Pennsbury Falcon Invitational
2018 — Fairless Hills, PA/US
Debate judge info
Messages for all debate judges
If you did not see the PFI logistics message, please be sure to visit either https://www.tabroom.com/
All tournaments run on time when the judges run on time, so thank you in advance for helping this tournament to run well. This is not a tournament that offers much prep time between rounds - there is no way to run 9 or 10 rounds of an event in 28 hours (including sleep time!) and give much time between rounds. Judges, especially those who are also coaches, pushing rounds to start on time is the only way that we can get out of the building before we are kicked out by custodians. Please be a good community member. This enterprise only works when every participant does their part to make it work. Do what is best for all of us, not only what works for you.
Though all rounds are open to any and all observers, judges are still obligated to answer when requested to sub in for a round. It is your affirmative duty to be sure that you are not judging; PHS is not known for its cell reception, so connect to wifi and check the pairings directly even if you do not receive a text or email. You can access pairings (once the tournament starts) at pfi.tabroom.com.
In the interests of fairness, I want to remind everyone that in a debate event, the winner should be determined based on what was said, not how well it was said. Use speaker points and low point wins (CX and LD only) to demonstrate dissatisfaction with debaters’ communication skills. Judges must keep personal opinions and arguments out of the round and decide based only on what the debaters said in the round. We further ask that judges communicate any preferences to the competitors before the round begins in order to make judge adaptation possible.
Especially in a five round tournament, speaker points play a large role in determining who will or will not reach the elimination rounds. As such, it is imperative that all judges follow the same speaker point scale. Though this may not be your preferred scale, the tournament will be most fair if all judges use the same scale. Please follow this system of scoring speeches, which will be available on the screen for all e-ballots:
29.5-30: I wish I could frame your speeches; your strategic decision-making belongs in a textbook
29.1-29.4: you left no doubt about who won and are better than most debaters at this tournament
28.8-29.0: you were effective and strategic, and made only minor mistakes
28.3-28.7: you mainly did the right thing, but made some errors
27.8-28.2: you made strategic errors or drops, left something to be desired
27.3-27.7: you missed things, were hard to follow, and need improvement
27.0-27.2: you advanced little in the debate or cost yourself the round
26.0-26.9: you are not ready for this division/tournament
Below 26: you were offensive, ignorant, rude, or tried to cheat (must come to tab to go below 26)
Finally, judges are in a single pool between JV and Varsity. All debates are equally important, from the varsity bid round to the 0-4 JV round. Want to see better debates next year? Be a good critic for all teams you judge this year - your feedback is essential to helping all our debaters learn and grow. As such, please be sure to fill in some comments that both the debaters and coaches can see after the tournament. As soon as the round ends, we need you to submit the decision and points. We encourage you to disclose your decision to the competitors, but briefly! You can go back to edit the feedback any time until the end of the tournament Saturday night (though, unlike in the past, students can see your feedback as soon as the next round is published).
Basic tournament rules
- internet connectivity is not allowed in rounds
- no mavericks (if we lose a partner after pairings have already been released, we may allow a debate to occur for educational purposes, but the team will withdraw unless both partners debate in all debates)
- school judges are obligated two rounds past their furthest advancing competitor
- JUDGES ARE NOT PARTICIPANTS IN DEBATES! Your role is to keep time and flow so you can make a decision after the debate. You may not ask for clarification during the round or interject your thoughts or questions. You may ask to read evidence after the debate, but not for explanation of it.
- Judges should feel free to come to tab to discuss any evidence challenges if they do not feel comfortable ruling on their own in round
Event specific notes
Policy
Prep time is 5 minutes. And it must be for the tournament to end. Please be strict about prep stealing via flashing failures. Low point wins are allowed.
LD
Prep time is 4 minutes. Low point wins are allowed.
Most debates in prelims are double-flighted so that a judge will see 2 debates within each round. Please follow the schedule and be sure you have the proper match of competitors – you may run the B flight first, but DO NOT mix and match under any circumstances! We may sometimes flight judges so that two different judges see flights in the same room; just follow the instructions in your text/email.
PF
Prep time is 2 minutes. Low point wins are NOT allowed.
We will use NSDA rules, so each round begins with a coin flip. The winner may choose to speak first or second OR to defend Pro or Con. The other team has the opposite choice. Carefully indicate which side is which on the ballot, and also in your notes! It is very easy to get confused or for the eballot to reset your choices.
Most debates in prelims are double-flighted so that a judge will see 2 debates within each round. Please follow the schedule and be sure you have the proper match of competitors – you may run the B flight first, but DO NOT mix and match under any circumstances! We may sometimes flight judges so that two different judges see flights in the same room; just follow the instructions in your text/email.
