I did PF at Roosevelt, now I study poli sci and IR at the University of Iowa and coach PF at Roosevelt
ask me any questions youd like and let me know what I can do to make your debate experience less stressful and more safe
Please set up as quickly as possible, don't wait for me to get there, pre flow before the round
Don’t sacrifice clarity for speed, I don’t like when you are too fast to hear, don’t spread, slow down and make better arguments with more warranting
The more extravagant an argument is the lower my threshold for responses will be, creativity is good but don’t run stupid arguments
don't be rude in general and in cross, especially if you’re rich/white/male presenting. If you are, be aware of your advantages and check back on them. A good attitude is really important. If you’re exclusionary I’ll start to want to drop you, so don’t be
Do not shake my hand
time yourselves pleasseee and be extremely honest with it, call out people that go over time
Email chains are amazing and so are speech docs if you’re feeling it
Paraphrasing is fine but do not change the meaning of your evidence. I’ll call for evidence if I’m told to or if I need a it for my decision. When I call for it, if your evidence is clearly misrepresented, I’m striking to from the flow and dropping your speaks.
Evidence comparison is cool, so is knowing your own from case and rebuttal super well, and being able to use it!
collapse, this can start in rebuttal, summaries cover both sides, extend/frontline important defense, cleanest offense, a well thought out narrative, and good, warranted and comparative weighing
author names/any relevant citation stuff and what the card says, and why it’s important/what it does in the round. The last part is rly important, implicate your evidence.
Second speaking teams should frontline at least offense and/or what they’re going for in rebuttal. Frontlining is strategically advantageous but its not required. If you frontline your entire case, I’d be surprised if you properly cover the other case
If you want me to evaluate your arguments, they must be in both summary and final focus entirely
I’ll listen to and vote off anything as long as it’s not discriminatory. However, I don’t suggest running any k’s/theory/etc as I have basically no experience with these, and will not know how to evaluate them the way you’d like me to.
if you do want to run anything technical, make sure the other team is ok with it before the round.
I prefer logical warranting and smart analysis backed by good cards, rather than unwarranted card dumps/blippy arguments, this goes for rebuttal especially but also the second half. warranting and nuance is everything
Overviews muddle the flow. offensive overviews suck, if the offense is that important you should just read it in case. defensive/general response overviews are ok, but not when they’re 1 minute. Weighing overviews can just be done on the impact level of the argument itself, as normal weighing at the impact level
I’m not giving you much offense off a turn at the end of the round unless you develop it well, frontline it, impact it, and weigh it. Turns are fun tho!
Do it! With three minute summaries I hope to see much more weighing in the second half of the round.
Use weighing mechanisms, link weighing, weigh in rebuttal, in cross if you want, develop it
COMPARATIVELY WEIGH, take into account your opponents weighing when you’re weighing
Just do all that stuff and you'll be fine, I don't really give less than a 28/27.5 unless you need to rly grow. But if you’re exclusionary/discriminatory/mean...then it’ll be fun to see how low they can go