The Ed Long Invitational at The Hockaday School
2022 — Dallas, TX/US
Congress Paradigm ListAll Paradigms: Show Hide
No Unintelligible Spreading
Background & Coaching Information:
*2 Diamond Coach with over 25 years of experience coaching both public and private programs in Florida, Alabama and Texas.
*Experience coaching and judging all events
*Have had TFA finalists in multiple events, NSDA Nationals Semi and Finalists and have coached numerous Alabama State Champions in multiple of events
- 2023 NSDA Duo Interp Finals Judge
- *I have a true passion for the overall educational and life changing skills of speech and debate. I expect competitors to be respectful of all events and each other.
INFORMATIVE & ORATORY
Content & Visual aids
*A NEW perspective on a NEW topic or a refreshing and inspiring topic that is not overdone.
*Informative should not be persuasive in nature; your job is to inform not persuade
*The best oratories provide stories and a genuine moments within the speech. I should feel and see your heart in your speech.
*Research should enhance and advance information presented. Research should be relevant, current, and reliable
* For informative, Visual aids should not be a distraction but add to the quality of what is being said. The focus should be on the words spoken and not the visual aids. Just because you have strong visual aids is not the winning point for me; a well written memorable speech and performance weighs more heavily.
*Speech should be well organized, easy to follow, and engage the audience
*Professional and engaging. Performance should enhance natural strengths. Don't force cheesy humor.
*Natural movement and gestures; blocked and robotic movements sometimes can distract from the overall presentation
*Apply all the needed vocal variation that makes speeches engaging
*I want you to be genuine and real. I am not interested in fake and robotic performances. I cannot stress this enough. I don't care how polished you are if you are not real.
*I should be able to tell why this topic is important; passion is imperative. This should be obvious in every aspect of your performance.
IE ( HI, DI, PROSE, POETRY, POI, DUO)
*Creative, engaging, relevant, entertaining.
*Maturity and age appropriate.
*Follow the event rules
*Easy to follow; don't make me work to understand what is happening.
*Take me on a journey of emotions
*Characterization should be genuine and real.
*Blocking should enhance and add to the performance; not be used in place of good performance.
*When working with a partner, strengths should complement one another
*Sometimes simple moments in a performance are the most memorable. A certain look or gesture can be gut wrenching and draw an audience in. Those moments are more impressive than overblocked and overacting attempts of winning my vote.
*Same as speaking events, I value genuine and real performances. I'm not interested in polished robotic performances that have not heart.
*I am a flow judge BUT presentation also matters a great deal. If I can't understand what you are saying, it is difficult for me to flow your arguments.
*Respect in the round is essential. I don't care how good you are if you are disrespectful to your opponents or to the judges you will not get my vote. Be professional and respectful at all times.
*I am good with any kind of speed, but keep it clear and articulate.
*If you do not extend properly, I will not buy any of your arguments.
*Proper extension should include tag, short summary of evidence, and impact calc.
*I expect FF and even Sums to have impact calculus (magnitude, propensity, reversibility, etc.)
*Impacts are essential. I don't care if you don't tell me why I should
* I prefer you being true to what public forum was designed for, however if you happen to run theory and Kritik debate I will be ok with it.
* The second speaking rebuttal should respond to turns placed in the first speaking rebuttal.
*Offense wins rounds, so make sure your voters are offensive.
*Please collapse or the debate will end up being a mess. If you are going for Theory make sure to delineate what you want me to do with it (drop the debater, drop the argument, etc.), stance on RVI, clear voters.
*I consider it the burden of the Kritik to provide an alt and prove its uniqueness, so I will default buy the perm even if your opponent doesn’t argue it unless uniqueness is proved.
*AGAIN, I prefer traditional PF debate, butI will and can adjust judging according to different styles of debate.
*Organization is key; make it easy for me to follow
*Words matter; word economy is essential. Don't waste time with insignificant words and filler language that takes away from overall presentation points
-Be strategic about your question; play to your strength and knowledge, but avoid easy questions that don't require much analysis
-It is imperative you answer the question clearly and concisely
-Clearly link evidence with rhetoric and impact
-Using variety of sources is important; I am not impressed with multiple sources if those sources don't directly link with what you are saying. Just spouting off sources is not impressive. The information actually has to say something of importance and connect.
-The more current the information, the better.
-Organization and structure is important; but add some personality and flair to make it interesting and engaging.
-Knowledge of the topic is essential; more rhetoric and logic used in your speech is more impressive than anything
-Professional presentation is incredibly important.
-Don't add humor if it is not your strength.
-Tone should fit the topic.
-DO NOT BE POLITICALLY POLARIZING. Bashing any ideology or person is not impressive and will immediately give me reason to not consider a high ranking. Be respectful always.
- I NEED CLASH.This is congressional debate, unless you are 1st AFF Speech, you should have clash in your speech. Bring up NEW points and please do not keep bringing up same points as other representatives.
- When you clash be sure you mention representative's names when referring to their specific arguments.
- Your speeches need evidence, MINIMUM, one piece of evidence per point. More is appreciated.
- When using evidence, it should clearly link or I will not consider it. Include dates; the more current and relevant the better.
- DO NOT read your speech; engage your audience and do this in a original, creative and respectful way.
- I do listen to your speeches and questions, so if you give clearly falsified evidence or logic I will know. Be involved and know parliamentary procedure as well.
- You are judged on the WHOLE round, not just speeches, so if you are rude or aren’t involved don't expect a good score from me.
PF: I did pf for 3 years in hs, and I've been judging for a while. I'm pretty much a flow judge so if you want me to weigh something, say it. I'm ok with speed as long as you aren't spreading and just keep in mind that if I don't catch what you say, then obviously I can't weigh it so you might want to slow down if you want to make a point. As far as reading cards and such, if you want to bring back evidence later on in the debate just say the author, year, and tagline so it's easy for everyone to flow.
Other than that, I'm pretty laid back so if you want to run CP or disads I'm kinda ok with that just make sure that it makes sense and isn't intentionally confusing.
LD: I did one year of ld, so I'm not the most well versed in it. If you are spreading I want to be on the email chain/ however you are sharing files so I can follow along. Run whatever you want, but just keep in mind that I'm not well versed in things like theory and kritiks, so you might have to do more work to convince me of those. If that sounds like something you want to do, go for it. I'm still a flow judge, so I won't vote off things that aren't said.
General: I don't really want to have to do any work for either team in terms of extrapolating information/arguments, I would prefer if you extended things clearly across the flow verbally. I will extend things and do work for you if there is really just nothing else to vote on.
In terms of magnitude, timeframe, etc. I weigh each one evenly pretty much so its up to the debater to convince me why I should prefer magnitude over timeframe etc.
I do like grouping arguments especially in the summary speech of pf for example, but you shouldn't just drop all evidence and arguments for the sake of a "cool grouping" or something.
You can ask any other questions to me if you are confused/want to know more.