Ari

Cx of 1AC - You’re working REALLY hard to set up a De-Dev Link… - Why are you only letting him have a yes/no question 2NC - Impact overview - Need to work on specific line by line and discussion of their evidence – so on CP not just reading a bunch of cards – engage in the warrants of their specific solvency deficits - Confusion – Econ line by line not de dev? 2NR - *talk about whether or not this card was legitimate - Start 2NR with impact calculus of some kind - Should only go for one main piece of offense – either politics or dedev - Want to work on organization/line by line for the 2NR as well – answer the 1AR arguments in order extended (esp on politics) - Only need to answer arguments extended by the 1AR – on dedev don’t need to reexplain the entire scenario and extend distinct cards about uniqueness/link since the 1AR doesn’t contest it - To kick the CP you should say not going for it, perm test of competition (So they can’t advocate it) - Not sure what you’re saying on Econ adv - Use up all your time – should plan to go for case defense and not have an underview
 * __Practice Debate #10 - Neg vs. Michael/Sehee - 07/27/2012 - Comments by Peyton__ **


 * __Comments Debate #8__**

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">Everyone needs to be better at paperless---1AC should be solved <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">1a---start out slower in the 1AC. Don’t ask questions like “where does it say extinction in your card,” they could ask you the same question about your 1AC evidence. Ask about the internal links to extinction, and ask how any particular impact scenario could destroy the entire world. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">1n—Clear, but need to speed up a little bit. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">Start with impact calculus on the elections DA. Good job with the warming impact calculus. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">Good specific answers to their 2AC evidence. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">2a---quick and clear in 2AC. Need to read fewer cards and do more explanation on case, you have many cards in your 1AC that answer their impact defense and general case arguments, use them! <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">Good questions about alt. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">2AR was good. You had an organized speech that discussed your aff’s impacts and the impact turns to the K. you should have explained your impact turns in the context of the aff plan---cap is key to stopping conflict, proven by the potential for airports to avoid economic crisis and conflict <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">2n---Pretty good pace---good use of case arguments in combination with the K (specifically, the arguments about drones). Could talk a little more specifically about the aff. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">2NR---try not to kick things at the beginning of your speech, at the same time, you did it efficiently and kept it well segmented. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">You explicitly conceded impact defense to warming on elections and then went for a warming impact to climate…think through that one a little more next time!
 * __Practice Debate #7 - Aff vs. Andrew/James - 07/25 - Comments by Zane__**

__ **Comments Debate #6** __

__ **Practice Debate #3 - Neg. vs. Ashwin - 07/16 - Comments by Tara** __ --Okay CX of the 1AC. Be careful of just making arguments/statements and then making it a question by adding a vocal question mark on it. Your comments about the card in regards to nuclear war and the Bay of Pigs could have been restructured a bit to make them more question-like than argumentative-like. --I could not help but overhear the dialogue between the two of you during the 2NC prep. Although the discourse was polite, we could have saved ourselves about a minute by discussing BEFORE the debate how you were going to divide up the block. :) If you are still deciding that, did you get to most effectively utilize the 3 minutes of preparation that Ruth was CXing the 2AC? There are times where pre-round block splitting decisions may need to be changed up depending on what the 2AC does, but, generally, you can save yourselves that in-round time by making that decision early on. --FLOW! :) The first two arguments you made on the CP were not answering 2aC arguments. Start your 2NC with either (a) a local overview or (b) "Off 2AC 1...states fail...my 1". --We have good volume, but I still want us to work on enunciation. We need to open our mouths more to help with clarity. --You did a nice job on 2AC 2 on the CP (the coordination debate). You signposted well and "built a wall" of 2NC cards. --We dropped the state budgets DA on the states CP. --Where is the overview for politics? --We had about 2:30 minutes of unused time in this speech - the last two minutes was a "rambling dissertation by Ari" that did not make much sense and you ended with :30 seconds left. I am not letting you off the hook easy this time. We needed much more in this 2NC --Speech redo of 2NC: 1 - Answer each of the 2AC arguments on the CP and only the answers the 2AC made; 2 - Extend cards from the 1NC on the CP, DA, and Case - reference the key ones by cite and give 1-2 sentences of warrants; 3 - Answer the State Budgets DA on the CP; 4 - Answer the impact take-out on Politics. --I was surprised by your 2NR decision initially, but it may have been your best move. I did feel that the reasonability debate was undercovered in the block, but this position was probably your best shot. --We need more structure in the 2NR. We are now in the mode of "More Deep Thoughts by Ari." :)

1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: Speed is ok, clarity needs to improve. You are slurring your words and not differentiating tags – enunciate more so the judge can understand you.  2) Recommended Drills: Practice speaking with a pen in your mouth and speaking at the maximum speed you can without losing clarity. 3) Assess use of evidence in rebuttals: quantity, quality, and comparison: No need for new cards on the economy advantage – you read 5 internal links in the 1AC so use them against the negative arguments.  4) Strategic Choice and Execution of 1AR: Case should follow a line-by-line structure – you can group their args but you need to answer all of them in order. Good call on their concession of the warming defense – exploit that by moving on from politics and making more states answers. 5) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions: Work on efficient line-by-line – try to concisely answer each solvency and advantage argument made in the block. Try to re-allocate time to more threatening arguments – in this case, the states CP and federalism net benefit. __ **Speech Redo - 2NC from Practice Debate #1 - 07/12 - Comments by Tara** __ --I asked Ari to redo his 2NC from yesterday's practice debate. He had a good grasp of the 2AC arguments but he needed more arguments on the flow. The speech yesterday was very short. The goal was to "build a wall".  --Ari did a much better job with the 2NC tonight. Each 2AC argument had multiple Negative answers to it.  --I would have liked to have had more against 2AC #2. At the very least, give me 1-2 sentences about why the card you extended answers that particular Aff argument.  --For future 2NCs, I would love to see a short overview that explained the position. --I am glad that you once again extended cards from the 1NC like you did last night. I am glad to see that continue tonight.
 * __Practice Debate #2 - Aff vs. Michael/Abby - 07/13 - Comments by Connor__ **

__ **Practice Debate #1 - Negative vs. Jennifer/Kushal - Comments by Tara** __ --I thought your CX of 1NC was pretty solid. You had a good presence and commanded the CX. I thought it was good for you to focus on questioning the internal links to the advantages (i.e. how does HSR solve for all of global warming? Why are megaregions key?). You should continue your focus on this (this is always the weakest part of an Aff) but continue to strive to increase the sophistication of your questions. --Avoid blunt questions like "why can't the 50 states do your plan?". :) Think about how to word this question in a way that is not quite so obvious. :) --Since this is the first round of the year, this may not be truly indicative of other rounds, but watch the amount of prep time you are taking for the 2NC. At most, you should take 4 minutes. Leave yourself plenty of prep time for the 2NR. I know it is a bunch of new files so that makes prep a bit difficult BUT you also had the benefit of a very limited set of files to work with. --I thought the division of the block was pretty good but you seem to be leaving the 1NR as much as you are taking (both of you are taking one off-case and one case flow). That may be a bit unbalanced since you have an 8 minute speech and James has a five minute speech. --We need to work a bit on clarity - we need to open our mouth more so that we are enunciating our words more. --You do a nice job of signposting and going in order of 2AC arguments. --I am glad that you are extending cards from the 1NC shell. Do a bit more than just referencing the cards by cite. Tell me 1 or 2 sentences about what the argument is that the cards are making and why that answers the Affirmative. --Work on "building a wall" in the 2NC - for every answer they give, you should have 2 or 3 answers/cards. --Answer "Perm does not link to the net-benefit since Obama can shift the blame" - if the Aff wins that argument, they will likely win the round. You have to win that the permutation links to the net-benefit. --Redo: I would like this 2NC redone. The first practice round of the year is always difficult but we needed a lot more in this speech. We really only gave about 3 minutes worth of prepared arguments. I want us to prep out a lot more arguments. (1) Read more cards on the CP and the case flow; (2) On the case flow, do more than just extend 1NC cards by cite - give me a 2-3 sentence explanation of what the cards say and what arguments they make that beats back the Affirmative, (3) try to avoid jumping back and forth between all of the flows in the latter half of the 2NC. I think with some more preparation and time with your files, you can make this 2NC really good. You have the basics down (answering each argument on the CP)...we just needed more to say that we had prepared.

__ **Notes - Activity Day 2 - 2nc v Elections - Abe** __ -Make sure to use 1nc evidence. Make sure to extend and get as much as possible out of evidence before you read another card. -Start with an overview that focuses on critical framing issues that are either conceded or important enough that you want to separate them from the rest of the flow and highlight them for the judge. In this instance, you should start with an impact framing overview and go through 1. DA > Case 2. DA Turns Case -Make sure your have a high enough area to speak from so you don't end up hunching over and crushing your diaphragm.

__ **Notes - Activity Day 1 - 2AC to Elections - Comments by Evan** __ --Good speech and clarity in the cards. You attacked all of the parts of the disad and read a variety of arguments which is strategic. You could do a better job at delineating between tags and cards and maybe be a little clearer on tags - this will help judges flow all of your arguments. --It's not necessary to begin by saying "they say Obama will win but..." - you can just begin by saying "non-unique: Romney will win..." --Good job saying the plan solves warming! I would make an even bigger deal about this - if the neg reads a disad that has a 1AC impact as its impact, they're probably in trouble. --Good job reading both the "plan solves econ" and the "econ key to election" cards! --Add some analytics - they're quick but require a lot of response from the 2NC.