Alexander Daniel ParadigmLast changed 12/3 4:38P MST
* I am a former PFD competitor from the Arizona and national circuits who graduated in 2011. In the six or so years since graduating high school I've dabbled in coaching and judging, but for the last few years I have attended one or fewer tournament per season to judge. That being said I don't expect many overwhelming changes in style.
* As for a paradigm, I'm not sure I can give much. Arguments must be responsive, which is often an issue for teams late in the round when it devolves into a rehash of bullet points from each side. Cards should be given context and analysis; do not bomb me with research. Be prepared to show me a card during breaks in the action (prep or immediately after the round) even if the other team doesn't ask for it, especially your strongest cards that your case hinges on.
* There is no type of argument I prefer or disfavor. Stats are great. Qualitative analysis is great. Historical analysis is great. Make the arguments you prepared to make and don't adjust on my account. I'm not looking for anything specific.
* Speed probably won't be an issue. On the off chance it is I'll likely blurt out "clear" or "slow down a bit." I'm not trying to be rude or docking you for it, but you aren't putting points on the board if I don't understand you.
* Decorum won't win or lose you anything but speaker points. This is not a reason to be rude.
* At the end of round I will disclose and give a brief RFD. If you have questions you can ask, but I will try to keep it brief intentionally to give you as much time as possible to breathe between rounds.