Isabella Nieto Paradigm

Last changed 9 August 2021 10:07 AM CDT

Howdy, I debated from 2016-2020, and participated in most circuits, so I am familiar with most forms and styles of debate.

CX: Generally, I believe in fair debates and creating fun learning experiences. I will listen to anything, but you need to show me that you understand your case and neg arguments, not just read from Open Ev. A simple way to do this is strong information during CX time, or giving a short explanation at the beginning or end of your constructive, if you don't have time that's fine. I tend to lean more towards analytical, theory, and case arguments, simply because I think they display critical thinking skills and show you can use common sense.

As far as speed, if you want to spread just make sure that taglines are clear. For virtual tourneys I prefer you not spread only because I have never seen it work out successfully, but spread at your own risk. I don't mind open CX as long as both you and your partner are carrying equal weight.

Finally, sportsmanship is very important to me. I think assertiveness and competitiveness is good, but do not be unnecessarily rude to your opponents, it will reflect in your speaker points. If its clear that your opponents skill level is still developing I will respect you more if you turn the round into a learning experience rather than a power flex. Also, don't lose sight of your burden as the aff or neg. In most cases doubt can be a very strong voter, so keep that in mind.

Case: My only request is that you know what you are talking about. I lowkey like k affs, but dont run if you dont know what you are talking about.

DA's: Truthfully, I roll my eyes at nuclear war and hyperbolic impacts, but as a former debater I know that it's just part of debate, so its fine, but I strongly value empirical evidence and impacts that are happening now(hint climate change) its a good way to win on timeframe. Impact Calculus is also good if you have time for it in your final rebuttal. To win the DA outline a strong internal link chain and strong empirical evidence if available and make the link as specific as possible.

Counterplan: Please for the sake of keeping the flow clean do not run multiple CP's I will literally lose my mind especially if they get dropped later in the round. You have a better change of winning the more specific the CP is. To win the counter plan you need to tell me why it is better than the aff, and how you claim the impacts of both the CP and the aff and solve for any DA's you read. I don't really like you just say "perm:do both" I think you need to read evidence that proves you can actually perm. Aff, literally all you need to do it show me why the aff is better(this is part of your burden anyway) and everything will be cool beans.

Theory: I LOVE theory, but I am not a fan of condo; however, if you make a compelling argument then I will vote on it. Condo tends to get messy, or turn into a time suck, or a non-issue therefore I have lose interest quickly.

Topicality: As the circuits become more progressive T has become a time suck which I really dont appreciate. Please for the love of all that is good only run T if it the aff is untopical and T is really only important to me if you make it important. Depending on the round my default is reasonability.

Kritik: I will listen to it, but same with the DA's I tend to value empirical evidence and impacts that are happening now. I will listen to any alt, but I tend to favor real world than phil. I value moral obligations, empirics, and understanding. I think it is also extremely important that you run the K as if I have no clue what I am doing, this will help you adapt to your judges and once again demonstrates that you know what you are talking which is very important to me.

Lincoln-Douglas: I will listen to anything, but you must show me that you have a strong understanding. I understand that each circuit is different, but during the debate I would prefer an emphasis on your value/criterion and framing, and once you nail those move onto more progressive ideas. I also want to see you use your brain when you make arguments so be sure to try and display common sense and critical thinking skills. I LOVE clash and real world impacts, its an easy way to meet all the criteria I listed previously. Finally, sportsmanship is very important to me. I think assertiveness and competitiveness is good, but do not be unnecessarily rude to your opponents, it will reflect in your speaker points. If its clear that your opponents skill level is still developing I will respect you more if you turn the round into a learning experience rather than a power flex.

Full Judging Record

Tournament Lv Date Ev Rd Aff Neg Vote Result
UIL 4A district 3 2021-04-01 LD R5 103 106 Neg Aff 2-1
UIL 4A district 3 2021-04-01 LD R2 102 108 Aff
UIL 4A district 3 HS 2021-04-01 LD R1 111 103 Neg
Lubbock High School TFA HS 2020-12-09 CX R3 104 100 Neg
Lubbock High School TFA HS 2020-12-09 CX R1 115 102 Neg
Big Spring TFA HS 2020-10-28 VCX Semifi San Angelo Central Allison Underwood & Isabella Rodriguez Westside Rohith Raman & Sripad Yadagiri Neg Neg 2-1
Big Spring TFA HS 2020-10-28 VPF R3 La Vernia Derek Kadrmas & Joshua Niday Centennial Aryan Aneesh & Abhiram Tadepalli Con
Big Spring TFA HS 2020-10-28 VCX R2 Snyder Sha Wilson & Timo Olvera Westside Mahintha Karthik & Townes Schultz Neg
Big Spring TFA HS 2020-10-28 VPF R1 L C Anderson Ben Coleman & Piper Domsch Seven Lakes Pranav Kasibhatla & Hanif Lawal Con
Lindale Fall TFA HS 2020-09-16 VCX R2 Westwood Vishal Narra & Brandon Shin Union Grove Analeice Jones & Emily Melton Aff
Lindale Fall TFA HS 2020-09-16 VCX R1 Argyle Tristan Ball & Joseph Thompson Hallsville Zachary Stansbery & Thomas Thompson Neg