Debate+Comments---Elsa

Round 2---Comments by Ryan Beiermeister
Neg vs Stryker & Kaycee

remember to label flows--transition from elections to K 1nr really good--like the swag at the top--it's always good to point out the strategic flaws of the 2AC would highlight that no terminal impact defense has been read--so 100% chance of extinction (where you're playing game on the aff) you're good at touting the quals of your evidence, and indiciting their evidence speedily, but try to attack their authros too

Round 3---Comments by Jeff Buntin
Aff vs Debnil & Madhu

2AC: I think you should change the order of the 2AC – definitely put the K on the bottom given that it’s probably relatively less likely that they’ll go for it – you’d much rather end up pressed for time and only making a few args on the cap K rather than politics, which was at the bottom of your order. Clarity – at the beginning of T and the K I had a lot of trouble flowing you. Case: You needed to be a little bit deeper on economy uniqueness in the 2AC – if you’re going for long-term growth more than short-term, you at least need to impact that distinction more – but since you also have some short-term stimulus args, you definitely need to answer their short-term uniqueness in more depth. You’ve gotta answer the aviation turn in the 2AC. Oil shocks wasn’t a 1AC impact – you can quickly dismiss their defense. States CP: it’s a little bold to only rely on 1AC ev – at the very least you should read some evidence that impacts your solvency deficits in terms of your advantages.

2AR: You can’t really go for the argument that US-Russia relations cause Chinese lashout due to containment fears – your advantage is about containing China more effectively. You have to be careful in the decision not to go for the economy advantage – like, their arg that economically interdependent countries don’t fight could also take out your China impact given US-China interdependence. I think you could have more directly used the China impact to say that the case turned the DA – like, a lot of your impact calc args on that advantage hint at that, but you never really directly make the conclusion.

Round 4---Comments by Rahim Shakoor
Neg vs Stryker & Taylor

1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: No. 2) Recommended Drills: 3) Assess use of evidence in constructive and rebuttal: quantity, quality, and comparison: Needed to do substantially more evidence comparison, especially since she was extending politics. More spin on the link debate. 4) Strategic Choice and Execution of Block/1NR: Don’t read a warming impact in the block, spend more time on the link debate, more substantive turns the case args, more nuance on the util debate rather than just tag-line extensions. 5) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions: Above?

Round 5---Comments by Connor O'Brien
Aff vs John & Eric

1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: Generally OK – slow down on short arguments because I missed some important ones like “perm do both” on the CP 2) Recommended Drills: Read 10 min or more of cards every day to improve speed and endurance. 3) 2AC—technical skill and coverage for case and off-case arguments: Indict their elections impact – the Allison card doesn’t provide any rational connection between relations collapse and nuke war. You need stronger answers to the alt cause/solvency args on each advantage – explain why the plan can overcome them/the squo solves them. You need more coverage on the K – cut down the theory args on states or improve efficiency of case coverage to gain back some time. 4) Assess use of evidence in constructive and rebuttal: quantity, quality, and comparison: More cards on the K would obviously help you – otherwise good. 5) Strategic Choice and Execution of 2AC/2AR: I think a different approach would serve you better – concede the megaregions alt causes to make economic decline inevitable, then go for the argument that the oil shocks solvency deficit to the CP outweighs the neg’s China impact – this would mean you could exploit the limited impact calc on that impact and avoid fighting the uphill battle on the economy advantage. 5) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions:

**Round 7 - Miles** 1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: None 2) Recommended Drills: None 3) 2AC—technical skill and coverage for case and off-case arguments: Need to treat some of their case args more seriously --- can't just say "we obviously solve megaregions" --- need to flush out more warrants Need a little bit better answers on the CP in the 2ac or just jettison the oil adv 4) Assess use of evidence in constructive and rebuttal: quantity, quality, and comparison: Some of your internal links to education were repetitive---you said depth key too many times --- you should've spent more time internal-link turning the net benefits to their interp and explaining why your counterinterp solved it 5) Strategic Choice and Execution of 2AC/2AR: I thought condo was probably the right call given 2nr coverage and relative 1ar covg on the K 5) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions: Spend more time using your offense to access theirs Be a little more efficient in your overview--it's a bit repetitive Make your "they justify infinite CP's arg" an arbitariness DA to their counterinterpretation --- if they can advocate more than 1 position, there's no limit

1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: None 2) Recommended Drills: None 3) Assess use of evidence in constructive and rebuttal: quantity, quality, and comparison: Great work on link/uq --- compared ev their ev to yours, said why polls matter the most, etc. Need to answer their impact D a little better --- you just made 1 arg and I didn't really even understand what it was 4) Strategic Choice and Execution of Block/1NR: Great coverage - just a little more time on the impact D, but other than that, really solid 1nr 5) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions: See above
 * Round 8 - Miles**

Round 9---Comments by Layne Kirshon
Aff vs AV Cailin-Rachel

-2ac started off a smidge unclear, but actually got perfectly flowable within 5 seconds, so just start off a little slower and then accelerate -very good embedded clash on case - my only comment would be you stumbled not infrequently which would probably be resolved by you not making eye contact w/the judge except cursorily to make sure you aren't ignoring any key signals. i think if you just keep your eyes on your flow you'll be a bit smoother. -small comment - card you read on case i don't think added much for you, unless it was for the cap K (i'm writing this mid 2ac so i may just not know anyways but that's my impression now) -kicking oil...probably good, but i don't know yet. we'll see as the debate goes on. my impression is since yall are faster, you're efficient on the case, and they don't have many points of offense and states isn't really that viable given the cx on deficit spending, so keeping a couple advs alive may be good. also kicking in the 1ar is generally a better time t/o than 2ac since the neg has generally made more narrow commitments then. -when zach prompted you to say their i/l ev is bad you should be a bit more emphatic b/c that's an important arg -good theory diversification - forced them to go to every page. intrinsicness theory is also useful even if it's a lie on the elections DA bc it can help you out on the cap k - you should establish in the 2ac and this applies to their other offense, even if only cursorily. -2nc cx was solid. the method Q was good but could have been a little more aggressive; don't just ask how you would meet their fw (Bc that presumes the burden is on you) but shift the burden to them to prove why your method is bad, so ask for specific conclusions you make. exploit the case double turn w/cap K (stimulus bad) more. the alt discussion of "what is the alt" is kind of trite. couch it more along the lines of w