Bellamy,+Tiana

=6/25/13= --Good order for the 2AC, that's exactly what i would have done. --You can't just say "extend all evidence" give a quick overview of each advantage that summarizes advantage and impact with key authors being extended. during the season i had a prewritten overview of each of my advantages that i could read which can be really helpful. --You don't need to read any cards on case. It's just a waste of time because they didn't put any arguments on case. --Don't do an explanation of cards in the 2AC, that's for the 1AR --Very clear 2AC good job! --this would be a great example of a 2AC to put a lot of theory in! CONDO!!!! A 2a's best friend. --put some nuanced perms on the cp--it's a good way to beat them. Also should make permutations in general --When CX-ing the 2NC don't say "you didn't answer this argument" because they have the 1NR and could answer the argument. No need to remind them that they didn't answer the argument--the judge will know. --Good job framing the debate at the top of the 2AR and framing the reasons why you will win. = 6/26/13 Bryan W. = Word bank: legitimize, Boehner

Open with a more direct line of questioning. (“Tell me more about…” shouldn’t be a part of your CX. Move them toward yes/no responses by leading them to your conclusion and **__then asking, “right?”__** You do this later but it sounds like you don’t know what you want out of her responses.) Organization on your CP: make sure your NB ptix scenario is clear (you didn’t know where you wanted to flow the DA) AT CP analytics: make sure to discuss why “if” analysis concedes a risk of the L—and in this case (since they didn’t read any ev to the contrary) a very high risk of the L; now move to discussing why the !’s magnitude makes this important