Tram+vs.+Kanoseph+-+Spencer

Sam Mulvaney 2AC – Don’t need to spend nearly as much time on case as you did. After the 1NC, I had two arguments on Solvency. In a circumstance like this, give me a quick explanation about the flow, the link and impact, then move on. Almost every judge is going to be very lenient if they do decide to make a lot of new case args in the block. Take prep for this speech. I know that debating maverick is a heavy strain on prep time, but use it if you need it. There were at least 30 seconds of the 2AC spent looking for more cards, and the cards you end up reading are on a flow that was entirely conceded. 1AR – I think this was by far the best speech in the round. The block was very scattered, and really hard to follow. You concisely said what you needed to on each flow, and didn’t get lost in the random mess. 2AR – I think the idea of consolidating down to only the stability flow was not a bad idea, but I would have recommended that advantage last. I think you have significantly more offense on the I-Law advantage, and gives you more strategic depth when comparing to this politics DA. Lastly, given how much was not answered, I think that you didn’t need to spend much time on the politics or CP flows. You could have spent 30 seconds on each, and explained every argument in more than detail than you needed to win this debate. Other thoughts – Don't need to say "this is x in x" (ie.”this is Barnett in 11”) when giving the cite. You are clear enough that understanding your cites is not a problem. You can simply say “name date” (ie. “Barnett 11”). Great cross-x. You did a good job explaining your questions clearly and concisely when the other team didn’t understand your questions. Use all your time – there was over 1 minute left on the 2AC.

Joseph Martino 2NC –You don’t need to elaborate on what the cards mean after every speech. The tag, when you are reading the card, and any signposting you give, is more than sufficient for me to understand the entirety of this card. 2NR – I don’t envy your position having to give the 2NR. I think what might help you a lot is just talking through your flows with one of the instructors at this camp. They can help you understand what is offense, what is defense, and what might be the best strategy for the 2NR. With that said, you need to spend most of your time explaining to me the impact of voting aff. If it is not the best policy option, tell me why. If there is a big disadvantage, layout for me what would happen if I vote affirmative, from the uniqueness, all the way through the impact. Whatever option you choose, I need you to provide a detailed account about how your evidence tells the narrative you are trying to win the debate with. Other Thoughts – Use your speech time - Over 1 minute left on the 2NC and 30 seconds on the 2NR Be keeping a thorough flow of the debate. This helps prevent missing the theoretical arguments the affirmative makes. Make all of the arguments that you are going to make on one flow, and then go to the next one. Bouncing between a number of flows makes the debate really hard to follow. I find myself commonly having to hear an argument, and then decide which flow I think it belongs on. Signposting – be sure to note where you are on a flow. This is something that will just become second nature to you with time, but you can make it significantly easier to flow by simply stating you are talking about the link before responding to their arguments, and reading more cards. Taking the time before the round to group your arguments together, and the few seconds of prep to make sure the cards are in the right spot, makes a ton of difference for me as a judge.

Kanu Madhok 1NC – Before you begin a speech, think about which arguments you want to talk about, and in which order. For the 1NC, you will almost always have your off case positions first, and then case arguments. Talking to an instructor before the round about the order of the arguments in your 1NC can provide you with a lot of information about how to order a speech, and why you want to order the arguments in a particular way. Additionally, once you move on to a new off case position, don’t go back. Make sure you have all of your cards ordered correctly before the speech begins. No plan text on the CP flow – I never heard a plan text read. It helps for the plan text to be in a place that is easy to follow. For a lot of counter plans, that is on the very top of the block. For some other off case positions, it makes more sense to read it after a card or two. Either way, I didn’t get a plan text throughout this debate, and that can often times lead to problems in a real debate. <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">Other Thoughts – <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">Use your speech time - Over 1 minute left on the 1NC and 30 seconds on the 1NR <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">Be keeping a thorough flow of the debate. This helps prevent missing the theoretical arguments the affirmative makes. <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">Make all of the arguments that you are going to make on one flow, and then go to the next one. Bouncing between a number of flows makes the debate really hard to follow. I find myself commonly having to hear an argument, and then decide which flow I think it belongs on. <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">Signposting – be sure to note where you are on a flow. This is something that will just become second nature to you with time, but you can make it significantly easier to flow by simply stating you are talking about the link before responding to their arguments, and reading more cards. Taking the time before the round to group your arguments together, and the few seconds of prep to make sure the cards are in the right spot, makes a ton of difference for me as a judge.