William Deverey Paradigm

Last changed 12/8 7:12A EDT

This will be my first year judging debate. I guess I'll see what rounds I get assigned to but I'm hoping to mainly judge Varsity Policy or other Policy divisions. I debated for four years in high school for Marquette. I spent my first year in novice policy, my second year in Varsity LD, and my last two years in Varsity Policy. I am also going to be debating at Minnesota in the Spring but am currently deferring my first semester of college. My career was a little scattered and I had some interesting rounds but I've always been a fan of the great debate community we have here in Wisconsin.

As far as my influences go they can pretty much be summed up with Matt Cekanor. I've obviously had other coaches such as Thomas Van Bibber, Milorand Robinson, and John Roselle, but most of what I know about debate comes from Matt. I like to say that I've taught myself everything I know, but that is a blatant lie and anyone who is unclear about my expectations, or judge philosophy should probably just reference his paradigm.

As far as broad overarching points on my judge philosophy go I think clash, knowledge of one's argument, and strategic vision are extremely important. In high school I was often extremely frustrated by rounds in which our opponents would read the same outdated case or off case blocks to our arguments that were unresponsive to our advantages, links, or impacts. Don't just read arguments to put tags on the flow or outspread the other team this makes the round and mess and leads to an infinite regression of meaningless jargon and tagline extensions(something I've definitely been guilty of doing before, it happens to the best of us). I also believe knowledge of one's argument is extremely important ... obviously. Debate is an educational activity and if you don't know what your talking about you're not doing anyone any favors and while perfection and knowing everything is impossible its definitely refreshing to see a debater who is familiar with their evidence and able to make well educated coherent points in round. Lastly strategic vision is very important for me because whether you're a critical team, a policy team, a nihlism team, or a song and dance team, and the end of the day odds are you're trying to win rounds, and winning rounds is best done through strategy. This is something I always struggled with in high school, and greatly appreciate seeing executing. Whether you're going for the pic with the internal da, or going for the k with case defense(an undervalued strategy-Matt Cekanor), you should have some sort of game plan going into every round if your really serious about competing and getting the most out of the debate.

Case- I think the case debate is a very important part of every round and often forgot about or undiscovered. I am very impressed by intelligent teams that use their case as defense to offcase arguments and are knowledgable enough to extend key warrants to fend off attacks on their advantages and solvency instead of reading a slew of unresponsive new evidence in the 2ac. I also believe that by the end of the round it is wise to collapse down to one key advantage or impact to outweigh the harms brought up by the negative. You don't have to do this to win a ballot in front of me, I just think it is strategically beneficial for any team to recognize and spend their time on their best argument in the 2ar.

DA-When debating the DA, i think it is very important to outweigh or turn the affirmative case and try to be winning on probability timeframe and magnitude. In my career I noticed it was rare for local circuit teams to just go for the disad but I think it is an undervalued strategy and much of my very limited national circuit success came though running well prepped and updated disads. A good block speech on the Da with additional impacts can be devastating for the one 1ar and oftentimes even one dropped impact scenario can cinch a negative victory.

K-I'm a fairly educated man, and even though I am yet to begin college, and carry on my debate career I have had a decent amount of experience with the K. I am by no means an expert in any sort or the word on any critical literature however. That being said I am very open to and interested in critical arguments and had a Baudrillard phase during my senior year which can be confirmed by my frustrated teammates and coaches from my alma mater. When evaluating the K I think specific links make a much stronger argument. Along with this point specific impacts that aren't just biopower or ontological death with no further explanation or substation in the round are also good. Lastly I think it is very important for the mechanism of the alternative to be clearly explained, and for the method of your criticism to have clear and coherent functionality within the round. If I am told to ontologically reposition myself or deconstruct language with no further explanation or synthesis of how your argument posits itself as a favorable plan to that of the affirmative I will not vote for you. Also floating pik's are cool, cheaty arguments are despicable but fun, if the debate delves into T then so be it

CP-I am a big counterplan fan, especially for plan inclusive cp's. I believe all any good counterplan needs is a clever alternative solvency mechanism and of course a net benefit. If you don't have a net benefit I will die on the inside. Please have a net benefit. I think that better solvency as an internal net benefit is great but you should also have external net benefits as well. Thats pretty much it. Answer the perm, steal the aff, suffer though the theory, take home the trophy.

Topicality-I am not an expert on topicality but I ran it a fair amount in high school and had some success with it especially in running away from critical affs with framework. Even though it may not be a glamorous argument, I think it is a very important one to the debate game, and oftentimes can create some very interesting and competing rounds. Make sure your always extending your definitions and try to treat the argument like and disad in the sense that these debates should come down to impacts like any other rounds. Show me the abuse, show me why your world has better education and show me why you have the best evidence. Also I believe any team running T should always have TVA's (Topical Versions of the Affirmative), and should use these as defensive arguments as the the opponents education is not unique.

Theory-This is admittedly my least favorite arg in the game. Mostly because I've been crushed by it before and its dullness depresses me. However it is necessary just Topicality and can be highly strategic in a pinch. I will not have any bias against this agreement in round even though I may get bore and I am definitely open to sorting though a T battle in the final rebuttals.

Sidenotes/Clownery-I will reward point for any jokes(appropriate ones), and double these points if they are inspired by Matt Cekanor's beard. I also have a love hate relationship with puns so do your worst at your own risk. Most importantly I love music so any music playing before round is great. Unless your music is bad. If you're not sure if your music is bad pay attention to what your listening too. If your music is modern country ie. Luke Bryant or contemporary popular rap ie. Lil' whatever or something that you feel might be similar, chances are your music is bad. If your music is Johnny Cash or Nirvana or some artist or band with similar talent and refinement than you will have my respect, and at the end of the day what more could you ask for. Debate is just a game. Trophy's are mostly just plastic and anticlimactic, and winning is a never ending cycle of stress and disappointment. But have fun!!! (Also please play the "The Pesos" in round, they are my favorite band, need more attention, and are under appreciated)

Quotes-

"It's okay to eat fish because they don't have any feelings." -Kurt Cobain

"I know very little about acting. I'm just an incredibly gifted faker." -Robert Downey Jr.

"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north." -Abraham Lincoln

"Sorry I'm late, I got lost on the path of life." -Kakashi Hatake

”I like happy things, I’m really calm and peaceful.” -Marshall Mathers

Full Judging Record

Tournament Date Ev Rd Aff Neg Vote Result
Tamar Kaplan Invitational at Highland Park HS 11/8/2019 SJV R3 Rosemount Sr KP Wayzata PS Aff
Tamar Kaplan Invitational at Highland Park HS 11/8/2019 VAR R2 Roseville Area GE Rosemount Sr SP Neg
Tamar Kaplan Invitational at Highland Park HS 11/8/2019 SJV R2 Wayzata PS Rosemount Sr FM Neg
Tamar Kaplan Invitational at Highland Park HS 11/8/2019 FJV R1 Roseville Area WK Minneapolis Washburn CS Aff
Tamar Kaplan Invitational at Highland Park HS 11/8/2019 SJV R1 Avalon EE Highland Park Senior CJ Neg
University of Minnesota High School Invitational 10/4/2019 Var R5 Minneapolis Washburn AP Roseville Area EH Neg
University of Minnesota High School Invitational 10/4/2019 JVS r4 Avalon EG Eagan LS Neg
University of Minnesota High School Invitational 10/4/2019 Var R3 Minneapolis Washburn JK Highland Park Senior SK Neg
Fort Atkinson 12/8/2018 VLD R5 Appleton North HP Verona Area CO Aff
Fort Atkinson 12/8/2018 NLD R3 Bradley Tech KP Appleton North MU Neg
Fort Atkinson 12/8/2018 NLD R2 Sheboygan South LH Menomonee Falls SM Neg
Alexandra Hoecherl Challenge at Appleton East 11/30/2018 Opol Final Homestead LT Madison East HN Aff Aff on a 3-0
Alexandra Hoecherl Challenge at Appleton East 11/30/2018 VCX Semi SPASH KS Homestead KW Neg Neg on a 3-0
Alexandra Hoecherl Challenge at Appleton East 11/30/2018 VCX R3 Madison East JK Homestead KW Neg
The Annual No Frills Tournament 11/17/2018 LD R5 Craig KH Whitefish Bay TF Neg
The Annual No Frills Tournament 11/17/2018 LD R4 West Bend SC Appleton North DY Neg
The Annual No Frills Tournament 11/17/2018 PF R2 Sheboygan North HS NM Brookfield East SD Neg
The Annual No Frills Tournament 11/17/2018 LD R1 Menomonee Falls EB Waukesha South SV Neg
Badgerland 11/9/2018 OCX Quarte Homestead GW Glenbrook North BC Neg Neg on a 3-0
Badgerland 11/9/2018 OCX R5 Glenbrook South KG Homestead GW Neg
Badgerland 11/9/2018 OCX R3 Glenbrook North CJ Glenbrook South LG Neg
Badgerland 11/9/2018 OCX R2 Glenbrook South BY Glenbrook North BC Neg
Badgerland 11/9/2018 OCX R1 Glenbrook North CB Glenbrook South MV Neg
West Bend Debate Extravaganza 11/3/2018 VCX R2 Fort Atkinson BH Madison East KJ Neg
West Bend Debate Extravaganza 11/3/2018 VCX R1 Homestead KW Ronald Reagan CP IE Aff
Milwaukee Debate League T3 All Hallows Classic 10/27/2018 NCX R3 Homestead KH Fort Atkinson ND Neg
Milwaukee Debate League T3 All Hallows Classic 10/27/2018 NCX R2 Rufus King ML Homestead LT Neg
Brookfield East Debate Tournament 10/20/2018 LDV R5 Appleton East MM Appleton North FB Neg
Brookfield East Debate Tournament 10/20/2018 LDN R4 Whitefish Bay SS Bradley Tech KP Neg
Milwaukee Debate League T2 10/13/2018 VCX R3 RonRea IE RonRea MW Aff Neg on a 2-1
Milwaukee Debate League T2 10/13/2018 VCX R2 RonRea RR RonRea SS Neg
Milwaukee Debate League T2 10/13/2018 VCX R1 RonRea AD RufKin AR Aff
Golda Meir Debate Invitational 9/29/2018 VCX R3 Ronald Reagan CP DW Rufus King WS Aff
Golda Meir Debate Invitational 9/29/2018 VCX R2 Ronald Reagan CP ES Stevens Point Area Senior High (SPASH) KS Neg
Golda Meir Debate Invitational 9/29/2018 VCX R1 Neenah PW Ronald Reagan CP RI Aff
The Hilltopper Classic 9/15/2018 VPol R3 Neenah PW Ronald Reagan CP MT Neg
The Hilltopper Classic 9/15/2018 VPol R2 Ronald Reagan CP ST Homestead WP Neg
The Hilltopper Classic 9/15/2018 VPol R1 Ronald Reagan CP IR Rufus King RW Neg