Bobby Phillips Paradigm

Last changed 10/7 2:57P CDT

Put me on the email chain: (yes I know). If the tourney doesn't allow it, I won't tell on you for having one.

I debated at Kapaun Mt. Carmel (2018) in high school and am currently a sophomore debating at Wichita State. I've been a 2n my whole career if that matters. I primarily research and read policy stuff. My involvement with the arms sales topic is pretty limited, but I can probably figure things out. I won't know much about trends in the topic. I can probably handle your top speed, but clarity and good arguments beats more arguments every time.


- I will probably flow on paper, and probably won't have any.

- I try to hold myself to the same standard I expect out of judges when I am debating. I care a lot about debate and think it's an amazing activity. I cannot promise that I will always make the best decision possible, but I can promise that I will put as much effort as possible into that decision. Debates are hard and stressful and I don't think that asking a lot of questions constitutes "charging the mound." I get frustrated with decisions too and will do my best to help you work through that, but at some point you just end up burning a lot of your own energy on something you cannot change. I won't take a post round personally (usually).

- I care about quality of evidence and who wrote your card can matter a lot to me.

- I care about cx. I tend to think of it as a speech and if no one gets anything out of three minutes of speech time then they are making a mistake.

- Read your framing page, but please answer the DA too.

- If you clip you lose. I feel comfortable voting on it if they don't say anything and I notice. If you accuse someone of clipping and want me to vote on it, the debate is over.


-I feel like people get lost in the "20 uniqueness cards therefore risk of a link outweighs" thing. 1% risk of a link with 100% uniqueness is still 1% risk of a DA

-Politics - Big fan. These debates, at there best, are usually about evidence quality. Strait turns are underrated - this goes for all DAs


- Read em, maybe a lot of them. Be bold, re-cut their cards, read lots of planks, do whatever, if you can defend it.

- Since I don't know much about the topic as far as the activity is concerned, I probably won't really have an opinion on "x counterplan is too good." This just means you need to give me a bit of an illustration of why it is so scary. My initial thought to "it beats our aff" is that you should make a better aff. If there is a real problem with it, I need more explanation than "it's hard to answer"

- Judge kick is a thing that I find difficult to deal with. I think it's probably implied by condo, but it's a lot less stressful for me if say it in the block. I try to avoid bringing my own thoughts into debate, but not having an argument happen until the 2nr makes that really difficult.

- competition can mean a lot of things, and maybe even things that aren't in the plan text. Net benefits are usually the best way to compete, but I love these kinds of debates. Not the ones that are just 10 cards that say "x = immediate" - those are sad


- I think that quality definitions are important and can justify a slightly less limited topic if that is what those words actually mean. Bad topic writing can also justify a bit more arbitrary T violations.

-Limits are not an impact alone - explain what affs they include and why those are bad. Abstractly limits can have an impact but are much better when contextualized - affs need to be more willing to say limits bad.

-fairness is pretty great, in T debates with plans I don't think it's too hard to win that it is the most important.

-I don't usually understand what argument people are even making when they say reasonability, but if you make it persuasive I guess I could vote on it.


- I am pretty convinced condo is good. If they drop it then it's bad, but don't make it the A strat. 1ars are usually way too light on this debate anyway. I don't think you need to answer "x counterplan is bad" if you are kicking the counterplan. I probably won't flow it, so I appreciate the break ig.

Framework / neg vs Ks

- People seem really concerned with bias when it comes to this section of paradigms. If you want to know, I am a policy debater and would probably go for fw against your aff if you don't defend a plan. That being said, I find myself voting aff in these debates pretty frequently. I am not going to pretend that bias doesn't exist, but if you end up with me in the back don't assume you're already lost.

- My biggest frustration in these debates is that both sides refuse to make decisions. An overview of your 1nc/2ac is not a rebuttal. Pick something you are winning and focus the rest of the debate through that.

- Fairness can "be an impact." Everything is an internal link, but I can and have voted on fairness outweighs. Impact turns are the way to go for the aff most of the time. Neg args about the process of debate you create instead of the subject matter you talk about is usually more persuasive to me. Things like clash seem like more strategic arguments then learning about the government is good.

- TVAs can do a lot of work, but you have to explain it. Reading a card about an aff impact is not a TVA.

- If you are going for a K, I would say that I'm pretty sympathetic to the neg on what exactly meets the standards of competition. That being said, the aff should still probably get perms even if this is a "method debate." I feel like more things than just the advocacy statement can be grounds for competition. Cards you read, ideas you support, and impact claims you make could definitely be a reason the alt is exclusive with the aff. I know this seems like a double standard with policy affs, but really you advocate a lot more than a ten word statement.

- I think neg teams spend a lot of time focusing on having a link and answering the perm (as they should) but forget about a real impact story. A small risk of a link isn't that important if there is no real impact to it. I feel like links should just be DAs to the aff and need a meaningful impact beyond "makes the perm harder."

Ks vs policy affs

- The alt is very important to me. How does it solve your links. If it doesn't then you probably don't have a unique disad to the aff. Solve stuff and we should be good. Please do something.

-Links seem to generally be the most important part of these debates for me. An impact overview at the top of the 2nc doesn't really explain why the links matter. Give each link an impact story. Shotgunning 12 links isn't going to result in no perm if the aff drops one. Tell me what they did, why its bad or turns their other stuff, and why it's more important than the aff.

- I think the aff should get their aff. Even if other considerations are important, I don't know how the aff could ever win if they get none of their offense. I think it will a pretty hard to get me to think differently on this one. Framework is really just a question of what matters more, not if they get to imagine the aff happens or not. That's just impact calculus.

- perms are an aff argument. They can solve a lot of links.



-death good

-"perms are a neg arg"

-process CPs

-debate bad


- putting a date accessed on your cards - if i noticed you did this and you cut the card, I will be happy

- actually "reading" cards, like with your brain, not your mouth

-the topic counter plan that everyone thinks is cheating this year (this is for every year)

-agenda politics (sad atm :c )


-impact turns

-plans/ alts that do big things (but not too big)

-limits good

Full Judging Record

Tournament Date Ev Rd Aff Neg Vote Result
NCFL Grand National Tournament 5/25/2019 CX R5 120 142 Neg Neg on a 3-0
NCFL Grand National Tournament 5/25/2019 CX R4 103 115 Aff Aff on a 3-0
NCFL Grand National Tournament 5/25/2019 CX R3 157 152 Neg Neg on a 2-1
NCFL Grand National Tournament 5/25/2019 CX R2 200 210 Neg Neg on a 3-0
NCFL Grand National Tournament 5/25/2019 CX R1 108 117 Neg Neg on a 3-0
Andover Central Friday Forensics Tournament 3/1/2019 puff R2 Maize NL Wichita East CN Neg
The Milo Cup at Millard North 2/15/2019 CX S Edina MS Lincoln East CW Neg Neg on a 3-0
The Milo Cup at Millard North 2/15/2019 CX R5 Millard South LS Millard North TM Neg
The Milo Cup at Millard North 2/15/2019 CX R2 Lincoln East TW Millard West AK Aff
The Milo Cup at Millard North 2/15/2019 CX R1 Lincoln East SP Millard West FW Neg
Kansas Championship Series 1/4/2019 NOVOP SFs McPherson CB Lawrence Free State DM Neg Neg on a 2-1
Kansas Championship Series 1/4/2019 DCISo R3 Salina South MT Shawnee Mission South LT Neg
Kansas Championship Series 1/4/2019 DCISo R2 Blue Valley West AS Lawrence Free State HB Neg
Sunflower District Tournament 12/7/2018 CX R2 6 Walker & Willis 4 Baxter & Powner Neg Neg on a 2-1
Sunflower District Tournament 12/7/2018 CX R1 5 Brant & Weakland 1 McCallop & Fasig Aff Aff on a 3-0
Maize High School 11/30/2018 VP RD 3 Lawrence Free State BH Hutchinson WW Aff
Maize High School 11/30/2018 VP RD 2 Washburn Rural BP Hutchinson OC Aff
Panther Debate Tournament 11/9/2018 JV QF Hutchinson Unruh & Miller Wichita East Kamath & Goual-Belhamidi Aff Aff on a 3-0
Panther Debate Tournament 11/9/2018 JV R4 Wichita East Kamath & Goual-Belhamidi Goddard Forrest & Jahay Aff
Panther Debate Tournament 11/9/2018 JV R2 Campus Reist & Landis Hutchinson Owens & Fleming Neg
Panther Debate Tournament 11/9/2018 JV R1 Manhattan Brockman & Singh Wichita HS West Walentowski & Marin Aff
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2018 NCX R5 Emporia ME Wichita East HS Neg
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2018 NCX R3 Little Rock Central PA Liberal Arts and Science CH Neg
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2018 NCX R1 Liberal Arts and Science WM Wichita East NY Aff