Andrew Whitaker Paradigm

Last changed 6/24 7:05P CDT

Background/experience: I debated for 3 years at Montgomery High school competing two years in policy and my senior year in ld. As far as other events go, I competed in extemp, congress, and even World Schools on occasion. I qualified to TFA state every year in policy and ld respectively. I also qualified to the TOC my senior year in ld.

General Paradigm: I really think debate has become an activity involving strategy over anything else in policy and ld especially. Therefore, I will tend to be more perceptive to strategy over grandstanding on your critiques. Additionally, I felt like during my career that judges tended to put their own personal beliefs about debate and the issues being debated on a pedastool making them biased toward certain arguments like Ks over theory or theory over Ks. My goal is to be a complete blank slate as far as that goes. I believe things like frivolous theory can be a strategy even though some judges are biased against it. That's not to say I'm a theory hack because I'm probably the opposite, but I am receptive to it just as I am to a DA or K. Also don't say racist stuff or I probably won't like you.

Specifics:

K: I read Ks throughout most of high school and am well read in most of the literature. That being said, I am not a K hack. I am probably going to know if you don't understand what you're reading or talking about. Most of the critiques I read were high theory involving authors such as baudrillard, deleuze, bataille, Heidegger, etc. I'm not going to grandstand about how you have to explain Ks thoroughly. They should have some explanation in the 2nr but some of this stuff can't be simplified down to a third grade level so I don't expect that to occur. I feel like the debate community has allowed some kids to get away with little explanation and say they are a great debater while other times judges use it as a cop out to not give an RFD. Just know what you're talking about and I'm cool with it. Also k affs are great and strategic.

LARP: I read policy affs and DAs throughout my policy career and somewhat as an LDer. I really like these arguments because they allow debaters to be strategic with turns and usually allow me to learn some cool stuff too. Have fun! I love DAs, CPs, plans, etc.

Theory: I never really read theory unless I was forced to. That's not because I didn't like it but I thought some judges would hesitate to vote on frivilous theory. I am happy to say that I am not one of those judges. Read frivilous theory all you want. Just remember that usually there are simple intuitive responses that are effective. Also I default competing interns but I don't have a specific leaning toward reasonability or competing interps one way or another. And yes! Reasonability is something I will vote on if you are winning that I should use it. I also don't have any presuppositions as far as rvis and drop the debater vs drop the argument. Tell me which I should use and if you don't I'll probably default to drop the argument if applicable and no rvis. Lastly, definitely weigh standards and impacts or you won't like my decision.

Phil: I didn't read Phil whatsoever until my senior year. I still am not read on the literature. That being said, I think Phil arguments are great and I will do my best to evaluate them just as I would a k. Just be prepared to explain it to me and how it interacts with offense in the round. If you like reading Phil, go for it.

Speaks:

I will say clear twice, then deduct speaks. If you are clear, then the main thing that I use to evaluate them is strategy. I will also adjust my speaks depending on the caliber of tournament. I will give a regular debater around a 28.8, a poor debater 28.5 and a good debater 29+

My goal is to be the most tab judge you have ever had, so read anything you want, be strategic, and have fun.

Full Judging Record

Tournament Date Ev Rd Aff Neg Vote Result
King Round Robin 3/29/2019 LDRR Quarte Quarry Lane SK Strake Jesuit BE Aff Aff on a 2-1
King Round Robin 3/29/2019 LDRR R5 Greenhill AZ Anderson SJ Neg Neg on a 2-0
King Round Robin 3/29/2019 LDRR R4 Harrison AZ Greenhill AZ Neg Neg on a 2-0
King Round Robin 3/29/2019 LDRR R3 Anderson SJ Independent NG Aff Aff on a 2-0
King Round Robin 3/29/2019 LDRR R2 James Bowie TW Newark Science OS Aff Aff on a 2-0
King Round Robin 3/29/2019 LDRR R1 James Bowie TW Harrison EL Aff Aff on a 2-0
Grapevine Classic 9/7/2018 LD Qrtrs Strake Jesuit College Prep JH Marcus KL Aff Aff on a 2-1
Grapevine Classic 9/7/2018 LD Double Strake Jesuit College Prep JP Keller JB Aff Aff on a 2-1
Grapevine Classic 9/7/2018 LD Double Dulles JG Garland KP Aff Neg on a 2-1
Grapevine Classic 9/7/2018 LD R5 Lovejoy CM George Ranch MS Neg
Grapevine Classic 9/7/2018 LD R4 Strake Jesuit College Prep WH Houston Memorial JM Aff
Grapevine Classic 9/7/2018 LD R3 Oakwood School - North Hollywood MW Westlake AC Aff
Grapevine Classic 9/7/2018 LD R2 Garland KP James Bowie JB Aff
Grapevine Classic 9/7/2018 LD R1 Westlake AL Colleyville Heritage IN Aff
Grapevine Classic 9/7/2018 LD R1 Northland Christian AB Colleyville Heritage AB Aff