Maekki+vs.+Madnee+-+Eshort

6/28/13 Round 5 Maekki (A) v Madnee (N) 1AC: Cuba, all adv 1NC: Ptx, China DA, Conditions CP, Case (Sol, Stability, ILaw, Leadership) 2NC: China, Case 1NR: CP, Politics, 2NR Everything

Maegan H. –1ac—you don’t need a roadmap for the 1AC, you can just begin speaking. Great initial speaking voice and speed—keep working at speed drills on being able to maintain that speed throughout your speech. If that means starting slower and building speed, you should do that. You also want to be able to answer the questions for the Aff—this is your chance to show off your knowledge about the interactions of the 1AC with other arguments—really good theoretical questions in CX—let’s see if those args show up in the 2AC 1AR—good extensions of your arguments, but be sure to give credit to the Neg answers—you want to not only re-explain your arguments, but you need to contextualize them in the context of their args—also, think about a strategy for the 1ar (what are the possibilities for the 2nr in this case (DA1 or DA2/case, or just CP) either way you need to win case, so I would start there—you started some impact calc at the end of the 1ar, and had about 10 seconds left—be sure to finish so the judge knows how to evaluate your imacts with theirs

Renee S. 1NC—same for you—start slow with your speech, and build up speed—it will help you maintain speed throughout the debate—when answering questions about the Conditions CP—you want to specify whether or not the plan does happen—really good incorporation of other judges comments into your debating tonight—much more LBL focused and includes extensions of your arguments— 1NR you want to be reading other evidence when necessary though—no 1NR on politics (or really any argument) should be without cards—good theory arguments—you have all the right arguments, now work on making them more efficient and block out your answers to condo

Nikki J. 2ac—the overview isn’t really an overview—you are just highlighting they dropped your impacts—good to catch this, but then you want to impact it—why do those impacts outweigh the other impacts in the debate (if fact you do this later on the ptx debate) You say the CP is a Voting Issue, but be sure to say why—why is it theoretically illegit (condo, conditions, etc)—You have a great date indict with the Tucker card, but extrapolate why that time difference is important—what has changed since then— 2AR—same as before, think about 2ar strategy—if they go for everything, you want to “punish” them for doing that. The contradiction you are talking about is really just a CP links to the DA argument—use this more to your advantage—its not just a reason to reject them theoretically, but a reason why both DA’s aren’t unique—you don’t want to lose your speed—you still need to cover in the 2ar, and going slower throughout the speech does not necessarily make you more persuasive

Maddy B. 2n—you want to be able to ask questions for 3 minutes—you got some good arguments from the first 2 minutes, but you have almost 1 minute left—really good arguments in the 2nc, but be sure to do more line-by-line—clash your arguments with their arguments too—also, you may need to pick and choose some of the arguments on case—if you aren’t fast enough to get through them all, you want to pick your best arguments 2NR—you want to make choices in the 2NR—pick one story to tell (DA/case or CP/NB) and develop that in depth instead of extending all the arguments—the reason this is important is a) you want clarity on the Neg position at the end of the debate and b) you don’t have time to explain all of your arguments in the 2nr—you have to be extending cards and impacts, doing calculus, etc—you want to have a general overview to set up how the judge should evaluate the debate—you can do this as a global overview, or a local overview on the china DA