wyatt hatfield ParadigmLast changed 5/2 12:36P EDT
Wyatt Hatfield Strake Jesuit Class of 2020
email - firstname.lastname@example.org
Debate is a game first and foremost.
Summary of my debate style - I am a memer who really enjoys debate so just remember debate is supposed to be fun and be creative with what you do.
Please note that I have strong opinions on what debate should be but I will not believe them automatically every round they have to be won just like any other argument. Tech>truth no exceptions unless under extreme circumstances which I don't think will happen, if they do then I will update this.
How to get good speaks
- be entertaining either with good music good jokes etc
- explain something to me really well
- be very strategic and just smart the whole round
- in order to get super high speaks 29.5 + in front of me you really need to do something new or innovative, reading your 2NR doc on Wilderson will never get you this high no matter how good it is. A new meme or strategy is almost a guarantee of this speaks range.
- making arguments that I really like or agree with, this includes Catholicism and monarchism.
do any of these things and you will def get above a 28
How to get low speaks
-making bad jokes
-doing really stupid things
-being really rude or mean. I will put here that being aggressive to the point of making your opponent uncomfortable is what I mean here.
- swearing or cursing, try to keep it professional and respectful please.
Styles of debate -
before I get into every style just know that I will vote on all of them if I see your winning them, this is just to say what my bright line for winning the arguments tends to be.
K - Lets be real 90% of people who read this stuff have no idea what it actually means. I was one of those people, if your like me and just read the 2Nr doc and make sure to not drop anything and you should be good. If you are one of the 10% who actually knows really well what you are talking about if you can show it to me like basically just outsmart your opponent in CX and really demonstrate you know what your saying, you will get very high speaks. Just make sure if your reading Lacan or something like that to explain it super well or else I will have no idea what your talking about. I will not vote on something I don't understand. Be warned I will not walk into the round thinking an impact is true, I will vote on impact turns to arguments, you need to be ready to defend the impact of the k I'm not going to accept it as true.
Larp - This was my main Strat when I couldn't read theory and I do enjoy a good larp debate. Other than that not much to be said here Larp is about being tech and having good cards. if you have both of those things you will win the debate in front of me.
Tricks - I really like tricks and don't have a bias against them like most people. that being said if you just blip storm a ton of aprioris I will probably miss some so please be clear with what you're doing. That being said if you are just reading some stupid generic aprioris or skep I will not be impressed and you will not get higher speaks. please be innovative
Theory - this is my favorite type of debate because it requires the least amount of prep. Make sure to be clearly extending and weighing your standard and please read paradigm issues. I don't get this new trend of not reading voters it really makes me mad. I will vote on anything no matter how frivolous if its won. My mentality is if its so frivolous it should be super easy to beat back. please note that I am very biased towards fairness first education not a voter type arguments. I personally read these a lot and do think they are true. That being said you still need to win the argument just like anything else I'm just saying if its a messy theory debate with little to no weighing done I will be leaning towards fairness impacts first.
Phil - same as k just make sure I know what the syllogism is and you will be good. if you have skep or permissibility triggers make sure to do a good job explaining why that triggers it just saying "extend this card it says trigger skep in the tag gg" does not do it for me. Side note I really enjoy theological debate if it’s possible. I promise good speaks if you make the debate interesting. Do with that what you will. Lastly is that I really don't know any literature at all besides theological stuff so don't expect me to know anything about the framework you read. the burden is on you to prove it to me.
Full Judging Record
|Debating the Discord Part 1||1546009200 12/28/2018||LD||7 R7||GrouchoMarxist||West Linn DT||Neg||Neg on a 6-1|
|Debating the Discord Part 1||1546009200 12/28/2018||LD||6 R6||Rina||West Linn DT||Neg||Neg on a 2-1|
|Debating the Discord Part 1||1546009200 12/28/2018||LD||5 R5||LS1||LARPbad||Aff|
|Debating the Discord Part 1||1546009200 12/28/2018||LD||3 R3||Big Chungus||anG||Aff|
|Debating the Discord Part 1||1546009200 12/28/2018||LD||3 R3||Phoenix||LS1||Neg|
|Debating the Discord Part 1||1546009200 12/28/2018||LD||2 R2||Sreyaash||Cypress Falls RK||Aff|
|Debating the Discord Part 1||1546009200 12/28/2018||LD||2 R2||GrouchoMarxist||Neg|