalism K, but you can't concede 'no impact to the economy' since they didn't say that. And the argument you're conceding on politics is really a link turn. It doesn't have uniqueness but you need to SAY that.
- You're getting distracted by a relatively pointless debate about Marx and Communism. I don't see why it's relevant that Communism works in small circumstances, for example. You do need to win that there is a plausible alternative to capitalism in some form or another.
- How is timeframe possibly an impact argument in favor of voting negative? You need to avoid using silly debate impact jargon here. Just frame this as an inevitably argument.
- It's true that the 1AR didn't extend the permutations. That said, you need to do more to protect yourself against the 2AR dancing around this a little bit. You have to anticipate what the 2AR will try to do, not just respond to the 1AR.
- You are right that you have a lot of evidence why capitalism is bad and they only have an analytic. But that doesn't necessarily mean you win. You have to actually prove to the judge's satisfaction that your argument is true. Which means you need to win a warrant.
- For your re-do, the most important thing is to lay out the mechanisms by which capitalism produces bad results.
Re-do
- Better job kicking out of the DAs. I would also just make a larger general claim that the K outweighs any impact they could win on the policy realm. That is going to be huge regardless of what happens with the DAs, since you need to outweigh the case, too.
- For the impact stuff, the most important answer to the 'Non-unique: capitalism has existed a long time' argument is that there are structural impacts built into the world, which are ongoing and really bad. You mention this as 'suffering' which is a nice start, but elaborate on this. Get on your high horse. Capitalism wrecks the environment, causes global warming, causes poverty, civil wars, AIDS, etc.
- For the perm, you should also just answer the arguments you think they might make. You're doing more to anticipate the 2AR, which is good, but go even further. Make preemptive arguments.
- I'd like to hear more about the 'alternative' debate - effectively, you want to win that the plan is net worse, try or die, etc. style arguments. But these need to be better supported.
Date of debate: 7/7
Debating on: Practice Debate EInstructor/commentator: Kernoff
Comments:
1AC: Your heg advantage doesn't have an impact. I would pick heg OR terrorism and boslter one or the other with a few extra cars. Good answer to cross-ex questions.
2AC: You need to be flowing the WHOLE time! You need a flow to give a 1AR and you need to back flow for your partner. It is Aamer's responsibility to get the cards he needs for the 2AC and your responsibility to have a good flow of the 2AC.
1AR: You need to flow the case on separate pages so you can give the specific case order. I don't understand your argument on the states CP about private companies working together. Good job going line-by-line and extending specific arguments from the 2AC. You don't have that much time to explain your arguments in the 1AR but try to include a brief warrant for each argument. You should give your 1AR by yourself - you don't need Aamer! Good use of peak oil to answer their Russian oil DA. You should extend conditionality since you are in trouble on the case and CP. Good coverage - you had a lot to answer!
Date of debate: 7/9
Debating on: Tournament round #2Instructor/commentator: Mikaela
Comments: You should be the one cross-exing the 1NC!
1AR – on case you need to be much more efficient. You are making good arguments but it’s taking too much time. Write 1AR blocks for common case arguments. I don’t think you should extend the terrorism advantage; it wasn't extended in the 2AC, and it isn't really getting you anywhere. Also, the turn you read to the oil DA has no terminal impact – why does it matter if backstopping diminishes Iran's influence? It might be more effective just to make defensive arguments.
On T, you need more than one argument, and your aff doesn't meet the interpretation you do extend -- needs a different approach. When you get to politics, I know you don't have much time, but try to extend warrants to your arguments.
Date of debate: 7/9
Debating on: Tournament Round 3Instructor/commentator: Quigley
Comments:
I voted Affirmative because the negative did not sufficiently develop any of their positions. On capitalism, I think the Aff wins a combination of the permutation and some of their capitalism good evidence. On elections, the 2NR did not respond to several of the 1AR's specific arguments which would have made it hard to vote on that an the CP. It is also just hard to conceptualize how to make my decision when there a multiple worlds in the 2NR.
Date of debate: 7/10
Debating on: Tournament round #5Instructor/commentator: Aaron Tam
Comments:
Should read the 1ac to find more problems and cx questions
Take more prep for the 2nc if you're not ready it is better than going up and being confused as to what to say
You should give a clear story of cap in the 2nr at every level - link, impact and alt. Only addressing the impact doesn't mean that it will win. If the 2ar gets up and wins link or the alt they would win.
Date of debate:
Debating on:Instructor/commentator:
Comments:
Date of debate:
Debating on:Instructor/commentator:
Comments:
Date of debate:
Debating on:Instructor/commentator:
Comments:
Date of debate:
Debating on:Instructor/commentator:
Comments:
EXAMPLE
Date of debate: June 23Debating on: Constellation aff
Instructor/commentator: Nicole
Comments:
Awesome job! Best 1AC ever!