Sal South Cougar Classic NIETOC 2022
2022 — Salina, KS/US
Friday LD/PFD Paradigm ListAll Paradigms: Show Hide
Eisenhower High School
Previously Mulvane High School
3 Years High School Policy
2 Years HS Lincoln-Douglas
1 Year HS PFD
I typically fall within the tabula rasa archetype with some caveats.
Flash Time/Email Chain Time should be OFF Time
I expect every debater to keep track of everyone’s prep time.
I would prefer to be included in all email chains and sharing of evidence to ensure best practices.
I will typically take speaker points away for jumping around on the flow haphazardly, or disrespect in CX or in speeches. There’s a fine line between aggressive and rude.
I can handle all speeds, but I would like you to slow down on tags and cites a bit.
I will not interrupt you during a debate round. However, if you are unclear, I may miss something on the flow. Make sure you annunciate tags and cites well.
I really don't like new Off Case in the 2NC. So, unless AFF does something pretty scummy in the 2AC, please don't run new in the 2.
On T: This is a valid strategy for the negative. I treat it with equal voting power as a DA or CP.
On CPs: CPs can be conditional or unconditional.
On DAs: Generic DAs are fine, but I do tend to vote on DAs with strong, specific links.
On the K: I will only vote on a K if it is unconditional. The K debate is the one argument that I do not believe should be gamified. If you run a K or K AFF, believe in it. This means that Ks NEED specific links. NO GENERIC K’s.
Ask me any questions for clarification.
Yes email chain please:
Debated four year at Salina South High School
Coached on and off since 2013
Speed is fine. If I can't understand you I will just say clear.
Don't just read pre-prepared blocks straight from your laptop at full speed with little contextualization to the arguments the other team is making. Please don't just speed read over views to me in the 2NR/2AR and expect to win my ballot. Don't force me to make a decision because you chose not to slow down and contextualize your arguments. It's pretty easy to tell if I am agreeing with your argumentation. I will either miss important things you want me to vote on, or I will try to keep up with everything and not think about the arguments which will most likely result in me voting on something that you didn't actually want me to vote for.
K vs FW- If you are going to read a K aff in front of me please take the time to explain what the aff does. Defending some type of advocacy statement in front of me is going to be the best option when reading a K aff. I enjoy topic debates but that doesn't mean that I haven't voted for K affs. I often end up voting neg on FW because the aff doesn't effectively argue against a topical version of the aff. I don't really find arguments about framework creating violence to be very persuasive and reading debate bad in front of me is not going to get you anywhere.
CP- I would prefer that you have a well thought out text than just some vague text that says we do the plan minus x or something like that. Don't be afraid to go for theory arguments in front of me on cheating counter plans that don't actually do anything. I would much rather vote for theory arguments than some process counterplan that does nothing.
K- I'm good on basic K lit but if you are reading some new alt that you haven't read before or are breaking something new I would probably not suggest doing it in front of me unless you can clearly explain what the world of the alternative actually does in a method that you can defend. You need to contextualize your link arguments. I'm not going to give you a lot of lead way on generic masking links.
I think that if you are reading more than 5-6 off that you are just doing too much most of the time. You should spend more time burying them in the block on case rather than reading 4 different CP's that all have next to no way to actually solve the aff and are just baiting them into undercovering something so you can go for it because you were just faster. That just leads to boring debates.
If you have any more question feel free to email me or just ask before round.
I'm an Assistant Coach at Hutchinson High School. I debated for four years in the KDC and DCI divisions.
In general, I prefer a more open style (heavy use of on-case arguments, DA's, and CP's), however, I want debaters to have the freedom to express themselves and do what they want. DO WHAT MAKES YOU SUCCESSFUL!! I will have an open mind when I submit my ballot. A couple of notes for those who want it:
Speed: Speed in the constructives is whatever. I'd prefer a slower debate, but I can keep up. I would prefer rebuttals be slightly slower, but it's up to you. I'll do my best to not miss anything.
Kritiks: I was never a huge K debater in high school, so I'm not up-to-date on the literature (although I have a baseline understanding of the most popular arguments). Make sure that if you read a K, actually explain its relevance in the round. I will vote on it, but you need to do more work for me than you would on judges who are more familiar.
You will win my ballot by giving me some impact stuff in the 2nd rebuttals and telling me why you have won. I'll vote on whatever framework is presented in round, but I default impact calc. It would be great if a team did the math for me instead of having to do it myself. What will the world of the aff be vs the world of the neg? Analysis like this will win you the round most of the time.
PLEASE signpost and provide clash. I'll do my best to write a solid RFD on every ballot so y'all understand why I voted the way I did, even if you might not agree with it :)
Well, tabroom literally deleted my paradigm and I hate repeating myself so here's the condensed version. #FREELUKE
234 rounds judged (yes I update this every round) (going for a record or something) and I'm a 4th year coach.
Debate : I literally don't care what you run. As long as you know what you're reading. If you're rude to other people in the round, I'll think it's cringe and vote you down. Impact calc is always nice. I actually read your evidence so don't self-sabotage. Mean what you say, because a captain goes down with their ship.
Forensics : ALL OF THIS IS CONDITIONAL AND VARIES BY EVENT - Well-developed blocking is always appreciated. A good intro and conclusion are important. Voice impressions or differentiation is nice as well. If applicable, your speaker's triangle is crucial. Confidence is key. Getting in your own head only messes you up.