Eliza Haas Paradigm

Last changed Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 4:00 AM UTC

The short version is that I am absolutely willing to consider and vote on any clear and convincing argument that happens in the round, and I like it when you're funny and interesting. See below for the long version, and if you have specific questions that I don't already cover below, feel free to ask them before the round.

 

General:

I vote on flow. I believe strongly that judges should be non-interventionist in their RFDs, so I will only flow arguments that you actually make in your debates; I won't intervene to draw connections or links for you or fill in an argument that I know from outside the round but that you don't cover or apply adequately. That’s for you to do as the debater--and on that note, if you want me to extend or turn something, tell me why I should, etc. This can be very brief, but it needs to be clear. I prefer depth over breadth. Super blippy arguments won't weigh heavily, as I want to see you develop, extend, and impact your arguments rather than just throw a bunch of crap at your opponent and hope something sticks. Know your case and the topic lit well. If you have the most amazing constructive in the world but then are unable to defend, explicate, and/or break it down well in CX and rebuttals, that will hurt you if your opponent capitalizes on your lack of knowledge/understanding even a little bit.

 

Arguments:

I’m pretty standard when it comes to types of argumentation. I've voted for just about every type of case; it's about what happens in round and I don’t think it’s my right as a judge to tell you how to debate. Any of the below defaults are easy to overcome if you run what you want to run, but run it well.

 

However, if you decide to let me default to my personal preferences, here they are (written mostly for circuit LD; feel free to ask me if there's something I don't cover or you're not sure how it would apply to a different debate form):

 

Have some balance between philosophy and policy and between empirics and quality analytics. Some preference for arguments that are more theoretical than purely policy-based. I like it when your arguments clash, not just your cards, so make sure to connect your cards to your theoretical arguments or the big picture in terms of the debate. I like to see debates about the actual topic (however you decide to interpret that topic in that round, and I do give a lot of leeway here) rather than generic theory debates.

 

For theory or T debates, they should be clear, warranted, and hopefully interesting, otherwise I'm not a huge fan, although I get their strategic value. In my perfect world, theory and T debates would happen only when there is real abuse and/or when you can make interesting/unique arguments about them; otherwise, I'd prefer T, theory, or definition debates to be cleared up earlier in the round if possible. Not at all a fan of bad, frivolous theory. No set position on RVIs; it depends on the round, but I do think they can be a good check on bad theory. All that being said, I have voted for theory a lot, so don't be scared if it's your thing. It's just not usually my favorite thing.

 

Framework debates: I love (love, love) hearing well-formulated morality arguments, especially if I haven’t heard them twenty times or if they aren’t purely nebulous without any real impacts. Because of that, I usually find framework debates really interesting (whether they’re couched as role of the ballot arguments, standards, V/C debates, burdens, etc.), especially if they’re called for in that specific round. Obviously, if you spend a lot of time in a round on framework, be sure to tie it back to FW when you impact out important points in rebuttals. I dislike long strings of shaky link chains that end up in nuclear war, especially if those are your only impacts. If the only impact to your argument is extinction with some super sketchy impact cards as evidence, I have a hard time buying that link chain over a well-articulated and nicely put together link chain that ends in a smaller, but more believable and realistically significant impact.

 

Ks can be awesome or terrible depending on how they're run. I'm very open to critical affs and ks on neg, as a general rule, but there is a gulf between good and bad critical positions. I tend to absolutely love (love, love) ones that are well-explained and not super broad--if there isn't a clear link to the resolution and/or a specific position your opponent takes, I’ll have a harder time buying it. Run your Ks if you know them well and if they really apply to the round (interact with your opponent's case/the res), not just if you think they'll confuse your opponent. Please don't run your uber-generic Cap Ks with crappy or generic link cards just because you can't think of something else to run. That makes me sad because it's a wasted opportunity. Alts should be clear; they matter. Of course for me, alts can be theoretical/discourse-based rather than policy-based or whatnot; they just need to be clear and compelling. When Ks are good, they're probably my favorite type of argument; when their links and/or alts are sketchy or nonexistant, I don't love them. Same basic comments apply for critical affs. 

 

For funkier performance Ks/affs, narratives and the like, go for them if that's what you want to run. Just make sure 1) to tell me how they should work and be weighed in the round and 2) that your opponent has some way(s) to access your ROB. Ideally the 2nd part should be clear in the constructive, but you at least need to make it clear when they CX you about it. If not, I think that's a pretty obvious opportunity for your opponent to run theory on you.

 

I'm also totally good with judging a traditional round if that's what you're good at--I do a lot of that at my local tournaments. If so, I'll look at internal consistency of argumentation more than I would in a progressive debate (esp. on the Neg side).

 

Style/Speed:

I'm fine with speed; it's poor enunciation or very quiet spreading that is tough. I'll ask you to clear if I need to. If I say "clear," "loud," or “slow” more than twice, it won't affect my decision, but it will affect your speaks. Just be really, really clear; I've never actually had to say "slow," but "clear" and "loud" have reared their ugly heads more than once. If you’re going very quickly on something that’s easy for me to understand, just make sure you have strong articulation. If you can, slow down on tags, card tags, tricky philosophy, and important analytics--at the very least, hammer them hard with vocal emphasis. My perfect speed would probably be an 8 or 9 out of 10 if you’re very clear. That being said, it can only help you to slow down for something you really need me to understand--please slow or repeat plan/CP text, role of the ballot, theory interp, or anything else that is just crazy important to make sure I get your exact wording, especially if I don't have your case in front of me.

 

I love humor, fire, and a pretty high level of sassiness in a debate, but don’t go out of your way to be an absolutely ridiculous ass. If you make me chuckle, you'll get at least an extra half speaker point.

 

I love CX, so it bugs me when debaters use long-winded questions or answers as a tactic to waste time during CX or when they completely refuse to engage with questions or let their opponent answer any questions. On that note, I'm good with flex prep; keep CXing to your heart's desire--I'll start your prep time once the official CX period is over if you choose to keep it going. CX is binding, but you have to actually extend arguments or capitalize on errors/concessions from CX in later speeches for them to matter much.

 

Weird quirk: I usually flow card tags rather than author names the first time I hear them, so try to give me the tag instead of or in addition to the cite (especially the first few times the card comes up in CX/rebuttal speeches or when it's early in the resolution and I might not have heard that author much). It's just a quirk with the way I listen in rounds--I tend to only write the author's name after a few times hearing it but flow the card tag the first time since the argument often matters more in my flow as a judge than the name itself does. (So it's easiest for me to follow if, when you bring it up in later speeches or CX, you say "the Blahblah 16 card about yadda yadda yadda" rather than just "the Blahblah 16 card.") I'll still be able to follow you, but I find it on my flow quicker if I get the basic card tag/contents.

 

Final Approach to RFD:

I try to judge the round as the debaters want me to judge it. In terms of layering, unless you tell me to layer the debate in another way, I'll go with standard defaults: theory and T come first (no set preference on which, so tell me how I should layer them), then Ks, then other offs, then case--but case does matter! Like anything else for me, layering defaults can be easily overcome if you argue for another order in-round. Weigh impacts and the round for me, ideally explicitly tied to the winning or agreed-upon framework--don't leave it up to me or your opponent to weigh it for you. I never, ever want to intervene, so make sure to weigh so that I don't have to. Give me some voters if you have time, but don’t give me twelve of them. See above for details or ask questions before the round if you have something specific that I haven't covered. Have fun and go hard!

 

If I'm judging you in PF or Parli:

 

- If neither team gives me a framework, I'll assume it's CBA.

 

- If you're not sure how parts of my policy/LD paradigm apply to things you want to run, just ask.

 

- PF: Please don't spend half of crossfire asking "Do you have a card for x?" Uggh. This is a super bad trend/habit I've noticed. That question won't gain you any offense; try a more targeted form of questioning specific warrants. I vote on flow, so try to do the work to cover both sides of the flow, even though the PF times make that rough.

 

- Parli: Whether its Oregon- or California-style, you still need warrants for your claims; they'll just look a little different than they would in a prepared debate form. I'm not 100% tabula rasa in the sense that I won't weigh obviously untrue claims/warrants that you've pulled out of your butts if the other team responds to them at all. I think most judges are like that and not truly tab, but I think it's worth saying anyways. I'll try to remember to knock for protected time, but you're ultimately in charge of timing that if it's open level. Bonus points if you run a good K that's not a cap K. 

Full Judging Record

Tournament Date Event Rd Aff Neg Decision
NPDL Tournament of Champions 4/7/2018 Parli 1 Los Altos Bhattacharya & Pombra Nueva Sharma & Keller OPP
NPDL Tournament of Champions 4/7/2018 Parli 6 Irvington Kulkarni & Lee CK McClatchy Schwartz & Karlson OPP
NPDL Tournament of Champions 4/7/2018 Parli 7 Los Altos Zeng & Lee Campolindo Gomez Siu & Stankus OPP
NPDL Tournament of Champions 4/7/2018 Parli Octo Gunn/Pioneer Independent Zhu & Li Nueva Cheng & Shahar OPP
Nueva Chen on a 2-1
South Oregon District Tournament 3/3/2018 PF R6 Runoff 3007 3008 NEG
South Oregon District Tournament 3/3/2018 LD R6 Runoff 2013 AFF
South Oregon District Tournament 3/3/2018 LD 6 2019 2007 AFF
Logan Will Ultimate Challenge 2/17/2018 PF 4 Ole Public Functionary/Updog Iliac Spine Quad AFF
Logan Will Ultimate Challenge 2/17/2018 Parli 5 Quadratus Hairline Murica/Magic AFF
Quadratus on a 3-0
32nd Annual Stanford Invitational 2/10/2018 VLD 1 Archbishop Mitty TB Oakwood School - North Hollywood NB AFF
32nd Annual Stanford Invitational 2/10/2018 VLD 1 Notre Dame DS Saratoga CF AFF
32nd Annual Stanford Invitational 2/10/2018 VLD 2 Quarry Lane SK Davis Senior ET AFF
32nd Annual Stanford Invitational 2/10/2018 VLD 2 St Francis AF Notre Dame AB AFF
32nd Annual Stanford Invitational 2/10/2018 VLD 3 Coral Academy Of Science Reno AG Presentation JW NEG
32nd Annual Stanford Invitational 2/10/2018 VLD 4 Saratoga VL La Salle Independent AT NEG
32nd Annual Stanford Invitational 2/10/2018 VLD Triples San Marino ED Strake Jesuit College Prep AMe AFF
San Marino on a 3-0
32nd Annual Stanford Invitational 2/10/2018 VLD Triples Oakwood School - North Hollywood WA Harvard-Westlake WB NEG
Harvard-We on a 3-0
32nd Annual Stanford Invitational 2/10/2018 VLD Doubles Loyola LA Harvard-Westlake SP NEG
Harvard-We on a 2-1
32nd Annual Stanford Invitational 2/10/2018 VLD Octafinals Palo Alto FZ Oakwood School - North Hollywood AW AFF
Palo Alto on a 3-0
32nd Annual Stanford Invitational 2/10/2018 VLD Octafinals Strake Jesuit College Prep NT Brentwood WJa NEG
Brentwood on a 3-0
North Medford Invitational 1/13/2018 LD 2 Crater BB Crater RV AFF
North Medford Invitational 1/13/2018 BQ 3 St Mary's HS - Medford, OR BM South Medford HB NEG
Puget Sound 84th High School Invitational 1/5/2018 OLD 5 Interlake MW Brentwood CL NEG
Puget Sound 84th High School Invitational 1/5/2018 OLD 5 Brentwood HG Westview AM AFF
Puget Sound 84th High School Invitational 1/5/2018 OLD 6 Lake Oswego Senior JS Brentwood DW NEG
Puget Sound 84th High School Invitational 1/5/2018 OLD 6 Capital ER Brentwood EL NEG
Puget Sound 84th High School Invitational 1/5/2018 OLD E1 Tahoma Senior HG Brentwood KM NEG
Brentwood on a 3-0
Puget Sound 84th High School Invitational 1/5/2018 OLD E2 Mountain View VP Brentwood DW AFF
Mountain V on a 2-1
Puget Sound 84th High School Invitational 1/5/2018 OLD E3 Mountain View VP Sprague LW NEG
Mountain V on a 2-1
National Parliamentary Debate Invitational at Berkeley 11/11/2017 Open 1 East Valley FP Dougherty Valley SS OPP
National Parliamentary Debate Invitational at Berkeley 11/11/2017 Open 2 East Valley MJ Valley Christian LE GOV
National Parliamentary Debate Invitational at Berkeley 11/11/2017 Open 2 Menlo-Atherton GY Dougherty Valley RL OPP
National Parliamentary Debate Invitational at Berkeley 11/11/2017 Open 3 Valley Christian RV Dougherty Valley ZS OPP
National Parliamentary Debate Invitational at Berkeley 11/11/2017 Open 5 Menlo-Atherton IN OPP
National Parliamentary Debate Invitational at Berkeley 11/11/2017 Open Doubles Stockdale SK East Valley MS OPP
East Valle on a 3-0
National Parliamentary Debate Invitational at Berkeley 11/11/2017 Open Octas East Valley MJ Campolindo DV OPP
Campolindo on a 3-0
Tournament of Champions 4/29/2017 LD 3 Dougherty Valley CS Collegiate EW AFF
Tournament of Champions 4/29/2017 LD 4 Harvard-Westlake VC Mission San Jose LS NEG
Tournament of Champions 4/29/2017 LD 5 Brentwood RY Cambridge Rindge and Latin OS NEG
Tournament of Champions 4/29/2017 LD 6 Harvard-Westlake AM Harrison MZ NEG
National Debate Coaches Association National Championships 4/8/2017 LD 2 University RH Newark Science DA NEG
National Debate Coaches Association National Championships 4/8/2017 LD 2 Logan WC New Trier CM AFF
National Debate Coaches Association National Championships 4/8/2017 LD 3 Hockaday AS Presentation NA AFF
National Debate Coaches Association National Championships 4/8/2017 LD 6 Law Magnet MG Presentation AS AFF
North Oregon District Tournament 3/23/2017 LD 1 AG 2013 AS 2016 NEG
North Oregon District Tournament 3/23/2017 LD 1 AB 2020 AC 2002 NEG
North Oregon District Tournament 3/23/2017 PF 1 AW 3022 AJ 3014 NEG
North Oregon District Tournament 3/23/2017 PF 1 AD 3019 AX 3027 NEG
North Oregon District Tournament 3/23/2017 CX 2 AG 1004 AS 1009 NEG
North Oregon District Tournament 3/23/2017 LD 3 AS 2015 AB 2011 AFF
North Oregon District Tournament 3/23/2017 PF 3 AJ 3013 AG 3005 AFF
North Oregon District Tournament 3/23/2017 PF 3 AX 3028 AB 3023 AFF
North Oregon District Tournament 3/23/2017 CX 4 AK 1001 AN 1012 AFF
North Oregon District Tournament 3/23/2017 LD 5 AG 2012 AS 2018 NEG
North Oregon District Tournament 3/23/2017 PF 6 AG 3002 AS 3011 NEG
Rose City Round Robin 2/24/2017 LD 1 Spragu 104 Clacka 122 AFF
Rose City Round Robin 2/24/2017 CX 1 OreEpi 216 LakOsw 205 AFF
Rose City Round Robin 2/24/2017 LD 2 Lakeri 124 Ashlan 108 NEG
Rose City Round Robin 2/24/2017 LD 3 Ashlan 109 Lincol 120 AFF
Rose City Round Robin 2/24/2017 CX 3 Tigard 223 Ashlan 201 NEG
Rose City Round Robin 2/24/2017 LD 4 Ashlan 106 Lincol 101 AFF
Rose City Round Robin 2/24/2017 LD 5 Ashlan 111 OakHil 113 AFF
Rose City Round Robin 2/24/2017 CX 5 Ashlan 203 Lincol 200 AFF
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD 1 Loyola JN Quarry Lane SK NEG
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD 1 Law Magnet MG Crystal Springs Uplands AT AFF
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD 2 Loyola HF Ashland GD NEG
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD 2 Evergreen Valley AZ San Marino IC NEG
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD 3 Albany EK Oak Park JF AFF
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD 3 West Ranch JW North Hollywood JS AFF
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD 4 Gig Harbor KG BASIS Silicon Valley SKo AFF
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD 5 Mountain View MS Polytechnic JL AFF
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD 5 Oakwood Secondary School - North Hollywood SM Davis Senior ET NEG
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD 6 Tahoma Senior HG Harvard-Westlake JG NEG
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD Triples Lynbrook NS Gig Harbor EA AFF
Lynbrook N on a 3-0
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD Triples Mission San Jose PB Hawken VP AFF
Mission Sa on a 3-0
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD Doubles West Ranch JW Nueva AK NEG
West Ranch on a 2-1
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD Octafinals North Hollywood JS Lynbrook NA AFF
North Holl on a 2-1
31st Annual Stanford Invitational 2/11/2017 VLD Octafinals Lynbrook VV West Ranch JW NEG
West Ranch on a 2-1
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 VLD 1 Rowland Hall-St. Mark's LC Northwest Career And Technical DB AFF
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 VLD 1 Lynbrook YZ West GG AFF
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 VLD 2 Salpointe Catholic MM Isidore Newman MK NEG
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 VLD 3 Eagle GP Centennial HH NEG
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 VLD 4 Centennial AH Palo Alto (Independent) FZ NEG
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 VLD 4 Green Valley BH Harker AMa NEG
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 VLD 6 Brentwood EL Green Valley TM AFF
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 VLD 6 Rowland Hall-St. Mark's KO Lynbrook SZ AFF
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 PF Doubles Prep Park & Wornow Nueva Nickel & Aysola NEG
Nueva Nick on a 3-0
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 PF Doubles Bishop Kelly Lamey & O'Brien Bellarmine Pahwa & Ma PRO
Bishop Kel on a 3-0
McMinnville High School Invitational 1/28/2017 LDV 1 AF 402 AM 404 NEG
McMinnville High School Invitational 1/28/2017 CX 3 BB 501 AL 507 NEG
McMinnville High School Invitational 1/28/2017 PARLI SF AD 1023 AJ 1002 NEG
AJ 1002 on a 3-0
83rd Annual Puget Sound High School Tournament 1/6/2017 OLD 1 Palo Alto (Independent) CF Centennial HH AFF
83rd Annual Puget Sound High School Tournament 1/6/2017 LDJV 1 Interlake HS - Bellevue CL Westview AM NEG
83rd Annual Puget Sound High School Tournament 1/6/2017 OLD 2 Palo Alto (Independent) FZ Central Valley TO AFF
83rd Annual Puget Sound High School Tournament 1/6/2017 OLD 2 Central Valley JW Tahoma Senior YE AFF
83rd Annual Puget Sound High School Tournament 1/6/2017 OLD 3 Raisbeck Aviation ER Brentwood LR AFF
83rd Annual Puget Sound High School Tournament 1/6/2017 LDNO 3 BELLINGHAM UNITED DEBATE CLUB WB Central Valley TT NEG
83rd Annual Puget Sound High School Tournament 1/6/2017 OLD 5 Centennial SB Santa Monica RE NEG
83rd Annual Puget Sound High School Tournament 1/6/2017 LDNO 5 Kamiak GK Central Valley RH NEG
83rd Annual Puget Sound High School Tournament 1/6/2017 OLD 6 Sprague SM Gig Harbor EA AFF
83rd Annual Puget Sound High School Tournament 1/6/2017 LDJV 6 Westview HN Interlake HS - Bellevue EZh NEG
83rd Annual Puget Sound High School Tournament 1/6/2017 OLD E2 Sprague SM Palo Alto (Independent) CF NEG
Palo Alto on a 3-0
83rd Annual Puget Sound High School Tournament 1/6/2017 OLD E2 Kamiak NB Brentwood EL AFF
Kamiak NB on a 3-0
83rd Annual Puget Sound High School Tournament 1/6/2017 OLD E3 Palo Alto (Independent) BH Gig Harbor CM NEG
Gig Harbor on a 2-1
College Prep LD Invitational 12/17/2016 NLD 1 Brentwood DW Cajon AW AFF
College Prep LD Invitational 12/17/2016 NLD 1 Mt Eden NK Monte Vista HW NEG
College Prep LD Invitational 12/17/2016 OLD 3 Albany EK Harker QC AFF
College Prep LD Invitational 12/17/2016 NLD 5 Lynbrook CX Dougherty Valley AR NEG
College Prep LD Invitational 12/17/2016 NLD 6 Dougherty Valley KD Cajon DM AFF
College Prep LD Invitational 12/17/2016 NLD 6 Mission San Jose SI Albany AL AFF
College Prep LD Invitational 12/17/2016 OLD Doubles Palo Alto (Independent) FZ Harker EM NEG
Harker EM on a 3-0
Alta Silver and Black 12/1/2016 LD 1 Quarry Lane LL Meadows ER NEG
Alta Silver and Black 12/1/2016 LD 1 East MR Del Mar/Torrey Pines HS Independent FK NEG
Alta Silver and Black 12/1/2016 LD 2 Cypress Bay SD Hunter AD AFF
Alta Silver and Black 12/1/2016 LD 2 Eagle CW West EW AFF
Alta Silver and Black 12/1/2016 LD 4 Woods Cross AS Bingham OK NEG
Alta Silver and Black 12/1/2016 LD 4 Bingham BL Rowland Hall-St. Mark's AA AFF
Alta Silver and Black 12/1/2016 LD 6 Harker SL Presentation AA NEG
Central Valley Bear Brawl 11/11/2016 OLD 1 Centen MS Ferris AL AFF
Central Valley Bear Brawl 11/11/2016 OLD 1 Centen ER LK TW AFF
Central Valley Bear Brawl 11/11/2016 OLD 2 Lincol KL GH AMi AFF
Central Valley Bear Brawl 11/11/2016 OLD 3 CV JM Ferris AA NEG
Central Valley Bear Brawl 11/11/2016 OLD 3 CV GM GigHar KG NEG
Central Valley Bear Brawl 11/11/2016 OLD 5 Eagle TW GonPre TJ NEG
Central Valley Bear Brawl 11/11/2016 OLD 5 Capita DL Eagle EC AFF
Central Valley Bear Brawl 11/11/2016 OLD 6 Spragu SM GigHar SA AFF
Central Valley Bear Brawl 11/11/2016 OLD 6 Eagle LB Centen SB AFF
Central Valley Bear Brawl 11/11/2016 OLD Double Octas GonPre MA RA JS AFF
RA JS on a 2-1
Central Valley Bear Brawl 11/11/2016 OLD Double Octas Kamiak NB Centen ER AFF
Kamiak NB on a 3-0
Central Valley Bear Brawl 11/11/2016 OLD Quarterfinals GigHar CM Lewand BR AFF
GigHar CM on a 2-1
Heart of Texas Invitational 10/14/2016 LD 1 Apple Valley KA Edmond North DA NEG
Heart of Texas Invitational 10/14/2016 LD 6 Law Magnet BJ Anderson JT NEG
Greenhill Fall Classic 9/18/2016 LD 5 Kent Denver CJ New Trier CM AFF
Cal Invitational at Berkeley HS Tournament 2/13/2016 JVLD 1 Dougherty Valley PT FSHA (Flintridge) DG AFF
Cal Invitational at Berkeley HS Tournament 2/13/2016 JVLD 1 Hockaday SL Kudos NN NEG
Cal Invitational at Berkeley HS Tournament 2/13/2016 JVLD 2 CL Education JK Granada Hills MJ NEG
Cal Invitational at Berkeley HS Tournament 2/13/2016 JVLD 2 Cherry Creek FE Dougherty Valley KK NEG
Cal Invitational at Berkeley HS Tournament 2/13/2016 JVLD 3 Sprague LW Kent Denver CJ AFF
Cal Invitational at Berkeley HS Tournament 2/13/2016 JVLD 3 Granada Hills VC Kudos OK AFF
Cal Invitational at Berkeley HS Tournament 2/13/2016 JVLD 4 Kent Denver GR Miramonte KH AFF
Cal Invitational at Berkeley HS Tournament 2/13/2016 JVLD Doubles Granada Hills VC St. Francis KR AFF
Granada Hi on a 3-0
Cal Invitational at Berkeley HS Tournament 2/13/2016 JVLD Doubles Oakwood School - North Hollywood MW Kent Denver SL AFF
Oakwood Sc on a 3-0
Cal Invitational at Berkeley HS Tournament 2/13/2016 JVLD Octas Granada Hills VC Dougherty Valley KK AFF
Granada Hi on a 2-1