Alex Martel Paradigm

Finally, halfway through the year, copying my philosophy over from last year. I will say, there are a few big additions are up at the top. Those of you that pref me regularly probably know about them already.

1. I'm flowing on paper again. This means you have to spend time on the arguments you want ink on. This was a deliberate choice. It's meant to make you exlain things. Teams that think they can say a word (statistics, scholarly consensus, winners win, bioptix good are frequent ones I hear) and think it's a full argument will suffer. Sorry, life ain't kind.

This also means I'll, more than likely, show up to the round looking for a pen and paper. Sorry.

2. Lately, if you remind me, I'll give you a movie to make references to for extra speaker points. More often than not, it will be Good Will Hunting. 

3. paperless debating -- I don't know why anyone would make you kids use prep to flash. paperless debate seems to be one of the few things our community has managed to get right about practicing what we preach, so I'm willing to put up with the extra few minutes of waiting. I'll more than likely use the time you folks are flashing things and make bad jokes, and silly puns like "all the cards they're jumping you are so stupid, they might as well call that thing a 'JUNK drive!'" and then dock your speaks when you don't laugh.

4. I've been thinking more and more about deleting all of this crap and just posting one line as my paradigm: I'm a banana. 

I dream of the debates I would see. I envision young, smart, indifferent people all preffing me highly -- like at every D8 tournament there's a secret room somewhere where intensely smart performance debates are happening, but they only allow the craziest, snarkiest, least socially adjusted in the pool to judge it. 

Then I think about the other possibility -- I don't get preffed at all. That idea doesn't bother me either, really. The only thing that really deters me from doing it is not being able to say "just look up my paradigm" to people when I walk into a room and debaters, frustrated that another judge pulled the trigger on limits in their last round and wanting to know if I care that they're not topical, ask my "do you have any preferences?"

I mean, I would prefer not to, I guess. I'm not sure I can tell them that though. I prefer that debates happen where there is significant impact analysis, a point of stasis about the issues being discussed (srsly, in these deleuze v zizek debates, it'd be helpful if you could help me resolve what capitalism even is)  and depth on a few key issues.

*****

So, I debated at Vermont from the ag topic to immigration. I didn’t really run a plan my last few years debating, so those of you who are looking just to see if I'll listen to your business even though you don't have one, I will -- but that doesn’t mean I’m not going to vote on framework , either. make sure you’ve got a legitimate answer to it that’s a little more nuanced than an impact turn -- some topic specific defense is generally clutch in a situation like that. 

Everyone who's rolling their eyes now because you think I'm a k hack, hold up before you take out your heg impact and substitute in some security k advantage you 

a) aren't familiar with or 
b) don't really feel like running. 

I’d rather hear you do what you feel comfortable with. 

It occurs to me I should begin by telling you what types of debates I enjoy watching. I’d say I probably enjoy watching what more and more people are calling “non-traditional” debates best -- no offense to those running the EU counterplan, it’s just slightly boring to me. That doesn’t mean that I don’t think a beautifully run terror disadvantage isn’t fun to watch -- but when it’s not done really well, it can be agonizing. 

So, because I ran more critical args, I’m more familiar with them. I also think knowing your bias and admitting it is better than pretending I don’t have one and then not really understanding a teams arguments when you’re in round because you expect me to be deep into the realism lit -- so, you may have to slow down and be a little more explanatory. On the flip side, don’t expect me to know what’s going on with your k just because I ran a couple of them. 

Now we’re hitting the part of the judging philosophy where people list types of arguments and people say “I like them!” or “ehh, I’ll listen to it, but whatevs” -- since I’m assuming as a coach my first year out I’ll be hearing a lot of novice debate, I’m going to do you one better and tell you what to do with each of these args to get my ballot, or at least higher speaks than you’d have gotten. I’m operating under the (maybe faulty) assumption you’re a novice reading this, and not just a coach trying to decide to pref me or not. 

topicality -- think of T as a disad. just because you can prove their business doesn’t fit your definition of substantial doesn’t mean you get my ballot. your interpretation is an example of how the resolution should be interpreted in not just this particular debate round, but every debate round. People lose sight of this I think, and because of that, impact analysis can fall to the wayside. Admittedly, this is what would happen with me, at least. If you’re going to go for T, make sure you outline what args are permissible and impermissible under your interpretation, and what this means for the negative. It helps to have contextual examples specific to this topic, and as the year goes on, it becomes more important. 

Theory -- I probably have an abnormally low threshold for voting on theory, to be honest. If you are going for it in front of me, make the same impact analysis I’m calling for in a T debate, please. Lay out the worlds of debate, which is better, which is worse, and why. 

Case -- Not sure what to say here. Put something on. It’s easier to pull the trigger on a k or d/a if there’s a solvency deficit arg that’s persuasive on case. 

Kritiks --zero point of the holocaust is not an impact. It’s cool if you want to go conceptual, I’m down, but you want to 

a) have specific examples of the way your impacts play out that have some bearing on the topic, and what that means for people, and 

b) a clear idea of what the alt is, and how to explain it in simple terms. Be careful about assigning a role of the ballot, because that can get confusing fast. 

Other than that, this year it’s going to be easy for k debates to get stale, because the topic seems to lend itself to stale/generic links. Points for creativity. 

When answering a K with a straight up aff, the link turn is key -- use your 1ac please -- I won't be persuaded by a block of cards and then a brand new 2ar that articulates the link turn. It also helps your partner out when he/she is giving the 1ar, and helping your partner out is a good thing. 

D/A’s, CP’s -- These are way less conceptual, just make the smart argument and justify your business. Aff people who are answering these, remember to isolate the parts of case the cp can’t possibly solve for, and make that the most important thing in round, be it an ethic, an ontology, or a gw advantage. If you’re going for the d/a in the 2nr, make sure you’re weighing the impacts, and probability and magnitude are probably most important in the end. that doesn’t mean drop timeframe though. 

performance -- I don’t think I really have separate advise for this because I don’t think of it as a different category of argument from the above per se. Make sure you’re making those basic arguments about what your performance does to disrupt x problem. Do me one favor though, don’t use your performance as a reason why you don’t answer obviously important business because of your speed is exclusionary, going multiple off is bad, or whatever other generic arg you’re making is. Plenty of good teams are slow and don’t brush off important arguments. That also doesn’t mean I’m not persuaded by speed is exclusionary, it just means you’re going to have to be smart with your time. 

That being said, there are things people will tank your speaks for doing but in good humor, I think you should totally do them in front of me as long as you’re not being serious -- I’ll give you an extra speaker point or two, just because. They include, but are not limited to: 

1. using the phrase “jack taco.” 
2. saying “don’t do the work for them” 
3. stating “this was cold conceded” -- bonus points if it was not conceded. 
4. calling a piece of evidence “on fire.” 
5. saying “I don’t get a 3nr” 

But, in all seriousness, you should be respectful to those you are debating, and your partner as well. And have fun! Debate is hard, might as well enjoy yourself while you’re doing it.

Full Judging Record

Tournament Date Event Rd Aff Neg Decision
Harvard 10/31/2015 Open 5 Cornell KR Oklahoma RS AFF Cornell KR
Harvard 10/31/2015 Open 6 Cornell LT Missouri State GG AFF Cornell LT
Harvard 10/31/2015 Open 7 Minnesota KW Missouri State CB AFF Minnesota KW
Harvard 10/31/2015 Open 8 Capital CL Georgia WS NEG Georgia WS
CEDA Nationals Wichita State 3/20/2015 Open Rd 1 Oklahoma WS Nevada Las Vegas KO AFF Oklahoma WS
CEDA Nationals Wichita State 3/20/2015 Open Rd 2 United States Military MS Kansas City Kansas CC GJ NEG Kansas City Kansas CC GJ
JVNovice Nationals at Binghamton University 3/6/2015 Nov 6 JMU JT GMU CL AFF JMU JT
JVNovice Nationals at Binghamton University 3/6/2015 Nov Octos JMU HK Liberty SW NEG Liberty SW
Liberty SW on a 3-0
CEDA East Regionals at WCSU 2/21/2015 Nov 1 Liberty ER Binghamton SW AFF Liberty ER
CEDA East Regionals at WCSU 2/21/2015 Nov 2 Liberty DJ Binghamton AM AFF Liberty DJ
CEDA East Regionals at WCSU 2/21/2015 Nov 3 Liberty SY West Virginia WG AFF Liberty SY
CEDA East Regionals at WCSU 2/21/2015 JV 4 Liberty RS Cornell DT AFF Liberty RS
CEDA East Regionals at WCSU 2/21/2015 JV 5 Boston College SC Binghamton SS NEG Binghamton SS
CEDA East Regionals at WCSU 2/21/2015 Nov Octas United States Military GM Liberty DJ AFF United States Military GM
United States Military GM on a 2-1
Sydney Landon Invitational 2/7/2015 Open 1 Binghamton MT Cornell BK NEG Cornell BK
Sydney Landon Invitational 2/7/2015 Open 2 Cornell KK Binghamton BS AFF Cornell KK
Sydney Landon Invitational 2/7/2015 Open 3 Binghamton WS Cornell DR NEG Cornell DR
Sydney Landon Invitational 2/7/2015 Open 4 Cornell ST Binghamton WF AFF Cornell ST
Sydney Landon Invitational 2/7/2015 Open 5 Cornell BK Binghamton AM AFF Cornell BK
Sydney Landon Invitational 2/7/2015 Open Sem Cornell DR Binghamton WS AFF Cornell DR
Cornell DR on a 3-0
5th Annual Jersey Shore Invitational at Monmouth University 1/30/2015 JV 3 Cornell RK James Madison GW AFF Cornell RK
5th Annual Jersey Shore Invitational at Monmouth University 1/30/2015 Open Round 6 James Madison DY United States Military CR AFF James Madison DY
5th Annual Jersey Shore Invitational at Monmouth University 1/30/2015 Open Quarters NYU ZD Rutgers-Newark JR AFF NYU ZD
NYU ZD on a 2-1
2015 Kathryn Klassic Cal State Fullerton 1/7/2015 JV 1 Binghamton CS Southwestern College GB NEG Southwestern College GB
2015 Kathryn Klassic Cal State Fullerton 1/7/2015 Open 4 James Madison BW Wake Forest AD NEG Wake Forest AD
2015 Kathryn Klassic Cal State Fullerton 1/7/2015 Open 6 Michigan KM Baylor BG AFF Michigan KM
2015 USC Alan Nichols Debate Tournament 1/3/2015 Var 2 George Mason OB Gonzaga CJ AFF George Mason OB
2015 USC Alan Nichols Debate Tournament 1/3/2015 Var 6 Western Connecticut State MM George Mason KL NEG George Mason KL
2014 Franklin R Shirley Classic 11/15/2014 OPN 5 Kansas City Kansas CC CJ West Georgia CT AFF Kansas City Kansas CC CJ
2014 Franklin R Shirley Classic 11/15/2014 OPN 6 Concordia College SS George Washington GS AFF Concordia College SS
2014 Franklin R Shirley Classic 11/15/2014 OPN 7 Dartmouth College AY Central Oklahoma WS AFF Dartmouth College AY
2014 Franklin R Shirley Classic 11/15/2014 OPN 8 Capital CL CUNY YX NEG CUNY YX
Huber Debates at Vermont 11/1/2014 OPEN 1 Cornell GK Rutgers-Newark CJ NEG Rutgers-Newark CJ
Huber Debates at Vermont 11/1/2014 OPEN 2 Cornell DZ Vermont LB NEG Vermont LB
Huber Debates at Vermont 11/1/2014 NOV 3 Vermont RR Oklahoma HT NEG Oklahoma HT
Huber Debates at Vermont 11/1/2014 OPEN 5 Rutgers-Newark JW CUNY AM NEG CUNY AM
Huber Debates at Vermont 11/1/2014 NOV Qrts Vermont BQ Cornell BK NEG Cornell BK
Cornell BK on a 3-0
Huber Debates at Vermont 11/1/2014 OPEN Semis Rutgers-Newark WM CUNY AM NEG CUNY AM
Rutgers-Newark WM on a 2-1
West Point Tournament 10/17/2014 JV Round 1 Libert KP GeoMas HM NEG GeoMas HM
West Point Tournament 10/17/2014 JV Round 6 JamMad CP Libert MS AFF JamMad CP
West Point Tournament 10/17/2014 JV Octos JamMad CP Libert JB NEG Libert JB
Libert JB on a 3-0
Rutgers NE Regional Opener 9/26/2014 open Opn 1 United States Military LC Rutgers-Newark WM AFF United States Military LC
Rutgers NE Regional Opener 9/26/2014 nov N 2 George Mason CL Liberty WR AFF George Mason CL
Rutgers NE Regional Opener 9/26/2014 JV 3 Liberty KP United States Military OR AFF Liberty KP
Rutgers NE Regional Opener 9/26/2014 nov N 4 James Madison KM Liberty MO NEG Liberty MO
Rutgers NE Regional Opener 9/26/2014 nov Nov Octos Liberty BL United States Military WH AFF Liberty BL
Liberty BL on a 3-0
CEDA Nats Indiana 3/21/2014 Rd 1 Dartmouth College MM Bard College/San Diego State DN AFF Dartmouth College MM
CEDA Nats Indiana 3/21/2014 Rs 2 NYU KC Oklahoma RY NEG Oklahoma RY
CEDA Nats Indiana 3/21/2014 Rd 4 NYU IH Kansas City Kansas CC TS AFF NYU IH
CEDA Nats Indiana 3/21/2014 Rd 8 Oklahoma WL Towson JR NEG Towson JR
IC Spring Sydney Landon IV 2/8/2014 Open 4 Binghamton SB Cornell MK AFF Binghamton SB
IC Spring Sydney Landon IV 2/8/2014 Open 6 Binghamton EF Cornell LR AFF Binghamton EF
William DeMougeot Debates 1/9/2014 Open 1 Oklahoma CO Kansas BC NEG Kansas BC
William DeMougeot Debates 1/9/2014 Open 2 Texas CM Kansas BM AFF Texas CM
William DeMougeot Debates 1/9/2014 JV JV 3 KSU DK UTDallas BP AFF KSU DK
William DeMougeot Debates 1/9/2014 Open 4 MoState HS Wyoming HJ NEG Wyoming HJ
William DeMougeot Debates 1/9/2014 JV JV 5 KCKCC JM UTSA BP AFF KCKCC JM
William DeMougeot Debates 1/9/2014 Novice Novice 6 Augie HT Houston AS AFF Augie HT
William DeMougeot Debates 1/9/2014 JV JV Semis Lindenwood NW KCKCC JM NEG KCKCC JM
KCKCC JM on a 3-0
UTD 1/5/2014 NOVICE NOVICE 1 Auggie SV UTSA EG NEG UTSA EG
UTD 1/5/2014 OPEN OPEN 2 Texas CM Kansas HW AFF Texas CM
UTD 1/5/2014 JV JV 3 Lindenwood NW UTSA BP AFF Lindenwood NW
UTD 1/5/2014 OPEN OPEN 4 KCKCC CG GeorgiaState FF AFF KCKCC CG
UTD 1/5/2014 OPEN OPEN 5 UTSA CM Kansas BC NEG Kansas BC
UTD 1/5/2014 JV JV 6 UTSA CD Lindenwood SW AFF UTSA CD
UTD 1/5/2014 OPEN OPEN Doubles Dartmouth MM Baylor SW AFF Dartmouth MM
Dartmouth MM on a 2-1
U of Rochester Brad Smith Debate Tournament 9/28/2013 open Round 2 O CUNY JM NewYor DD NEG NewYor DD
U of Rochester Brad Smith Debate Tournament 9/28/2013 nov Round 3 N Vermon PS Cornel MM NEG Cornel MM
U of Rochester Brad Smith Debate Tournament 9/28/2013 open Round 4 O CUNY AL Bingha BS AFF CUNY AL
U of Rochester Brad Smith Debate Tournament 9/28/2013 jv Round 5 JV NewYor EI Cornel LR AFF NewYor EI
U of Rochester Brad Smith Debate Tournament 9/28/2013 open Round 6 O Navy JR Bingha CE NEG Bingha CE
U of Rochester Brad Smith Debate Tournament 9/28/2013 open Semis O NewYor GZ Vermon BB NEG Vermon BB
Vermon BB on a 3-0
U of Rochester Brad Smith Debate Tournament 9/28/2013 jv Finals JV NewYor KW Cornel LR AFF NewYor KW
Cornel LR on a 2-1
JV/Novice Nationals 3/2/2013 JV J1 Liberty CM JMU PY AFF Liberty CM
JV/Novice Nationals 3/2/2013 JV J3 JMU RS Liberty CT NEG Liberty CT
JV/Novice Nationals 3/2/2013 JV J4 JMU LM Rutgers BJ AFF JMU LM
JV/Novice Nationals 3/2/2013 NOV N5 George Mason NU Binghamton OS NEG Binghamton OS
JV/Novice Nationals 3/2/2013 JV J7 USMA HH CUNY AT NEG CUNY AT
JV/Novice Nationals 3/2/2013 NOV NO John Carroll HM Binghamton OS AFF John Carroll HM
Binghamton OS on a 2-1
JV/Novice Nationals 3/2/2013 JV JO Liberty CW Binghamton FP AFF Liberty CW
Liberty CW on a 3-0
CEDA East Regionals 2/23/2013 JV JV 2 USMA OO Bing EC NEG Bing EC
CEDA East Regionals 2/23/2013 JV JV 3 CUNY JD USMA HH NEG USMA HH
CEDA East Regionals 2/23/2013 NOV Novice 4 Bing RK USMA RM AFF Bing RK
CEDA East Regionals 2/23/2013 NOV Novice 5 NYU FI WVU AR AFF NYU FI
CEDA East Regionals 2/23/2013 JV Quarters UVM CB Bing EC AFF UVM CB
UVM CB on a 3-0
CEDA East Regionals 2/23/2013 JV Semis UVM CB WCSU AB NEG WCSU AB
WCSU AB on a 3-0
CEDA East Regionals 2/23/2013 NOV Semis NYU FI USMA LS NEG USMA LS
USMA LS on a 3-0
Jersey Shore Invitational Monmouth 1/26/2013 Novice Novice 2 GMU NT BING BS AFF GMU NT
Jersey Shore Invitational Monmouth 1/26/2013 Open OPEN 5 CUNY MC BarCol JD AFF CUNY MC
Jersey Shore Invitational Monmouth 1/26/2013 Novice Novice 6 WVU AR LIBER CC NEG LIBER CC
Jersey Shore Invitational Monmouth 1/26/2013 JV JV SEMIS UniSta HS LibUni CW AFF UniSta HS
UniSta HS on a 2-1
William R DeMougeot Debates UNT 1/9/2013 JV JV 2 WestVirginia\New OT WakeForest PS AFF WestVirginia\New OT
William R DeMougeot Debates UNT 1/9/2013 Open 3 UTSA NS Trinity MV AFF UTSA NS
William R DeMougeot Debates UNT 1/9/2013 Open 6 KSU BM Houston BR NEG Houston BR
William R DeMougeot Debates UNT 1/9/2013 Open 7 Houston AJ Wyoming BF AFF Houston AJ
Fear and loathing in Dallas 1/5/2013 JV JV 2 WestVirgini GR WakeForest PS AFF WestVirgini GR
Fear and loathing in Dallas 1/5/2013 OPEN 3 Kansas GM Towson JR NEG Towson JR
Fear and loathing in Dallas 1/5/2013 OPEN 4 100 WestGa GM NEG WestGa GM
Fear and loathing in Dallas 1/5/2013 NOVICE Novice 5 UTDallas TW Lindenwood HW AFF UTDallas TW
Fear and loathing in Dallas 1/5/2013 OPEN 6 Towson HW UTSA MX AFF Towson HW
Franklin R. Shirley Classic at Wake Forest University 11/8/2012 - 3 Bard DJ Stanford LS AFF Bard DJ
Huber Debates 2012 Univ of Vermont 11/3/2012 Open Open Round 1 Binghamton\USMA FO Cornell DK NEG Cornell DK
Huber Debates 2012 Univ of Vermont 11/3/2012 Open Open Round 2 Cornell FF USMA HT AFF Cornell FF
Huber Debates 2012 Univ of Vermont 11/3/2012 Open Open Round 3 UVM SC Binghamton EF NEG Binghamton EF
Huber Debates 2012 Univ of Vermont 11/3/2012 Open Open Round 4 Binghamton GR BC ST AFF Binghamton GR
Huber Debates 2012 Univ of Vermont 11/3/2012 Novice Novice Round 5 Binghamton KK Cornell AR AFF Binghamton KK
Huber Debates 2012 Univ of Vermont 11/3/2012 Open Open Round 6 Binghamton CP Cornell LP NEG Cornell LP
Huber Debates 2012 Univ of Vermont 11/3/2012 Open Open Quarters Cornell LP USMA CH AFF Cornell LP
Cornell LP on a 3-0
Huber Debates 2012 Univ of Vermont 11/3/2012 Novice Novice Semis USMA LS Binghamton KM AFF USMA LS
USMA LS on a 3-0
West Point Debate Tournament 10/19/2012 JV JV Round 3 Liberty CG Cornell DR AFF Liberty CG
West Point Debate Tournament 10/19/2012 Novice Novice Round 5 Binghamton CS GeoMas ET AFF Binghamton CS
West Point Debate Tournament 10/19/2012 Novice Novice Octos NYU EI Cornell AR AFF NYU EI
NYU EI on a 3-0
NE Regional Opener 9/21/2012 1 WILK WM USMA CH AFF WILK WM
NE Regional Opener 9/21/2012 2 BHamtnTC GMU HJ AFF BHamtnTC
NE Regional Opener 9/21/2012 4 GMU UB WVU GR NEG WVU GR
NE Regional Opener 9/21/2012 5 GMU NT JCU HM NEG JCU HM
NE Regional Opener 9/21/2012 6 CUNY GC
NE Regional Opener 9/21/2012 Octos JCU HM BHamtnAS AFF JCU HM
JCU HM on a 3-0
NE Regional Opener 9/21/2012 Quarters RutgerBM WVU OP AFF RutgerBM
RutgerBM on a 3-0
NE Regional Opener 9/21/2012 Semis USMA SC RutgerVH NEG RutgerVH
USMA SC on a 2-1