Debating on: Case Mini Debate (Aff) Instructor/commentator: Quigley Comments:
-Good speaking voice, much better on projection of voice
-Smart answers but I want you to work on referencing more evidence from the 1AC when responding to 1NC arguments.
-Need to work on word economy some, says "like" and "obviously" as filler words
Date of debate: 6/23
Debating on: T mini debate Instructor/commentator: Charles Comments:
2NC
- You're pretty vague on the 'we meet' argument. You do a nice job of referencing the evidence, but you sort of just treat it like it's a definitive truth. But they are challenging it. You need to defend it a bit more.
- You have a few arguments that need to be justified more. You say it's from the Senate and their's is from dictionary.com. I can see why this would be a reason to prefer yours, but it's not totally obvious.
- More on limits. This is the place you are the most sparse, and it's really crucial to explain how the aff explodes the topic. This is a really tough T argument to win if you are not overloading them on this question.
Date of debate: 6/27
Debating on: spending DA Instructor/commentator: Nicole Comments:
2ac: pretty great. Your analytics need some more tags for them - that'll make it easier to flow and more argumentative. Also, make sure you are not reexplaining 2ac cards you just read - the 2ac should have a diversity of arguments whenever possible.
Redo your 1ar the way we discussed on the IL
more comparisons, cut down on unnecessary explanation and discussion of impact calc
take out econ ! take out since that hurts you - and no cards are necessary on that question.
1ar Redo:
great job. make sure to move the "impact overview" to the line by line by the impact take out to make it more useful
you need a little more "impacting" of your uniqueness argument to make it worth investing the time.
ou did a GREAT job talking about why jobs was a more important internal link to the economy - affecting multiple sectors, etc.
Date of debate: 6/28
Debating on: 2AC CP Redo Instructor/commentator: Quigley Comments: -Skip the "states won't spend money" arg in the 2AC -Good contextualization of the solvency deficits to the Aff, maybe work to make them more organized and structured
Date of debate: 6/28
Debating on: 2AC/1AR CP Mini Debate Instructor/commentator: Gjerpen Comments:
You are clear yet quick in the 2AC - keep it up. Try to make more specific arguments about why the States can't solve NIB rather than general arguments about why the States can't solve transportation infrastructure. In the 1AR, try to extend more arguments from the 2AC. You don't have enough time to extend them all, but try to give the 2AR some more options.
Date of debate: 6/30
Debating on: Security K Instructor/commentator: Mikaela Comments: Great 2AC! I like the incorporation of a utopian fiat bad argument. Try to make each analytic argument a little bit more robust -- several arguments that were only 1 sentence were hard to flow. You also repeated yourself a little bit -- work on just saying things once.
1AR -- If you group the neg's link arguments, you don't also have to summarize what those arguments are -- the judge will understand what you're doing. Try to go closer to 2AC order and focus on extending those arguments; this was a very good speech but involved a little too much of "they drop X" and "we didn't drop X".
Date of debate: 7/2
Debating on: practice debate #1 Instructor/commentator: Mikaela Comments:2AC – Be sure to answer every argument on case – you have a great start here but remember to answer everything the 1NC says (for example, that natural gas leaks are worse for climate change). Politics – Try to read a greater diversity of answers – rather than 2-3 cards that there’s no impact to prolif (which doesn’t really answer the impact to the DA since it’s only one component of why US-Russian relations are important), make uniqueness arguments and link arguments as well as some analytical hedges against the DA. 2AR – generally good, especially for a difficult speech to give. Extend the case impacts and point out that a small solvency deficit should outweigh the DA since there is no terminal defense against the case. For your re-do – re-give the 2AC, answering every argument on case and making more arguments with greater diversity on the politics DA. If possible, also add some more arguments on the spending and federalism DA’s.
2AC REDO -- good improvement!**
-When answering the 1NC's case arguments, start by extending a relevant 1AC card (for example a solvency card on warming)
-Remember to extend the terminal impacts to the advantages
-Always include a uniqueness argument when answering politics
-Some of your impact calculus on the spending DA could be more efficient to save time to read more cards
Date of debate: 7/7
Debating on: Practice Debate D Instructor/commentator: Mikaela Comments: 1AC CX – Try to have more questions ready (you have lots of time to read through the 1AC and prep questions before the debate!), but good job sticking it out for the full time!
2NC - generally good, but you aren’t answering arguments in order. You and Ambria should work together before the debate to make sure you have all the blocks you need.
2NR – I’m not sure you want to concede that “spending is an advantage to the plan” because the CP doesn’t necessarily also solve the turn – their evidence is about federal stimulus being good; there’s possibly a distinction between that spending and state spending. At the very least, give a reason/explanation as to how the CP accesses the same stimulus.
Try to stay organized and stop jumping around between politics and the CP. You also need to extend the complete argument on politics – repeal will pass, plan prevents passage (this argument is conceded in the 1AR), and repeal is key to relations (also not contested by the 1AR). Most importantly, explain why US-Russian relations are important and outweigh the case. You should be in a good position on the politics DA, but you need to win a reason why it matters.
You also extend a case defense argument, but case wasn’t in your oder.
**For your re-do – Re-give the 2NC, answering every 2AC argument in order – consult Ambria’s flow if you’ve missed some arguments. For example, make sure you answer the argument on the CP that the states are discriminatory. On politics, do some impact assessment – why US-Russian relations are important and outweigh the affirmative’s impacts. Read additional evidence on each 2AC argument.
Date of debate: 7/9
Debating on: Tournament Round 2 Instructor/commentator: Quigley Comments: I voted Aff because the Perm solves some risk of the impacts and I don't think that the alt is likely to be effective at combatting capitalism.
You don't need to do so much impact calc in the 1AR, you should focus on just getting through all the arguments. You need to have some more impact defense to all of the cap impacts the 2NC read and also focus more on why the alt cant solve, maybe make a transition wars argument. The perm/no link strat is hard to pull off with this aff.
Date of debate:7/9
Debating on:Debate #1 Instructor/commentator:Baker Comments:
-try to ask fewer open ended questions in cross-x
-don't forget to give an order
-try to keep the tone of your voice steady - it's wavering as you approach words you don't know
-explicitly reference and address the different perms made in the 2AC
-try to fill the time allotted - always take more up to the podium than you think you'll need
-make sure to explicitly kick out of arguments you aren't going for
Date of debate: 7/9
Debating on: Tournament round #4 Instructor/commentator: Mikaela Comments: 2NC – I think the K and politics is too big of a 2NC given the large number of 2AC arguments on each. Maybe extend one of those two offensive arguments and one case advantage.
Go line-by-line and answer every argument! You do a better job of this on the politics DA than on case, but still aren’t answering arguments in order. On the K, you make some good arguments but need to integrate them into the line by line. On politics, I have no idea why you read a card that Middle East war won’t escalate in response to the argument that Iran is an alternative causality to Russian relations.
Don’t let yourself get distracted in your speech – stop responding to other people’s side comments!
2NR – Try not to get so flustered.
I don’t think the CP + downgrade DA is a particularly good strategy for this 2NR. There’s no external impact to the DA, and arguably there’s no impact at all; and lack of impact defense on the case means that any solvency deficit is a huge threat.
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 Mini Debate (Aff)Instructor/commentator: Quigley
Comments:
-Good speaking voice, much better on projection of voice
-Smart answers but I want you to work on referencing more evidence from the 1AC when responding to 1NC arguments.
-Need to work on word economy some, says "like" and "obviously" as filler words
Date of debate: 6/23
Debating on: T mini debateInstructor/commentator: Charles
Comments:
2NC
- You're pretty vague on the 'we meet' argument. You do a nice job of referencing the evidence, but you sort of just treat it like it's a definitive truth. But they are challenging it. You need to defend it a bit more.
- You have a few arguments that need to be justified more. You say it's from the Senate and their's is from dictionary.com. I can see why this would be a reason to prefer yours, but it's not totally obvious.
- More on limits. This is the place you are the most sparse, and it's really crucial to explain how the aff explodes the topic. This is a really tough T argument to win if you are not overloading them on this question.
Date of debate: 6/27
Debating on: spending DAInstructor/commentator: Nicole
Comments:
2ac: pretty great. Your analytics need some more tags for them - that'll make it easier to flow and more argumentative. Also, make sure you are not reexplaining 2ac cards you just read - the 2ac should have a diversity of arguments whenever possible.
Redo your 1ar the way we discussed on the IL
more comparisons, cut down on unnecessary explanation and discussion of impact calc
take out econ ! take out since that hurts you - and no cards are necessary on that question.
1ar Redo:
great job. make sure to move the "impact overview" to the line by line by the impact take out to make it more useful
you need a little more "impacting" of your uniqueness argument to make it worth investing the time.
ou did a GREAT job talking about why jobs was a more important internal link to the economy - affecting multiple sectors, etc.
Date of debate: 6/28
Debating on: 2AC CP RedoInstructor/commentator: Quigley
Comments:
-Skip the "states won't spend money" arg in the 2AC
-Good contextualization of the solvency deficits to the Aff, maybe work to make them more organized and structured
Date of debate: 6/28
Debating on: 2AC/1AR CP Mini DebateInstructor/commentator: Gjerpen
Comments:
You are clear yet quick in the 2AC - keep it up. Try to make more specific arguments about why the States can't solve NIB rather than general arguments about why the States can't solve transportation infrastructure. In the 1AR, try to extend more arguments from the 2AC. You don't have enough time to extend them all, but try to give the 2AR some more options.
Date of debate: 6/30
Debating on: Security KInstructor/commentator: Mikaela
Comments: Great 2AC! I like the incorporation of a utopian fiat bad argument. Try to make each analytic argument a little bit more robust -- several arguments that were only 1 sentence were hard to flow. You also repeated yourself a little bit -- work on just saying things once.
1AR -- If you group the neg's link arguments, you don't also have to summarize what those arguments are -- the judge will understand what you're doing. Try to go closer to 2AC order and focus on extending those arguments; this was a very good speech but involved a little too much of "they drop X" and "we didn't drop X".
Date of debate: 7/2
Debating on: practice debate #1Instructor/commentator: Mikaela
Comments: 2AC – Be sure to answer every argument on case – you have a great start here but remember to answer everything the 1NC says (for example, that natural gas leaks are worse for climate change).
Politics – Try to read a greater diversity of answers – rather than 2-3 cards that there’s no impact to prolif (which doesn’t really answer the impact to the DA since it’s only one component of why US-Russian relations are important), make uniqueness arguments and link arguments as well as some analytical hedges against the DA.
2AR – generally good, especially for a difficult speech to give. Extend the case impacts and point out that a small solvency deficit should outweigh the DA since there is no terminal defense against the case.
For your re-do – re-give the 2AC, answering every argument on case and making more arguments with greater diversity on the politics DA. If possible, also add some more arguments on the spending and federalism DA’s.
2AC REDO -- good improvement!**
-When answering the 1NC's case arguments, start by extending a relevant 1AC card (for example a solvency card on warming)
-Remember to extend the terminal impacts to the advantages
-Always include a uniqueness argument when answering politics
-Some of your impact calculus on the spending DA could be more efficient to save time to read more cards
Date of debate: 7/7
Debating on: Practice Debate DInstructor/commentator: Mikaela
Comments: 1AC CX – Try to have more questions ready (you have lots of time to read through the 1AC and prep questions before the debate!), but good job sticking it out for the full time!
2NC - generally good, but you aren’t answering arguments in order. You and Ambria should work together before the debate to make sure you have all the blocks you need.
2NR – I’m not sure you want to concede that “spending is an advantage to the plan” because the CP doesn’t necessarily also solve the turn – their evidence is about federal stimulus being good; there’s possibly a distinction between that spending and state spending. At the very least, give a reason/explanation as to how the CP accesses the same stimulus.
Try to stay organized and stop jumping around between politics and the CP. You also need to extend the complete argument on politics – repeal will pass, plan prevents passage (this argument is conceded in the 1AR), and repeal is key to relations (also not contested by the 1AR). Most importantly, explain why US-Russian relations are important and outweigh the case. You should be in a good position on the politics DA, but you need to win a reason why it matters.
You also extend a case defense argument, but case wasn’t in your oder.
**For your re-do – Re-give the 2NC, answering every 2AC argument in order – consult Ambria’s flow if you’ve missed some arguments. For example, make sure you answer the argument on the CP that the states are discriminatory. On politics, do some impact assessment – why US-Russian relations are important and outweigh the affirmative’s impacts. Read additional evidence on each 2AC argument.
Date of debate: 7/9
Debating on: Tournament Round 2Instructor/commentator: Quigley
Comments:
I voted Aff because the Perm solves some risk of the impacts and I don't think that the alt is likely to be effective at combatting capitalism.
You don't need to do so much impact calc in the 1AR, you should focus on just getting through all the arguments. You need to have some more impact defense to all of the cap impacts the 2NC read and also focus more on why the alt cant solve, maybe make a transition wars argument. The perm/no link strat is hard to pull off with this aff.
Date of debate:7/9
Debating on:Debate #1Instructor/commentator:Baker
Comments:
-try to ask fewer open ended questions in cross-x
-don't forget to give an order
-try to keep the tone of your voice steady - it's wavering as you approach words you don't know
-explicitly reference and address the different perms made in the 2AC
-try to fill the time allotted - always take more up to the podium than you think you'll need
-make sure to explicitly kick out of arguments you aren't going for
Date of debate: 7/9
Debating on: Tournament round #4Instructor/commentator: Mikaela
Comments: 2NC – I think the K and politics is too big of a 2NC given the large number of 2AC arguments on each. Maybe extend one of those two offensive arguments and one case advantage.
Go line-by-line and answer every argument! You do a better job of this on the politics DA than on case, but still aren’t answering arguments in order. On the K, you make some good arguments but need to integrate them into the line by line. On politics, I have no idea why you read a card that Middle East war won’t escalate in response to the argument that Iran is an alternative causality to Russian relations.
Don’t let yourself get distracted in your speech – stop responding to other people’s side comments!
2NR – Try not to get so flustered.
I don’t think the CP + downgrade DA is a particularly good strategy for this 2NR. There’s no external impact to the DA, and arguably there’s no impact at all; and lack of impact defense on the case means that any solvency deficit is a huge threat.
EXAMPLE
Date of debate: June 23Debating on: Constellation aff
Instructor/commentator: Nicole
Comments:
Awesome job! Best 1AC ever!