Alex

Round 1
Judge:Jesse Speaker Position:1A Comments:

__1AC__ Start off slower then gradually gain speed

__1AR__ Case first then off case positions

Bear down on arguments you know will probably be needed in the 2AR instead of making sure all 2AC arguments are extended

Take the T RVI out

Round 3 - July 17

 * Judge:Linda**
 * Speaker Position:2N**

- Don’t talk into your computer screen. Tilt the computer screen slightly away from you, and don’t put it directly in between you and the judge. - All of you need to work on clarity! Remember, speed doesn’t matter if the judge can’t understand you. Prioritize volume and enunciation over rushing through cards sloppily. - Both teams have major problems with organization in the rebuttals – in the 2NR and the 2AR, you need to highlight the key issues and impact calculus on the top, and then address issues in a neat fashion. - Both teams have the tendency to get bogged down into minutia, and most clash is simply “yes” and “no” back and forth. When you answer an argument, you should not just repeat what your partner said, but make distinctions and new warrants, and compare evidence in order to get ahead. Otherwise you are just staying on the same level, and the judge does not know how to evaluate these competing claims.
 * __General Comments __**


 * __2N Comments __**
 * 1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: **You need to work on clarity and stamina.


 * 2) Recommended Drills: ** You should do over-enunciation drills and pen drills, and do these for extended periods of time to increase endurance.

- I think you took way too much in the 2NC. Taking case, the kritik, and the disadvantage is too much and causes shallow debate. This is particularly true of the kritik, which takes more than 3-4 minutes to develop in-depth. - Capitalism kritik coverage issues – you did a good job on the framework and role of the ballot debate, but you dropped the permutation and the two pieces of evidence at the bottom of the flow. I would also like to see you make more specific tie-ins to the case, and use analytics to explain why the plan is capitalist and how the kritik turns the case. - Spending disadvantage - You also need to do more link comparison – you should explain that your links outweigh their link turns, especially on timeframe, because their deficit spending is immediate, while it takes time for them to save money and get macroeconomic benefits. (You made this argument in the 2NR, but it wasn’t in the 2NC. You need to make it earlier.) - Case – You need to spend a lot more time on case, particularly to answer the 2AC’s multiple internal links to the economy and trade. When taking the kritik, you can also use your time on case to illustrate how their case specifically links to capitalism – for example, there argument about how they link markets together is exactly the link of the 1NC Smith evidence in the capitalism kritik, because it integrates markets into capitalism and a global order.
 * 3) 2NC—technical skill and coverage for case and off-case arguments: **

– I think you wasted a lot of time in the 2NC just reading very similar cards. For example, on the spending disadvantage you read seven cards that all said deficit spending was bad. I think you could certainly cut down that number because most of them are redundant.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">4) Assess use of evidence in constructive and rebuttal: quantity, quality, and comparison: **

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">– CHOOSE. You cannot go for everything in the 2NR – you have to pick one consistent and coherent strategy to go for, and go deep on it. You also cannot go for multiple worlds in the 2NR – going for the spending disadvantage and the capitalism kritik is very contradictory and will definitely be exploited by the affirmative. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">– You gave the order of your speech like a 2AR would, by putting case positions on top and your offense on top. Flip that order.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">5) Strategic Choice and Execution of 2NC/2NR: **

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">– Pick your best strategy and only go for one major position (I suggest the kritik, or the spending disadvantage and case.) <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">– Make sure to spend more time on impact calculus describing how your impacts outweigh and how your impacts turn the case. At the top of the debate, you should discuss a “framing issue” and tell the judge what the most important issue in the debate is.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">5) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions: **

Round 8
Andrea Judging aff v. Josh and JP

__1ac__ Had 20 seconds left- add another card, always have one ready to add if you have time

CX of 1nc- Did a good job—liked your point about how US key to the economy proves that US heg also key to global stability

__1ar__ Need to get through the case faster- more than half your speech time was there, you got to the off case args with 2:15 left On competitive bidding CP- Don’t read soo much of their evidence when you are indicting it- it took 20 seconds to say "their ev is bad" On dedev- transition wars explanation was a little muddled- sorta sounded like you were talking about collapse of US hegemony and not the economy, or both? Be more clear there. Need to keep alive your growth sustainable argument- this is a must win UQ arg…also need to ans that growth is the root cause of climate change

judge: Arnett neg v Sarah and Kenny
 * Round 11**

Case -not doing enough here to make it hard on the 1AR or develop these arguments -extend evidence specifically-flowing can help this -overview include the war and environment impacts from the 1NC Kritik-line by line e.g. last alternative argument

2NR

Conditionality DA-Link turn debate, need to organize impact debate more. Case debate. Double turn. Need to choose on warming debate.

Round 9---July 26th---Linda

 * __<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">1A Comments __**
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">You really need to work on clarity.


 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">2) Recommended Drills: **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">You should do overenunciation drills and pen drills.


 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">3) Assess use of evidence in rebuttals: quantity, quality, and comparison: **
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Terrorism advantage – Kenny is right in the cross-x of the 1AC – you need evidence in your 1AC that says that terrorists will attack the United States. I suggest putting in one of the cards from the ports affirmative that says a terrorist attack will happen by 2013.


 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">4) Strategic Choice and Execution of 1AR: **
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Trade advantage – I think you should kick this advantage in the 1AR. It is your weakest advantage at this point, and you are pressed on time.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Hegemony advantage – make sure you extend your internal links, and explain why hegemony is able to solve. You can respond to their “hegemony unsustainable” argument by saying that hegemony is only unsustainable if the US does not upgrade its military infrastructure.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">States CP – since they kicked the counterplan, there is really no point in going for 50 state fiat theory, especially since most judges will reject the counterplan, not the team. And even if you want to go for a reject the team argument, you need to explain why it’s a voting issue, not just say “extend the voting issue.”
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Solvency
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Uniqueness debate – make sure to spend more time on the “global warming is inevitable” debate – this is sort of the thesis of the 1AC, and the framing issue. It non-uniques their turns and proves it is try or die for the affirmative. This is a good time to cross-apply your 1AC inherency evidence.


 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">5) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions: **
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Give your re-do with the above suggestions.