Forrest Hebron Paradigm

Last changed 30 January 2021 11:27 AM EDT

I'm a tab judge and am completely open to judging based on how the debaters tell me to. I am open to all types and styles of arguments, from topicality to Kritiks. If debaters say nothing about the framework used in the round, I will default to a policy making framework, if you run something like a performance aff, etc., I expect you to flesh-out framework for me. At end of round I'm evaluating your offense/defense vs. your opponents. This is the easiest way for me to judge the round, with as little intervention as possible, I'm looking to hear generally how the aff is a net improvement over the status quo. From the negative I'm looking to hear how the aff is a net negative, or how it fails to affirm the resoultion.

General:

Did Policy and LD in high school. PF for some time as well. My preferences as far as CX and LD are pretty similar. Did policy and parli in college. Coached LD and Policy in the past. Arguments that I frequently had students run were obscure kritiks, hard-policy affs, impact turns. I have always been a huge believer in the linebyline.

As far as policy, I ran policy arguments more than kritikal arguments, but as I got later in my career developed more of a preference for the K. That said, I really love good policy debates.

On the K, I expect some time to be spent on framework if it's expected for me to evaluate it through something other than the traditional way. I've been judging a lot more kritikal rounds in LD and CX than I have in the past. Frequently I find that when i vote for kritik debaters it's because they do a better job on the k-proper/linebyline debate as well as framework. Especially so if they are making good link-level arguments(not generic), RTB args. and k turns case. Explain how you get "solvency" or offense off-of the Alt. Being nebulous about the alt is generally a bad thing and frequently issues arise in k debate if this is neg strategy. I welcome the 1-off k strat, or k-affs.

Used to go for T a lot. That said, I usually advise debaters to go for T if there's an abuse story. In general have a high threshold for voting on T. If neg, extend that t is a voter, and internal link it to fairness, education, etc.

I assume condo is cool. I assume PICs are cool. I even think multiple CPs are cool (you would have to win on the theory level if Aff contests multiple CPs). Perms I assume are ok.

I encourage you to read theory if you want. I enjoy meta-debates. I especially enjoy if you put a lot of your own work into it.

Disads, you win me over if you run specific links or run multiple disads with different terminal impacts. Aff gets points for putting offense onto disads or explaining how case outweighs, or how aff solves the disad.

Affs get wins from me when they kill it on the case debate. Affs get some lee-weigh in the tight rebuttals if they're efficient and avoid drops.

I like offense from both sides. Somewhat related: recently I've found myself voting on presumption if aff drops the ball. I guess this makes some statement about what aff is obligated to do, namely defend the resolution by proving it true via 1ac. If there's some late level question about the round I may be looking at the viability of presumption. If neg tells me to vote on it, I may if there is some doubt about what aff is doing, and whether they're hitting the threshold.

Stylistic/ other things:

I am very decent keeping up with high speed.I flow the analytics as best as I can. That said, if you rush through standards one after the other, I may miss something. Adjust your pace, sign post more, be extra clear here. Generally though, I can count on two or three fingers the number of times a debater has gone too fast on theory for me.

It is very helpful to tell me what is offense and defense, this just avoids the round getting too muddy and means I adjust your speaks upward for communicating better, and for better understanding how your arguments function.

In rebuttals I generally expect things to get more big picture, in the 1ar and 1nr with drops being pointed out. I expect some level of pre-empting your opponents arguments esp. if you are the 2nr. And then finally, I expect impact calc, weighing, and some sound defense strategy (impact mitigation, timeframe, risk, magnitude, etc).

Speaks

I sometimes give out 30's but generally best speakers at any given tournament get in range of 29.5-29.9. I try to keep in mind the level of competitiveness of the tournament when giving speaks, but also, try to give consistent speaks.

Things that impact me giving high speaks:

Lack of prep taken/ good use of prep time.

Good strategy.

Being fast and efficient. Avoiding rehashing stuff that you're obviously winning and instead explaining the weight of that argument and moving on. Knowing what your cards say without having to go look.

Flowing. If cross-x is asking what number 6 argument opposing team made in the speech, I'm assuming your not flowing.

Numbering arguments, clear sign-posting, overviews, underviews, impact calc, roadmaps, referring to cross-x.

Clarity and not just looking at computer the whole time. Being sufficiently loud.

Good use of cross-x, which is underrated. I'm not sure why people don't do this, but in cross-x you can read opponent's evidence, ask about warrants in the card (sometimes they're not there), and author quals.

Kicking arguments strategically or going for something unconventional.

Using logic, analyzing evidence (looking for warrants in the cards), or a good line-by-line. Also, if neg: covering the 1AC, as opposed to generic off-case heavy strats. On case argumentation seems to be a dying art, which is sad, but as the neg if you do a good job covering case in my book it goes a long way. Aff: being super organized, grouping arguments, etc, especially in rebuttals. Handling the 2ac well is also something that helps. If you're doing a 2ac without prep and the speech is super-methodical I'm going to notice.

Being polite to opponents. Being aggressive is ok, but use best judgement.

Having fun, making jokes or demonstrating your knowledge of the topic.

I like impact turn debates and conversely impact defense, these are a great way to deviate the round from typical tropes, and can be very engaging.

I will never give you an L if I didn't like your way of debating or what you said. But if you require me to somewhat intervene in the round because of a poor debate I will give low point wins. I've given low point wins before to teams that did the better job strategically but had issues articulating things. If you cross the line as far as politeness, again, I will give VERY low speaks. Generally though, that's only happened 4-5 times in 8 years of judging for me.

LD

LD has gotten more policy-oriented. I have no issue with this. I do see some strategic issues if a 1ar spends the majority of the speech reading cards. Conversely I see issues with a 1nc with too many cards and not enough of a linebyline.

I don't think I've ever evaluated/ decided a round off a framework flow unless it had something to do with a K/ K aff being ran. You can concede framework if you want I just need to how your offense gets some access to some framework. What I'm suggesting is not undercovering contention level arguments and the linebyline.

Something that really makes it easier for me to evaluate the round is organization: numbering arguments, roadmaps, signposting, overviews, underviews. Being very clear about where you are on the flow at any time.

There is a tendency for blippy arguments to be hidden in the framework, or as underviews. the only way I can vote on them is if they are extended and impacted out.

I'm really not sure what has happened on the cutting edge of LD since getting out of high school. I know that theory/ framework debates have gotten to be more commonplace, with the utility of some of this theory questionable at best. Since then I've judged a lot of theory heavy, k heavy and policy rounds; i would say I have not judged many of these "tricks" rounds. Arguments are arguments, and they all function the same way, generally, what I'm suggesting is avoid the buzzwords and tell me the function of the argument.

As far as theory, I have voted on all sorts of theory arguments, but they have to be impacted, and i have to know how they are voting issues. Can't ever remember voting on disclosure theory.

PF

Usually i vote for the team that communicates better, of course they should be making the better arguments, but communication and persuasion are so important. In rebuttals I need to know about drops and hear some sort of weighing. I'm not in the camp that wants a card for every argument, speech times are already so short in PF. Go as fast as you want but realize that going faster may just make the debate more messy.

If you want to know what you can do to have a better chance at winning: extend evidence, talk about warrants, compare your evidence to your opponents'.

Congress

As a debater I had a lot of success in congress. I view congress as being an adversarial, somewhat extemporaneous event where you make good arguments backed by evidence and logic. Knowledge of parliamentary procedure is a definite plus, and I am looking for engagement and responsiveness regardless of what speech it is in the cycle. In other words, clash matters highly in congress, especially because speeches can tend to get stale pretty quickly if there are not (new) original arguments being made.

Debate Ethics

I prefer to not be involved in email chains or document sharing but sometimes I slip up and look at the speech documents. Avoid clipping cards--this is a breach of debate ethics and could result in loss of the round if there is a repeated pattern of doing it. I prefer that debaters self-police any ethical issues, and direct my attention to the issue while the round is happening, then I'll try to resolve the issue.

Full Judging Record

Tournament Lv Date Ev Rd Aff Neg Vote Result
6 6A UIL Spring Meet HS 2021-03-27 LD Finals Hamsika Gorty Angela Yi Neg Neg 2-1
6 6A UIL Spring Meet HS 2021-03-27 LD Semifi Angela Yi Daniel Kim Aff Aff 3-0
6 6A UIL Spring Meet HS 2021-03-27 LD R3 Rhea Karumuru Hamsika Gorty Neg
6 6A UIL Spring Meet HS 2021-03-27 LD R2 Aditya Bamroo Neel Kanamangala Neg
UIL District Tournament HS 2021-02-26 PF Sem X 368 P 367 CON CON 2-1
UIL District Tournament HS 2021-02-26 CX R4 Y 340 N 351 Aff
UIL District Tournament HS 2021-02-26 CX R3 Y 339 M 348 Aff
UIL District Tournament HS 2021-02-26 CX R2 D 337 G 349 Aff
UIL District Tournament HS 2021-02-26 LD R1 F 284 G 327 Aff
Hallsville Virtual Tournament of Hearts UIL TFA HS 2021-02-10 ULD Finals Princeton Long Aledo Bohnen Aff Aff 3-0
Hallsville Virtual Tournament of Hearts UIL TFA HS 2021-02-10 TLD Quart Byron Nelson Baute Greenhill Kesselman Aff
Hallsville Virtual Tournament of Hearts UIL TFA HS 2021-02-10 CX Semis L C Anderson Gossett & Lind Princeton Arroyo & Diaz Neg Neg 3-0
Hallsville Virtual Tournament of Hearts UIL TFA HS 2021-02-10 TLD R3 Harvest Christian Rabanal Lubbock Porter Neg
Hallsville Virtual Tournament of Hearts UIL TFA HS 2021-02-10 ULD R2 Grand Saline Edralin Pine Tree Gipson Aff
Hallsville Virtual Tournament of Hearts UIL TFA HS 2021-02-10 TLD R2 Harvest Christian Drygas Greenhill Kesselman Neg
Hallsville Virtual Tournament of Hearts UIL TFA HS 2021-02-10 ULD R1 Grand Saline Clifton Mabank Garcia Neg
Jack C Hays TFA and NIETOC Qualifier HS 2021-02-04 LD R3 Andrea Abrams Miller Roberts Neg
Jack C Hays TFA and NIETOC Qualifier HS 2021-02-04 PF R2 Katie Golson & Nikhil Weerakoon Kali Aman-Carrier & Raiyan Shaik Aff
Jack C Hays TFA and NIETOC Qualifier HS 2021-02-04 LD R1 Michelle Antony Saaj Gumbula Neg
Banquete Bulldog Bash TFA and NIETOC HS 2021-01-28 VPF Semis Vista Ridge Ruth Martin & Sujith Alluru Strake Jesuit Simon Bloesch & Ben Goldin Con Con 3-0
Banquete Bulldog Bash TFA and NIETOC HS 2021-01-28 VCX Semis Tuloso Midway XK Reagan LV Neg Neg 3-0
Aubrey UIL Academic Invitational HS 2021-01-23 CX R4 Ahide Aldape Caitlyn Roberts & Gracie Day Barbers Hill Kaylee Myers & Graycen Clements Neg
Aubrey UIL Academic Invitational HS 2021-01-23 CX R3 Bridgeport CX One Madison Williams & Mackenzie Lopez Grand Saline Calistie Norris & Victoria Olivares Aff
Aubrey UIL Academic Invitational HS 2021-01-23 CX R2 College Station Nicolas Brannstrom & Heyu Li Olney Adelade Edgington & Allie Barrington Neg
Aubrey UIL Academic Invitational HS 2021-01-23 CX R1 IDEA Judson Jaedyn Dudley & Jaelyn Dudley Independence Pranav Kalkunte & Satvik Parupati Neg
Lindale Invitational HS 2021-01-13 NULD R4 Hallsville Miriam Navarro Mineola HS Hunter Collier Aff
Lindale Invitational HS 2021-01-13 VULD R3 Nederland HS Bulldogs Michael Grumbles Saginaw Charles Schlichenmeyer Aff
Lindale Invitational HS 2021-01-13 NULD R2 Joshua Madyson Cronin Midlothian Vicente Staton Aff
Lindale Invitational HS 2021-01-13 VULD R1 Boswell Nathan Horton Argyle Owen Norkett Neg
Athens Mount Pleasant Murder Hornet TFA NIETOC Swing HS 2020-11-12 VLD Semis Coppell VS Burleson Centennial MJ Aff Aff 3-0
Athens Mount Pleasant Murder Hornet TFA NIETOC Swing HS 2020-11-12 VLD R5 Midway EW San Angelo Central MW Neg
Athens Mount Pleasant Murder Hornet TFA NIETOC Swing HS 2020-11-12 VLD R4 Byron Nelson DH Lovejoy JV Neg
Athens Mount Pleasant Murder Hornet TFA NIETOC Swing HS 2020-11-12 VLD R3 Agoura CS Lovejoy TB Neg
Athens Mount Pleasant Murder Hornet TFA NIETOC Swing HS 2020-11-12 VLD R2 Coppell SS San Angelo Central BW Aff
Athens Mount Pleasant Murder Hornet TFA NIETOC Swing HS 2020-11-12 VLD R1 Byron Nelson JW Argyle CP Aff
Austin Highs Spooky Cap Classic HS 2020-10-22 VPF Semis Westlake Aneesh Kondagunturi & Alan Chu Strake Jesuit Joshua Martinez & Nicolas Valladolid Con Con 2-1
Austin Highs Spooky Cap Classic HS 2020-10-22 VLD Qrts Strake Jesuit Vratin Mankidy McNeil Yara Mustafa Neg Aff 2-1
Austin Highs Spooky Cap Classic HS 2020-10-22 VPF Octs James Bowie Kathryn Thomason & Caroline Rasmussen Strake Jesuit Beck Hassen & Bond Hassen Pro Con 2-1
Austin Highs Spooky Cap Classic HS 2020-10-22 NLD R3 Strake Jesuit Jason Lin HuaXia Chinese School - Houston Laura Huang Neg
Austin Highs Spooky Cap Classic HS 2020-10-22 NLD R2 Strake Jesuit Christopher Miller HuaXia Chinese School - Houston Emma Qian Neg
Austin Highs Spooky Cap Classic HS 2020-10-22 NPF R1 HuaXia Chinese School - Houston Rina Li & Cynthia Kong Chadwick Sage Silberman & Ella Bjerre Pro
Austin Highs Spooky Cap Classic HS 2020-10-22 VLD R1 Rock Hill Lucy Mokua Strake Jesuit Harvey Zhu Neg
TFA 2020 Stratford Spartan Tournament HS 2020-10-14 CX Finals Houston Memorial Qian & Poe Elkins Li & John Aff Neg 2-1
TFA 2020 Stratford Spartan Tournament HS 2020-10-14 LD R4 Clear Brook Islam William B Travis Zou Neg
TFA 2020 Stratford Spartan Tournament HS 2020-10-14 CX R3 Langham Creek Le & Colby Kinkaid Miles & Balametov Aff
TFA 2020 Stratford Spartan Tournament HS 2020-10-14 CX R2 Houston Memorial Qian & Poe Kinkaid Ibarra & Dhutia Aff
TFA 2020 Stratford Spartan Tournament HS 2020-10-14 CX R1 Kinkaid Segal & Ferber Elkins Li & John Neg
Raymond B Furlong Tournament at Saint James HS 2020-10-09 LD F Madison Central CG Mountain Brook MC Neg Neg 2-1
Raymond B Furlong Tournament at Saint James HS 2020-10-09 PF O Mountain Brook LS James Madison Memorial LS Con Con 2-1
Raymond B Furlong Tournament at Saint James HS 2020-10-09 PF R5 Hoover SP Mountain Brook GP Pro
Raymond B Furlong Tournament at Saint James HS 2020-10-09 PF R4 Hoover RM Mountain Brook MS Con
Raymond B Furlong Tournament at Saint James HS 2020-10-09 PF R3 Marist AE Mountain Brook HS Pro
Raymond B Furlong Tournament at Saint James HS 2020-10-09 PF R2 Montgomery ZZ Middleton NR Pro
Raymond B Furlong Tournament at Saint James HS 2020-10-09 PF R1 Marist EV Strake Jesuit GK Con
Westlake Chap Classic TFA TOC NIETOC Qualifier HS 2020-10-01 LD Finals Austin SFA Hartline McNeil Gulati Aff Aff 3-0
Westlake Chap Classic TFA TOC NIETOC Qualifier HS 2020-10-01 NLD Semis Westlake Maldei-Stumm Round Rock Bolash Aff Aff 2-1
Westlake Chap Classic TFA TOC NIETOC Qualifier HS 2020-10-01 LD Quarts L C Anderson Abdalla Round Rock Alam Neg Neg 3-0
Westlake Chap Classic TFA TOC NIETOC Qualifier HS 2020-10-01 LD R4 Jack C. Hays Wilson Round Rock Vaddula Neg
Westlake Chap Classic TFA TOC NIETOC Qualifier HS 2020-10-01 LD R3 Westwood Karthik L C Anderson Abdalla Neg
Westlake Chap Classic TFA TOC NIETOC Qualifier HS 2020-10-01 NLD R2 Tomball Memorial Clark McNeil Rath Neg
Westlake Chap Classic TFA TOC NIETOC Qualifier HS 2020-10-01 LD R1 Austin SFA Plumley Round Rock Engel Aff
NEWMAN SMITH SPONTANEITY 41 HS 2020-09-25 CX R4 Hebron KN Jesuit AR Aff
NEWMAN SMITH SPONTANEITY 41 HS 2020-09-25 NCX Round Jesuit LohMa Westwood PS Aff
NEWMAN SMITH SPONTANEITY 41 HS 2020-09-25 CX R2 Greenhill MS Jesuit WS Neg
NEWMAN SMITH SPONTANEITY 41 HS 2020-09-25 CX R1 Greenhill MR Jesuit GJ Aff
NEWMAN SMITH SPONTANEITY 41 HS 2020-09-25 NCX R1 Westwood SM Jesuit MaLop Aff
Lindale Fall TFA HS 2020-09-16 VCX Semifi Westwood Vishal Narra & Brandon Shin North Lamar Isabella LoCicero & Hunter Steelman Aff Aff 3-0
Lindale Fall TFA HS 2020-09-16 VCX Quarte Lovejoy Tajvir Singh & Andrew Mao Mount Pleasant Connelly Cowan & Taryn Thurman Neg Neg 3-0
Lindale Fall TFA HS 2020-09-16 VCX R3 Aledo Daniel Bunting & Caroline Erb North Lamar Isabella LoCicero & Hunter Steelman Aff
Lindale Fall TFA HS 2020-09-16 VCX R2 St Mark's School of Texas Aayush Goodapaty & Ned Tagtmeier Princeton Robert Arroyo & Paola Diaz Aff
Lindale Fall TFA HS 2020-09-16 NCX R1 Westwood Sahithi Martha & Madhavan Prasanna St Mark's School of Texas Harry Wang & Howard Zhang Neg