Debate+Comments---Zach

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

might ax the federalism add on because the perm solves it, or be better at explaining why it doesn’t (thought it was unclear here). 2NR make federalism add on t/ econ (russia caspian argument? also makes it sound less new) say "Romney turns Keynsian economics" would extend the case arg about the aff not solving fast enough

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

I think you should chop some of the internal links from the 1AC economy advantage – with the extra time, I think you should read an impact to competitiveness that’s distinct from the other economy impacts, and maybe read more impacts to oil dependence.

1AC tags: when you begin a tag with “that causes” or “that prevents”, it needs to refer accurately to the last tag – like, the oil dependence advantage includes a tag “plan solves quickly” and then the next tag is “that causes large US presence in the Middle East” – in the latter tag, “that” refers to oil dependence, but the way the previous tag is written, it seems as though it refers to __solving__ oil dependence.

Minute left in the 1AC? That’s nuts. Read some more impacts to stuff.

Your CX of the 1NC was great – very aggressive on questions like the state constitutional amendments portion of the CP and the alt to the cap K – and you kept pressing lines of questioning far enough to get some real utility out of them.

1AR: on the states CP, I thought your extension of 50-state-fiat theory was very good – not too long, but enough of an investment that it would create a big deal for the 2NR. I thought you weren’t quite as good on the substance of the CP – you need to impact your solvency deficits in terms of the case – what does it mean for your advantages if you win your investor confidence or state conflicts args?

On the case: I think you could have been a little bit better at answering economy impact D – the block pushed a bit on 2008 collapse empirics and I don’t think you really had a warrant that dealt with that. I also would have maybe read a card against the aviation turn. I thought you were really effective and efficient on the oil advantage.

Elections DA: you can’t make the arg that it doesn’t turn China because China feels encircled by US-Russia relations – the whole thesis of your impact is that we need to encircle China more effectively. You were also a little light on answering their “turns economy” args – which weren’t great, but definitely needed to be answered.

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

1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: Stop shaking so much, it distracts the judge and makes you get out of breath. 2) Recommended Drills: Stand still. 3) 2AC—technical skill and coverage for case and off-case arguments: ?? 4) Assess use of evidence in constructive and rebuttal: quantity, quality, and comparison: More cards on T? 5) Strategic Choice and Execution of 2NC/2NR: Its dangerous to spin the link the way you did against the disabilities aff, you fall vulnerable to the exact thing the aff criticizes. There weren’t the nuances comparing the resistances of the aff and the neg that would raise the extension of the K to the next level. This makes the permutation a good spot for the aff to be in. Pre-empt ghost in the machine style arguments. Use your link spin to say that capitalism would co-opt aff resistance-based politics. Make a T version of the aff, aff conditionality and vagueness arguments on T. 5) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions: Pre-empt reasonability and potential abuse not a voter. Make arguments for why predictability is a pre-requisite to and turns reasonability. Impact the ground disad more.

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

1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: Good clarity+speed. 2) Recommended Drills: Read 10 min or more of cards every day to improve speed and endurance. 3) Assess use of evidence in rebuttals: quantity, quality, and comparison: Good use of evidence on the K to respond to the 1nr development of the K. You need an answer to the environment impact – either impact D or “cap solves environment.” 4) Strategic Choice and Execution of 1AR: Extend the perm on the CP – the block said “only the CP solves” which means this is crucial. Consider extending conditionality – the 2NC was “vote neg because they’re bad at saving the econ” and the 1NR was “vote neg because saving the econ is bad.” You probably don’t get new alt answers – no reason not to read them, but don’t bank on the judge allowing them Isolating competitiveness from the economy turns was a good approach – you could take this a step further by extending the megaregions internal link as a reason decline was inevitable – sacrificing half an advantage to take out an entire strategy is a pretty good trade-off. The solvency deficit to the pivot counterplan could use a little more explanation of how the resource wars impact is distinct from the one they fiat out of. 5) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions: Implement the suggestions described above.

**Round 7---Comments by Alex Miles**
1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: Started the 1ac not at top speed - that's awesome Slow down on condo / in the 1ar in general 2) Recommended Drills: None 3) Assess use of evidence in rebuttals: quantity, quality, and comparison: - Fantastic ev comparison on politics in the 1ar --- maybe a little bit too much actually - save some of that for the 2ar so you could've spent more time on the K - Didn't do enough analysis on the ethics part of the cap debate --- read a util card in the 1ar and answer the "you externalize ethics onto the state" arg - functionally a fiat K in dressed up garb 4) Strategic Choice and Execution of 1AR: - Great efficiency on the case - Less time on politics and a little more on the K answering the ethics part of the debate - Need to utilize your political engagement args as offense on FW, against the alt, and on their ethics args - A little more time on econ decline doesn't cause war --- the 2nc made a big enough deal that you need to give that arg more credence 5) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions: - See above

**Round 8---Comments by Alex Miles**
1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: No 2) Recommended Drills: 3) 2NC—technical skill and coverage for case and off-case arguments: Technical coverage was basically fine, except need to spend more time on the transition - esp since they read a biology card on cap about greed / growth /etc --- just be aware that that cross ap exists and will be made by crafty teams 4) Assess use of evidence in constructive and rebuttal: quantity, quality, and comparison: You honestly didn't do enough analysis on the environment and sustainability parts of the debate --- even though it's an impact turn debate in which you want to read a lot of ev, the reason you read so many 1nc cards on the impact turns is so that you can have a little more time for explanation in the 2nc --- in order to win the necessary framing issues to beat the aff's args, you're gonna have to do some comparaitve analysis / indict their ev, and it's way easier to get that done in the 2nc and nearly impossible in the 2nr 5) Strategic Choice and Execution of 2NC/2NR: I like the block --- 3 single sheet options puts pressure on the 1ar Use their counterinterps to prove T version of hte aff Good job readjusting in the 2nr in light of the 1ar shift to FX inev --- but you need to be clearer about which affs do / don't meet b/c I was pretty sure you said loans were T even though in CX it seemed as if they weren't 5) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions: More time on the FX arg---explain how the extra step they take means they are a financing, not investment mech

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

1ac -outstandingly clear - i could hear the words in the cards -only aesthetic comment is you're really clear but don't separate card from card well enough bc it's ironically all so equally clear it's hard to figure out when you're moving onto a new card - just insert a loud AND or be louder or very briefly pause. -1nc crossx was excellent - both first 2 questions were devastating, though when reading their subpar ev you should slow down because i actually didn't really know why the card was aff until after the subsequent exchange occurred. cx about the alt was kind of trite bc obvi the alt has never happened, you should ask more mechanical Qs about what the alt does to solve the impacts in the brown evidence -1ar was really good; started off a bit too quick but the rest of it was very clear. more theory, dish bad, go to 50 state fiat/intrisncess explicitly and make those make the cap K go away. also make sure you more thoroughly establish a link bw the dedev stuff and cap; i haven't read their ev but it may say stuff like cap makes wild business cycle fluctuations inev and growth therefore unsustainable. be more careful w/fw on cap - mcclean isn't necessarily responsive good ev choices on dedev you were a bit too brazen on the terrorism arg - elsa prompted you and you kinda just mumbled some stuf i didn't entirely catch.