Date of debate: 6/25

Debating on: Topicality
Instructor/commentator: Chris Crowe
Comments:
Try to use more of the arguments we've been talking about. Three quick arguments might not quite do the trick on topicality.
Incorporate examples of things your interpretation limits out or why adding space lasers to the topic doesn't carry with it that many other possible affirmatives.

Date of debate: June 27
Debating on: Constellation Aff
Instructor/commentator: Marissa Wizig
Comments:Try to explain the differences between your arguments and theirs. Also try to focus on what your evidence actually talks about. Good job reading additional evidence.

Date of debate: 6/29

Debating on: DA Mini Debates
Instructor/commentator: Katie/Jordan/Joyce
Comments:
-For your road map, you don't need to tell me the exact argument
-For the 1NC, you don't need to go line-by-line for the case args
-Try to speak with a sense of urgency and purpose (not necessarily fast, but confidently)
-Good analytical arguments on the case - it can pressure the 2AC
-Clear signposting between cards will help with organization

Date of debate: June 30

Debating on: CP/DA
Instructor/commentator: Lorelei
Comments: Good analytics — however, be careful about using solely analytics on an entire flow. It's better to have cards AND analytics on a flow; otherwise, it's often difficult to win whole flows on the basis of analytics alone. Be sure to mark clearly when you start adding cards to a flow. Solid answers to the CX by Margarita; you answered questions articulately and extended your answers to use up her cx time.

Date of debate: 7/1

Debating on: DA and CP with conditionality
Instructor/commentator: Kathryn Kernoff and Jordan
Comments:
CX: Stand up and look at the judge! Great job listening to answers and asking follow up questions. Be careful not to be too obvious about your strategy, although it is good to ask questions to set up your arguments.
2NC: Good signposting and clash, but I shouldn't have to remind you! Start with their first argument, tell the judge what it is, and then respond. You picked which cards to read really well. You have some extra time - use it to respond to their no spillover argument and the argument that the counterplan links to spending.

Date of debate: 7/2

Debating on: Security kritik
Instructor/commentator: Kathryn Kernoff
Comments:
2AC: Great argument that if the US didn’t assert its leadership, China would try to take over. This is similar to a set of affirmative arguments defending an idea called “realism.” Be sure that any 2AC against a counterplan or kritik contains a permutation to do both.

Date of debate: 7/7

Debating on: Practice Debate B (1A)
Instructor/commentator: Lorelei Yang
Comments: Start out slower, and build up speed as you go along. In the CX of the 1NC, you spent a lot of time on questions that would not help the aff team; for example, trying to hold the CP to a specific definition of "substantial" isn't going to help, as the CP shouldn't be topical, anyway, and therefore the funding of the CP has only to be sufficient to garner its N/B. The time allocation of the 1AR could have been much better; devoting over half your time to condo really ate into your ability to defend against the DA/CP scenario (in fact, you were effectively non-responsive on the DA) — a better time allocation in the 1AR would have been focused more on the DA, CP and K.

Date of debate: 7/7

Debating on: Practice Debate B

Instructor/commentator: Joe Balistretri

Comments:

General:
-make sure to use all of the time in your speeches
-explain which flows you're going to go to and make sure you address all of them
-try to keep things separated onto flows
cross x notes:
-face the judge
-try to avoid getting into back and forth arguments
-you shouldn't talk after the timer goes off
-try to stick to asking and answering questions
-you guys did a good job asking questions about the evidence

1ac cross-x
-i liked the honesty of the 1a about the things he didn't know
1nc cross-x
-the questions about the link to the DA were good
-you guys should try to get timers or download programs for your computers

2ac
-always put the case arguments first
-make a permutation and a framework argument on the K. also explain why the alternative can't solve and why your case outweighs the impacts
-also perm the counterplan

2nc
-leave things for the 1nr to do
-you should read more cards on the K and DA flows - explain how your alternative works
-explain how your DA impacts turn and o/w the case



Date of debate: 7/12

Debating on: Round 3
Instructor/commentator: Katie
Comments:
You need to take debate rounds more seriously – you and Bryan seem to treat these rounds as a joke, which is honestly kind of a waste of time for all involved. You demonstrated apathy and disrespect towards your teammates and opponents.

Date of debate:7/11 (round 2)

Debating on:Aff (REE)
Instructor/commentator: Matt Schnall
Comments:
Good job in 2AC mixing analytical arguments with evidence in responding to the offcase positions. You have time to make more arguments -- both in terms of time left over at the end of the speech and in terms of speech efficiency, and I think you will need a greater number of arguments to successfully respond to these positions. As mentioned in the post-round critique, the 2AR answers on the kritik are well-reasoned and fundamentally sound, but need to be articulated earlier in the debate.

RFD: Negative goes for the Heidegger kritik. The 2AR arguments about why extinction outweighs are new -- these arguments needed to be made at some point earlier in the debate in order for the negative to frame a response. Up to this point, the affirmative had conceded negative arguments that ontology should be evaluated first and that the kritik turns solvency.

EXAMPLE

Date of debate: June 23
Debating on: Constellation aff
Instructor/commentator: Nicole
Comments:
Awesome job! Best 1AC ever!