Debating on: T Mini debate Instructor/commentator: Nicole Comments:
2ac: super good 2ac! you made great arguments and were very roganzied with them. You are a bit choppy in your reading - a few tricks to work on that.
1. make sure you have your arguments written out in anorganized fashion and not just side notes on a sheet of paper (easier for real debates than these mini debates)
2. try to practice reading more than 2-3 words at a time. Use the finger guiding trick we talked about in the group
3. practice reading the end of a page and beginning of the next fluidly like we talked about. 5 minutes a day of practice doing that will allow you to practice reading ahead while keeping fluency
4. confidence! you were great!
1ar: good arguments, but need more organization. Make sure you are referencing and extending 2ac arguments.
I think you feel time pressured because you're trying to extend everything. For the redo, i'm asking you to just extend 3 arguments for the 1ar and impact them. with more time in a debate you can extend more, but these should give the 2ar 2 options to win the debate with.
Date of debate: 6/25
Debating on: T Instructor/commentator: Charles Comments:
- You have a good explanation of time skew - and the non-reciprocal nature of the CP. You could probably condense this a bit, but it's mostly fine as is
- Give us a bit more energy! You're doing good, but you want to sell it to the judge.
2NC
- You start out by saying 'conditionality is not really unfair' - start out more aggressively.
- Good argument with permutations. It's true that this is an important element that balances time
- Try to avoid phrasing things in terms of rhetorical questions. You do a great job making the 'logical option' argument, but it could be more forcefully made
1AR
- Your arguments are a little bit too directly responsive to the 2NC. You are super efficient and to the point, so that's good. But just open things up with a general explanation of why conditionality is bad.
Date of debate: 6/29
Debating on:CPs Instructor/commentator:Baker Comments:
-try not to rock back and forth when you speak
-good job impacting your argument, but dont forget even if statements to work as back up
-make sure to start with your offense, dont get caught up in the line by line
Date of debate: 6/30
Debating on: Security K Instructor/commentator: Mikaela Comments: Good 2AC! You should develop your framework argument more. It needs to be clearer what you're trying to accomplish, and frontload some offensive arguments to avoid getting buried by the block. Generally good integration of analytics with evidence.
1AR -- Always start by extending your specific 2AC argument before answering what the block said. So, for example, extend the perm, explain the evidence, THEN respond to the block. You could also describe what a world of the perm would look like -- how is it possible to do the plan and critique capitalism at the same time? Also, do some more work explaining the case impacts and comparing them to the K impact.
Date of debate: 7/2
Debating on: 2AC redo Instructor/commentator: Gjerpen Comments:
You do good line-by-line and make it easy for me to follow which 1NC arguments you are answering. Keep in mind that you don't need to do this for off-case arguments (like disads and Cps) - you should really only be doing it for arguments against your advantages and/or solvency.
You should put your flows and cards on a table/podium while you read them instead of holding them. It will help you stay more organized and make it easier to flip between flows and cards.
Sound more confident! You are making smart arguments.
Date of debate: 7/6
Debating on: Practice Debate B Instructor/commentator: Gjerpen Comments: Have an overview at the top of your 2NR – I’m not sure which arguments you are trying to go for. It would be really helpful for you to clearly articulate which arguments you would like me to evaluate, and extend these arguments with analysis. You seem to extend a bunch of arguments on various flows without a coherent strategy. You do a nice job of kicking out of the spending DA by extending the no link. Make sure to have impact calculus on the politics DA and explain why it’s a net benefit to the CP.
REDO: Good efficient kicking of the spending DA. You do a better job of explaining how the States CP solves the aff, but don't really extend the politics DA at all. You should be doing impact calculus to explain how the DA turns and outweighs the case. You can't win a CP without a net-benefit, even if it solves all of the aff.
Date of debate: 7/6
Debating on: Practice Debate C Instructor/commentator: Nick Comments:
- Good clarity and volume, but try to work on emphasizing important words/parts of the 1AC
- Fantastic job in 1AC cross-x with knowledge of evidence and explanation of advantages
- Cross-x on the kritik was fine, but you should try to frame your questions more offensively. For example, rather than asking “what is the alternative?”, you should ask “how does the alternative address X or Y advantage?”
- Remember to ask what the statuses of the counterplan and the kritik are during cross-x of the 1NC.
- Nice pointing out that the disad was missing in the 2AC speech order!
- There’s no need to read evidence that the plan is popular in the 1AR – just point out that fiat means the plan passes and that there’s no impact to some congresspeople getting upset.
- If you’re going to extend the theory argument on the counterplan, you need to answer her 1NR arguments as well.
- Explain why the spending disad links to the counterplan.
- Nice explanation of your economy internal link on the disad.
- On the kritik, you need to explain how the neg specifically was unfair on the framework debate and articulate what the impact to these arguments are.
- Try to get to the substance of the kritik with more time
Date of debate: 7/7
Debating on: Practice Debate D Instructor/commentator: Kernoff Comments:
2NC: You should redo this speech. Good job explaining how spending is a net benefit to the states CP. Don't talk about federalism - you never read it! You answered the money argument well but you need to go line-by-line on the CP. Good job answering the perm, but remember the most important answer is that it links to spending.
2NR: Good choice of which CP to extend and good job kicking out of states. You should address their theory argument and say the argument is new and that kicking the CP solves the problem. On spending, the only argument in the 1AR is that spending is good for the economy (Ireland example). You should focus on answering that.
Date of debate: 7/9
Debating on: Tournament rd. 4 Instructor/commentator: Charles Comments:
- You've got a lot of advantages and elements in the 1AC. I think it would make sense to cut down the number of cards by highlighting more of the ones you do read.
1AR
- You don't need to re-explain their arguments in such detail. Time is pressured in the 1AR. It takes about 45 seconds before you really complete your first argument.
- You're too focused on responding to the minutia of things that they said. Focus on making sure that your advantages still apply. You're picking and choosing arguments here and there to respond to, but aren't talking about WHY those arguments matter. If their arguments don't respond, you don't need to answer them.
- Same thing with the off-case positions. They failed to answer virtually every 2AC argument. You need to identify specific 2AC arguments that beat the DA, rather than just generically talking about the economy.
Date of debate: 7/10
Debating on: Tournament round #6 Instructor/commentator: Mikaela Comments: 1AC – Good clarity!
Try not to spend too much of the cross-ex of the 1NC asking clarifying questions about what the 1NC said.
1AR – You should concede the 2NC argument that economic decline doesn’t cause war. It takes out the negative’s only offense, and you can still extend your other advantages. Either way this seems like a good speech to make some choices and not go for every advantage. Good job on the CP. Your arguments on spending could use a bit more explanation.
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: 6/23
Debating on: T Mini debateInstructor/commentator: Nicole
Comments:
2ac: super good 2ac! you made great arguments and were very roganzied with them. You are a bit choppy in your reading - a few tricks to work on that.
1. make sure you have your arguments written out in anorganized fashion and not just side notes on a sheet of paper (easier for real debates than these mini debates)
2. try to practice reading more than 2-3 words at a time. Use the finger guiding trick we talked about in the group
3. practice reading the end of a page and beginning of the next fluidly like we talked about. 5 minutes a day of practice doing that will allow you to practice reading ahead while keeping fluency
4. confidence! you were great!
1ar: good arguments, but need more organization. Make sure you are referencing and extending 2ac arguments.
I think you feel time pressured because you're trying to extend everything. For the redo, i'm asking you to just extend 3 arguments for the 1ar and impact them. with more time in a debate you can extend more, but these should give the 2ar 2 options to win the debate with.
Date of debate: 6/25
Debating on: TInstructor/commentator: Charles
Comments:
- You have a good explanation of time skew - and the non-reciprocal nature of the CP. You could probably condense this a bit, but it's mostly fine as is
- Give us a bit more energy! You're doing good, but you want to sell it to the judge.
2NC
- You start out by saying 'conditionality is not really unfair' - start out more aggressively.
- Good argument with permutations. It's true that this is an important element that balances time
- Try to avoid phrasing things in terms of rhetorical questions. You do a great job making the 'logical option' argument, but it could be more forcefully made
1AR
- Your arguments are a little bit too directly responsive to the 2NC. You are super efficient and to the point, so that's good. But just open things up with a general explanation of why conditionality is bad.
Date of debate: 6/29
Debating on:CPsInstructor/commentator:Baker
Comments:
-try not to rock back and forth when you speak
-good job impacting your argument, but dont forget even if statements to work as back up
-make sure to start with your offense, dont get caught up in the line by line
Date of debate: 6/30
Debating on: Security KInstructor/commentator: Mikaela
Comments: Good 2AC! You should develop your framework argument more. It needs to be clearer what you're trying to accomplish, and frontload some offensive arguments to avoid getting buried by the block. Generally good integration of analytics with evidence.
1AR -- Always start by extending your specific 2AC argument before answering what the block said. So, for example, extend the perm, explain the evidence, THEN respond to the block. You could also describe what a world of the perm would look like -- how is it possible to do the plan and critique capitalism at the same time? Also, do some more work explaining the case impacts and comparing them to the K impact.
Date of debate: 7/2
Debating on: 2AC redoInstructor/commentator: Gjerpen
Comments:
You do good line-by-line and make it easy for me to follow which 1NC arguments you are answering. Keep in mind that you don't need to do this for off-case arguments (like disads and Cps) - you should really only be doing it for arguments against your advantages and/or solvency.
You should put your flows and cards on a table/podium while you read them instead of holding them. It will help you stay more organized and make it easier to flip between flows and cards.
Sound more confident! You are making smart arguments.
Date of debate: 7/6
Debating on: Practice Debate BInstructor/commentator: Gjerpen
Comments:
Have an overview at the top of your 2NR – I’m not sure which arguments you are trying to go for. It would be really helpful for you to clearly articulate which arguments you would like me to evaluate, and extend these arguments with analysis. You seem to extend a bunch of arguments on various flows without a coherent strategy. You do a nice job of kicking out of the spending DA by extending the no link. Make sure to have impact calculus on the politics DA and explain why it’s a net benefit to the CP.
REDO: Good efficient kicking of the spending DA. You do a better job of explaining how the States CP solves the aff, but don't really extend the politics DA at all. You should be doing impact calculus to explain how the DA turns and outweighs the case. You can't win a CP without a net-benefit, even if it solves all of the aff.
Date of debate: 7/6
Debating on: Practice Debate CInstructor/commentator: Nick
Comments:
- Good clarity and volume, but try to work on emphasizing important words/parts of the 1AC
- Fantastic job in 1AC cross-x with knowledge of evidence and explanation of advantages
- Cross-x on the kritik was fine, but you should try to frame your questions more offensively. For example, rather than asking “what is the alternative?”, you should ask “how does the alternative address X or Y advantage?”
- Remember to ask what the statuses of the counterplan and the kritik are during cross-x of the 1NC.
- Nice pointing out that the disad was missing in the 2AC speech order!
- There’s no need to read evidence that the plan is popular in the 1AR – just point out that fiat means the plan passes and that there’s no impact to some congresspeople getting upset.
- If you’re going to extend the theory argument on the counterplan, you need to answer her 1NR arguments as well.
- Explain why the spending disad links to the counterplan.
- Nice explanation of your economy internal link on the disad.
- On the kritik, you need to explain how the neg specifically was unfair on the framework debate and articulate what the impact to these arguments are.
- Try to get to the substance of the kritik with more time
Date of debate: 7/7
Debating on: Practice Debate DInstructor/commentator: Kernoff
Comments:
2NC: You should redo this speech. Good job explaining how spending is a net benefit to the states CP. Don't talk about federalism - you never read it! You answered the money argument well but you need to go line-by-line on the CP. Good job answering the perm, but remember the most important answer is that it links to spending.
2NR: Good choice of which CP to extend and good job kicking out of states. You should address their theory argument and say the argument is new and that kicking the CP solves the problem. On spending, the only argument in the 1AR is that spending is good for the economy (Ireland example). You should focus on answering that.
Date of debate: 7/9
Debating on: Tournament rd. 4Instructor/commentator: Charles
Comments:
- You've got a lot of advantages and elements in the 1AC. I think it would make sense to cut down the number of cards by highlighting more of the ones you do read.
1AR
- You don't need to re-explain their arguments in such detail. Time is pressured in the 1AR. It takes about 45 seconds before you really complete your first argument.
- You're too focused on responding to the minutia of things that they said. Focus on making sure that your advantages still apply. You're picking and choosing arguments here and there to respond to, but aren't talking about WHY those arguments matter. If their arguments don't respond, you don't need to answer them.
- Same thing with the off-case positions. They failed to answer virtually every 2AC argument. You need to identify specific 2AC arguments that beat the DA, rather than just generically talking about the economy.
Date of debate: 7/10
Debating on: Tournament round #6Instructor/commentator: Mikaela
Comments: 1AC – Good clarity!
Try not to spend too much of the cross-ex of the 1NC asking clarifying questions about what the 1NC said.
1AR – You should concede the 2NC argument that economic decline doesn’t cause war. It takes out the negative’s only offense, and you can still extend your other advantages. Either way this seems like a good speech to make some choices and not go for every advantage. Good job on the CP. Your arguments on spending could use a bit more explanation.
EXAMPLE
Date of debate: June 23Debating on: Constellation aff
Instructor/commentator: Nicole
Comments:
Awesome job! Best 1AC ever!