Zackery Tucker Paradigm

Last changed 16 June 2019 11:26 AM CST

***Include me in your email chain.*** zacktucker89@gmail.com

Lincoln Douglas

LD debate should remain distinct from policy debate. While the passage of new policy may be deemed essential for AFF ground with some resolutions, value debate should remain central to the round. I don't mind speed or policy arguments in an LD round as long as you provide analysis of those arguments and link them back to the value debate.

Policy Short Story

As a judge, I am open to all arguments and styles of policy debate. Your job as a debater is to convince me that what you have to say matters and should be preferred to your opponent. The way you go about that is entirely your choice (within reason…professionalism and decorum are key). If you have questions pre-round, please ask. Having said that, here are some specific likes/dislikes as a judge which you can choose to follow or completely ignore (because I will objectively evaluate whatever lands on my flow whether I really like it or not):

Policy Long Story

Case: I do love case debate. I find it hard to vote NEG when case goes relatively untouched and hard to vote AFF when rebuttals focus on off-case arguments. Rounds where case is essentially dropped by both sides are my worst nightmare.

K: Not my favorite, but I will evaluate K. I’m not really well-versed in kritikal literature, so if you choose to run kritikal arguments (AFF or NEG), please provide thorough explanation and analysis. Don’t expect me to know the ideals that Whoever promoted because, unless you tell me, I probably don’t.

T: I tend to be pretty lenient on the affirmative as far as T goes. In order to win on T, the negative must completely prove that the affirmative has totally harmed the fairness and education of the round.

CP/DA: Sure? Run them? Why not?

Theory/Framework: Sure. Whatevs. Just tell me how/where to flow it and why it matters in this round.

The Flow: Tell me how to flow the round. Roadmap. Sign post. Please slow down for clarity on tags and citations. If you insist on spreading tags and cites, please provide me with a copy of your speech. If your arguments don’t make it on my flow, they cannot be evaluated on my ballot. I also do very little (feel free to read that as “no”) evidence analysis following the round. It is your job as a debater to clearly articulate the argument/evidence/analysis during your allotted time.

Have fun and promote better discourse.

Full Judging Record

Tournament Lv Date Ev Rd Aff Neg Vote Result
National Speech and Debate Tournament HS 2019-06-17 XDB R3 K652 K1270 Aff
National Speech and Debate Tournament HS 2019-06-17 XDB R3 K473 K967 Neg
National Speech and Debate Tournament HS 2019-06-17 XDB R3 K621 K157 Neg
National Speech and Debate Tournament HS 2019-06-17 XDB R3 K131 K1199 Aff
North Little Rock Wildcat Classic HS 2017-12-01 VPF Finals 2 Trujillo & Tyner 1 Halle & Branch Neg Neg 3-0
North Little Rock Wildcat Classic HS 2017-12-01 VLD R2 2 Briana Griffin 1 Robert Brindle Aff
North Little Rock Wildcat Classic HS 2017-12-01 VLD R2 1 Josh Slocum 2 Dustin Lauderdale Aff
North Little Rock Wildcat Classic HS 2017-12-01 VPF R1 1 Keogh & Berry 10 McDaniel & Thorn Aff
North Little Rock Wildcat Classic HS 2017-12-01 VPF R1 1 Brumbelow & Baumhover 8 Gardner & Hearne Aff