Tim Mahoney Paradigm

Last changed 23 February 2020 3:14 AM CDT

St. Mark's School of Texas

CXphilosophy = Years judging: 19 as a hs coach another 10 as a college coach
Rounds on this year’s high school topic: 30+
Rounds on this year’s college topic: 0

yes, please add me to the email chain smdebatedocs@gmail.com,

yes, please send out a card document at the conclusion of the debate. please make sure that the card document accurately represents the cards relevant in the debate i.e. make sure cards that were marked are marked in the document and that cards not read in the debate don't appear in it, etc.



Teachers teach, coaches coach, judges judge.1
Clarity is king.2
I view my role as a judge in the frame of least intervention.3


More and more I'm starting to think that it should all revolve around solvency advocates. While I've probably had some tendencies toward that approach for a few years now it's even more prominent now. If a team is willing to read a plan and they have a card that says their plan is EE or DE with China then we should thank our lucky stars that they are willing to talk about the topic and try to give them a good debate. (I know that's from way back on the china topic but it's still a good example) Having said that if they have a solvency advocate for their CP I think the neg should get a tremendous amount of leeway on theoretically legitimate questions. The test is "Is the cp solvency advocate at least as specific as the aff solvency advocate".

New additions:
Framework: I'm over it. The aff gets to weigh their advantages (fiat) and the neg gets their K. The neg can't win fiat is an illusion but they can win it's a waste of time/bad idea to engage the state OR they can say "Our argument is that in the face of the aff Obama/Congress/Supreme Court/usfg should say 'no, we reject the securitization/racism/imperialism/capitalism/insert k lingo' of this idea the world would be better if we FILL IN WITH YOUR ALTERNATIVE". If you don't understand what I mean then feel free to ask questions about this.
If you say you are ready then say "Oh wait, I need another second." I will probably penalize you 15 seconds of prep. Don't say you are ready and ask me to stop prep time until you are ready.


Virtually everything else in this judging philosophy is about ways you can get better speaker points or some of my subjective biases I think you should be aware of. The reality is that most of my subjective preferences rarely matter in debates because the debates aren’t close enough to make it matter.

Respect others.4
Want good speaker points? Impress me with arguments that prove you have done a substantial amount of research on the topic and that you can make smart arguments.5
New aff’s are intellectual terrorism – you ask for it you got it.6
Topicality is for the unresearched.7
Most theory debates are terrible.8
Evidence is a good thing. Read some cards, preferably some with warrants from people with expertise in the relevant area.9
Excessive arrogance is unacceptable.10
Take ownership of your arguments.11
Post round discussions are good.12
Notes on the use of computers in debate.13


Make complete arguments. "perm do both" and "voting issue fairness and education" are not complete arguments.



]1 While this may seem obvious it bears repeating. What I teach my students and what I coach my students, i.e. what I think about debate and how the game should be played, shouldn’t be relevant when I’m judging two teams that I don’t coach or teach.


2 I've decided that a part of my role as a judge is to ensure that all debaters speak clearly. It is unfair that some debaters are virtually incomprehensible forcing the other team to read over their shoulder or look at every card instead of just being able to flow. So I'm adding a deterrent to the unclear debater. I expect debaters to speak clearly at all times. That doesn't just mean the tags on your cards, it means all the words of your evidence, it means everything. When I say "clearer" what I'm saying is "you are so unclear I have virtually no idea what you are saying so please make a SIGNFICANT, MEANINGFUL change in your delivery". I don't mean make a .001 change. If I have to say clearer a second time you are well on the path to having a cranky judge.

3 As a judge I have two jobs 1) pick one winner in each debate 2) enforce time limits as set by the tournament. To some extent intervention may be inevitable, however, it is my job as a judge to pick a winner based on the arguments made in each debate. That includes being cognizant of my subjective biases and doing my best to keep those preferences from influencing my decision.


4 This should be self evident. See also, footnotes 10, 11 and 13.

5 If your strategy relies on your technical proficiency it probably won’t impress me. If your strategy relies on reading a host of confusing cards that you don’t really understand and you hope that the other team won’t understand them either then you probably won’t impress me. A 1ac with several advantages all with poor internal links probably won’t impress me. A 1nc with a clear coherent method of winning the debate based on good evidence probably will impress me. A 1ac with a solvency advocate and well evidenced advantages probably will impress me. I like it when the aff is kritikal and the neg beats them with a smart go farther left strategy.

6 If you really wanted to have an in depth educational debate you would have disclosed your plan and advantages and given the other team a chance to research it. Break a new aff and your chances of losing on T go up and your chances of winning that anything the neg did was an illegitimate voting issue go way down. Will I be really impressed if, in the face of a new aff, the neg provides a well researched coherent strategy? Yes. Will I understand if, in the face of a new aff, the 1NC is three conditaional cp’s and a K? Yes.

7 Limits usually wins topicality debates and that is unfortunate. Smart teams should make arguments not only about limits/ground but about the educational value of the topic envisioned by both sides. A narrow topic that excludes some of the core issues that would generate educational research probably isn’t as good as a broader topic that encourages students to research important issues.

8 I generally find theory debates to be the bastion of the weak. Your amazingly good ASPEC debate usually sounds like a 27 to me. Think of it this way…every time you say something besides topicality is a voting issue count on losing half a speaker point. Again, this will not affect who wins debates only speaker points. However, I can be persuaded that illegitimate counterplans have so skewed the playing field that reject the argument not the team is insufficient and they must be voting issues. There are probably a host of counterplans that fall within this category. Three that leap to mind are consult, delay, and states. Two exceptions to this rule to help the negative: If your counterplan is unconditional it will be pretty hard for the aff to convince me it has unfairly skewed the debate. Second, have a true solvency advocate for your counterplan. Just a hint, a card that says states have acted uniformly and another card that says the states have poverty programs doesn’t cut it. You need a card that is as specific as the aff solvency advocate. Of course, if the aff solvency advocate doesn’t really match up to the plan it will probably be difficult for the aff to convince me that the counterplan should be rejected for lack of an advocate.
It would help make theory/topicality debates better if you SLOW DOWN so I can flow your arguments. It’s not necessarily a clarity issue it’s just that it’s very difficult for judges to flow short analytical arguments as fast as you can spit them out.
“Voting issue – fairness and education” usually gets flowed as VI F@E and I presume that means it’s a voting issue if they go for whatever argument you have identified as a VI. If you expect it to be a voting issue if they don’t go for it then you need to give some type of warrant as to why the debate has been skewed by them merely making the argument.

9 One good card is better than three short bad ones. Qualifications should matter but debaters rarely take the time to explain what constitutes qualified evidence and what doesn’t. In front of me that would be time worth spending.


10 Confidence is good. It’s better when it’s backed up with smart arguments and good evidence. If you disrespect your opponents because of some inflated sense of your own importance be prepared for low speaker points.

11 If it sounds like you read the same argument every debate, your coach wrote all your blocks, and you have no idea how your arguments interact with your opponent’s arguments then your speaker points aren’t going to be very good. My argument preferences are way less important than your ability to explain arguments. When in doubt about what arguments to go for choose arguments you understand, you can answer cx questions about, and arguments you will be able explain in rebuttals.


12 If you have questions about the decision please ask them. Don’t be afraid to ask pointed questions. However, don’t become the debater who always whines about every decision as if they have never lost a debate. Word gets around.

13 I don’t penalize your time to jump/email material to your opponents but I’m a stickler for stolen prep so if I think you are abusing the privilege be prepared to be called out on it. You get ten minutes of “crash” time per debate. If you computer crashes and you need to restart I won’t penalize your prep time. I’ll set a timer for 10 minutes and if you can’t get your computer ready in 10 minutes you are going to have to start anyway. Most other issues related to this are covered under #4.

Full Judging Record

Tournament Lv Date Ev Rd Aff Neg Vote Result
Georgetown Debate Seminar 3 Week Tournament 2020-07-08 Open R5 BS Kit & Dana HHH Sarah/Daniel Aff
Georgetown Debate Seminar 3 Week Tournament 2020-07-08 Open R3 Brown-sharp Zoh Poyer & Michelle Njoku HHH Aisha/Rannu Neg
Georgetown Debate Seminar 3 Week Tournament 2020-07-08 Open R1 HHH Kailey/Brent BS Jonah/Noah Aff
Barkley Forum for High Schools HS 2020-01-24 PEL R6 Henry W Grady NW Edgemont SS Aff
WESTMINSTER HS 2019-11-23 OPEN Quarte Carrollton School of the Sacred Heart BA Woodward GR Neg Neg 2-1
WESTMINSTER HS 2019-11-23 OPEN Octafi Carrollton School of the Sacred Heart CG Woodward WG Neg Neg 3-0
WESTMINSTER HS 2019-11-23 OPEN R3 Montgomery Bell BY Woodward GR Neg
University of Michigan HS Debate Tournament HS 2019-10-30 VCX Double Glenbrook South RH Edgemont SS Neg Neg 3-0
University of Michigan HS Debate Tournament HS 2019-10-30 VCX R5 Edgemont SS Casady AR Aff
University of Michigan HS Debate Tournament HS 2019-10-30 VCX R2 Kent Denver LK Grand Rapids City HG Aff
Greenhill Fall Classic HS 2019-09-12 CX R6 Glenbrook South BK Alpharetta HS SD Aff
Barkley Forum for High Schools HS 2019-01-25 PEL R3 Kent Denver HS Glenbrook South BR Aff
Barkley Forum for High Schools HS 2019-01-25 PEL R1 Woodward GW Madison Central FG Aff
Southern Bell Forum MBA HS 2019-01-05 SBF R6 Glenbrook South GS Peninsula ST Aff
Southern Bell Forum MBA HS 2019-01-05 SBF R3 Solorio CC Bellarmine College Prep VR Neg
Greenhill Fall Classic HS 2018-09-13 CX Octafi Carrollton School of the Sacred Heart AD Glenbrook South RS Neg Neg 2-1
Greenhill Fall Classic HS 2018-09-13 CX RR R6 Hendrickson SG Glenbrook North DF Neg
Greenhill Fall Classic HS 2018-09-13 CX R4 Northside College Prep OP Isidore Newman QD Neg
Greenhill Fall Classic HS 2018-09-13 CX RR R4 Montgomery Bell BG
Greenhill Fall Classic HS 2018-09-13 CX RR R3 New Trier EK Jesuit CP HM Aff Aff 2-0
Greenhill Fall Classic HS 2018-09-13 CX R2 Woodward GR Hendrickson GS Neg
Greenhill Fall Classic HS 2018-09-13 CX R1 Fullerton Union GK Presentation RV Aff
Crestian Policy Classic HS 2018-02-14 VAR R5 Carrollton Scho PG Glenbrook South KA Neg
Crestian Policy Classic HS 2018-02-14 VAR R4 Carrollton Scho DJ Mount Vernon Pr KS Aff
Westminster HS 2017-11-18 OPEN R6 Alpharetta HS MK Montgomery Bell KZ Neg
Westminster HS 2017-11-18 OPEN R4 Chattahoochee AM Montgomery Bell BG Neg
Trevian Invitational former New Trier Season Opener HS 2017-10-07 Open Double Peninsula JK Niles North WI Aff Aff 3-0
Trevian Invitational former New Trier Season Opener HS 2017-10-07 Open R6 Glenbrook South GS Northside CP CL Aff
Trevian Invitational former New Trier Season Opener HS 2017-10-07 Open R5 Glenbrook South VH Jones CP RC Aff
Trevian Invitational former New Trier Season Opener HS 2017-10-07 Open R4 Glenbrook South DP Wayzata SH Neg
Greenhill Fall Classic HS 2017-09-16 CX Double Kent Denver KK Woodward MR Neg Neg 2-1
Greenhill Fall Classic HS 2017-09-16 CX R4 Wayzata SH Crossings Christian CH Aff
Greenhill Fall Classic MS 2017-09-16 CX R3 Wayzata KP Pace HN Neg
Crestian Policy Classic HS 2017-02-16 VAR Octas Woodward SP Westminster HB Neg Neg 3-0
Crestian Policy Classic HS 2017-02-16 VAR R6 Glenbrook South KV Niles West AF Aff
Crestian Policy Classic HS 2017-02-16 VAR R5 Carrollton School of the Sacred Heart BD Niles West BC Neg
Crestian Policy Classic HS 2017-02-16 VAR R3 Woodward MR Aff
Barkley Forum for High Schools HS 2017-01-27 PEL R4 Wooster SN Cathedral Preparatory SL Neg
Barkley Forum for High Schools HS 2017-01-27 PEL R3 Harker KH Alpharetta HS Debate DD Aff
John Edie Holiday Debates hosted by Blake HS 2016-12-16 CX R5 Marist AV Lane Tech NS Aff
John Edie Holiday Debates hosted by Blake HS 2016-12-16 CX R2 Anoka AJ Marquette University DP Neg
John Edie Holiday Debates hosted by Blake HS 2016-12-16 CX R1 Niles West Be East Kentwood RM Aff
New Trier Season Opener MS 2016-10-08 Open Rd 4 Iowa City West TK Pace AK Aff
New Trier Season Opener HS 2016-10-08 Open Rd 3 Montgomery Bell CJ Northside CP OP Aff
New Trier Season Opener HS 2016-10-08 Open Rd 1 Fullerton Union GK Niles West YN Aff
Greenhill Fall Classic HS 2016-09-18 CX R6 Damien MP Niles North BL Neg
Greenhill Fall Classic MS 2016-09-18 CX R5 Pace MM Woodward AH Neg
SDI 4 Week Tournament 2016-08-02 PD R3 RRSW Mazets & Nottingham BGMP Mundada & Cho Neg
SDI 4 Week Tournament 2016-08-02 PD R2 RRSW Robinson & Daszkal RRSW Pokkula & Costa Rica Aff
SDI 4 Week Tournament 2016-08-02 PD R1 BGMP Wells & Rawal BGMP Freedline & Chaturvedi Aff
National Debate Coaches Association National Championship HS 2016-04-09 LD Finals Harvard-Westlake CC Greenhill BE Neg Neg 3-0
2016 Crestian Classic Policy Debate Tournament HS 2016-02-10 RR R6 Maine East H.S. PS Highland Park Senior BD Aff
2016 Crestian Classic Policy Debate Tournament HS 2016-02-10 RR R4 Meadows BN Glenbrook North LM Aff
2016 Crestian Classic Policy Debate Tournament HS 2016-02-10 RR R3 Niles West GG Montgomery Bell RK Aff Aff 2-0
The Glenbrooks MS 2015-11-21 VCX R6 Pace MT Wayzata SL Neg
The Glenbrooks HS 2015-11-21 VCX R4 Niles West BS Meadows BN Neg
The Glenbrooks HS 2015-11-21 VCX R2 Niles North BB Okemos RZ Aff
Greenhill Fall Classic HS 2015-09-19 CX R2 StGeo VM Harker SH Aff
Greenhill Fall Classic HS 2015-09-19 CX R1 Berkne GO NilWes BS Neg
SDI 4 Week Tournament 2015-07-28 CX Quarte BEPST Jain & Shan BEPST Tambe & Wang Neg Neg 2-1
SDI 4 Week Tournament 2015-07-28 CX Octafi BEPST Gordon & Lemons BEPST Grossman & Stryker Aff
SDI 4 Week Tournament 2015-07-28 CX R7 BEPST Grossman & Stryker BEPST Gordon & Lemons Neg
SDI 4 Week Tournament 2015-07-28 CX R6 BDRS Falkenstein & Lu Hybrid Carty & Jacobs Neg
SDI 4 Week Tournament 2015-07-28 CX R5 BEPST Bannister & Dill BEPST Alla & Callahan Aff
SDI 4 Week Tournament 2015-07-28 CX R3 BEPST Mahajan & Nys BEPST Tambe & Wang Neg
SDI 4 Week Tournament 2015-07-28 CX R2 BEPST Jain & Shan BDRS Blocker & Hellie Aff
SDI 4 Week Tournament 2015-07-28 CX R1 BEPST Carithers & Zhu BHL Haran & Singh Aff
SDI 4 Week Mini Tournament 2015-07-18 CX Round BEPST Chaturvedi & Robinson BDRS Daftari & Greene Aff
SDI 4 Week Mini Tournament 2015-07-18 CX Round BEPST Bannister & Dill BHL Gokare & Luo Aff
SDI 4 Week Mini Tournament 2015-07-18 CX Round HRS Pimentel & Testore BHL Singh & Wellman Neg
Barkley Forum for High Schools MS 2015-01-23 CX ADW Db Pace LS Harker MS Neg Neg 2-1
Barkley Forum for High Schools HS 2015-01-23 CX R5 Iowa City WZ Meadows CN Neg
Barkley Forum for High Schools HS 2015-01-23 CX R3 Harker HS Carrollton TD Neg
Barkley Forum for High Schools MS 2015-01-23 CX R1 Pace FL New Trier KB Aff
Southern Bell Forum HS 2015-01-02 CX Rnd 5 College Prep PY Woodward Academy AB Aff
Southern Bell Forum HS 2015-01-02 CX Rnd 1 Lakeland District Deb AR Niles North GY Aff
Damus Hollywood Invitational and USC Round Robin HS 2014-11-06 USCRR R7 C.K. McClatchy HB Downtown Magnets GS Neg Neg 2-0
Damus Hollywood Invitational and USC Round Robin HS 2014-11-06 USCRR R5 Encinitas Independent DZ Niles West CH Aff
Damus Hollywood Invitational and USC Round Robin HS 2014-11-06 USCRR R3 Lowell CC Damien LS Neg Neg 2-0
Damus Hollywood Invitational and USC Round Robin HS 2014-11-06 USCRR R2 Harker SM Loyola AG Aff
Damus Hollywood Invitational and USC Round Robin HS 2014-11-06 USCRR R1 St Francis SR Rowland Hall St Marks WR Neg Neg 2-0
The Meadows School MS 2014-10-31 Pol Octos Damien CS Pace FL Aff Aff 2-1
The Meadows School HS 2014-10-31 Pol R5 Damien CS College Prep PY Aff
The Meadows School HS 2014-10-31 Pol R3 Notre Dame KR Rowland Hall St Marks NF Aff
The Meadows School HS 2014-10-31 Pol R2 Notre Dame SC Greenhill DJ Neg
Greenhill Fall Classic MS 2014-09-20 CX Rnd 6 Pace Academy LS Jesuit College Prep WH Aff
SDI 2014 4Week Mini 2014-07-26 CX R4 ABMPS Rangnathan & Patel ABMPS Hesu Wang Aff
SDI 2014 4Week Mini 2014-07-26 CX R3 CGRS Hu & Kakkar BHW Xu & Shukla Neg
SDI 2014 4Week Mini 2014-07-26 CX R2 BHW Hurt & Bacon ABMPS Fatteh & Zhang Neg
SDI 2014 4Week Mini 2014-07-26 CX R1 ABMPS Jaramillo & Daftary CGRS Abramson & Zhu Aff
The Cal Invitational at UC Berkeley HS 2014-02-15 VCX Double Highland Park TX HS Coppell BJ Aff Aff 3-0
The Cal Invitational at UC Berkeley HS 2014-02-15 VCX Triple Coppell BJ Green Valley AB Aff Aff 2-1
The Cal Invitational at UC Berkeley HS 2014-02-15 VCX R5 New Trier TG Green Valley AB Aff
The Cal Invitational at UC Berkeley HS 2014-02-15 VCX R2 Lowell DL Tigard CS Aff
The Cal Invitational - UC Berkeley HS 2013-02-16 VCX Round HoustonMem CC Dowling LS Neg
The Cal Invitational - UC Berkeley HS 2013-02-16 VCX Round Notre Dame LN Loyola DW Aff
The Cal Invitational - UC Berkeley HS 2013-02-16 VCX Round MBA BR SLC West LP Aff