I am not a native English speaker, so speak slowly and speak clearly. I vote for the argument that makes the most sense and who defends their arguments. Please present your facts clearly as the speeches progress. I will not be timing, so time yourselves. Debate is about having fun too, so enjoy the experience.

Hi, I'm Alina (she/her)! I'm currently a junior neuroscience major at UTD.

My little cousin participates in his school's speech and debate team and he recruited me to be a volunteer judge lol. As an FYI, I've never competed in any sort of speech and debate events before.

I judged PF for the first time in September 2023, and this'll be my first time judging LD.

Helpful info:

• I'm a volunteer and I've read over some information about LD debate and watched a demo video, but I'm new to judging LD
• Tbh I kinda wanna hear y'all spread lol but pls don't start off your speech at max speed (you can start at ~80%) then work your up
• No rudeness!
• In general, I listen for well-structured, logical, and cohesive arguments and counters. Just connect the dots and I'll vote your ballot.
• Email chain pls: alinalandam@gmail.com

Looking forward to judging and hearing you speak! :)

Should Debaters use Rapid Delivery (spreading)?

No. I don’t like it. It isn’t good public speaking, and it certainly isn’t persuasive.

How Should Debaters Approach Constructive Speeches?

A few well-developed arguments prove more persuasive than a larger quantity of arguments., Arguments should each be addressed individually.

How Should Debaters Approach Rebuttal Speeches?

Rebuttals should provide voters to address the important issues advanced in constructive speeches., Rebuttals should extend arguments individually which debaters advanced in constructive speeches.

How Should Debaters Approach Evidence?

Citations after article introduction are preferred.

How should debaters use values, criteria and arguments to support a value position?

Build the value that is not overly complicated and should be relatable, and criterion should not be over technical.

What arguments (such as philosophical, theoretical or empirical) do you prefer to support a value position?

Empirical, but a highly persuasive philosophical approach can potentially work just as well.

Please explain your views on kritik arguments.

Critical arguments should provide substantial evidence for their support: as in every criticism needs at least one "For example" or at the very least a thorough clarification with a credible, referenced source.

How should debaters run on case arguments?

Make sure all claims are supported with specific, defined examples. Avoid paraphrasing

I am an English teacher who is volunteering my time. I will always listen with an open mind.

In Oratory, Info, and Impromptu: I value your originality, creativity, and persuasive presentation of ideas of personal importance. Cite your sources, explain their importance, and tell me why it matters.

In DI, HI, DUO: It is crucial that you tell a story in a meaningful and impactful manner. Characterization, gestures and facial expressions, and, vocal variation will all add to the overall decision.

Overall speaking skills or/and argumentation are critical to winning! But remember the most important thing is that you learn!

I mainly judge PF events. I am an avid history and current affairs buff. I also do research on resolutions that are being debated so I can follow positive and negative arguments.

As a judge I will be evaluating debaters for their overall persuasiveness, which in my view has 2 elements:

1. Logic of argument: The argument must be coherent and it must be in the context of the resolution. It is important not to drift away from the resolution. Drift happens when a debater discusses implications of the resolution and then implications of implications and so on. Use the resolution as a guide and tie your arguments back to the resolution at hand. And, successively build your position, while undermining your opponents arguments.

2. Presentation style: This includes clarity of speech and body language. Debaters have limited time so they must speak at a good clip but it cannot come at the cost of clarity in speech. Vigorous but respectful disagreement with opposing team is expected. Before, starting your speaking time give a one sentence overview of how you will proceed. For example, "First I will refute my opponents positive or negative points, then I will explain and provide evidence of the points I made in my opening remarks", etc. Finally, a word of caution about "spreading", it does not work. If your goal is to read out loud as many words as you can in your allocated time, you will almost certainly loose points.

The golden rule is not to loose your audience. As a judge, I am the audience and debaters will have my undivided attention. But if a debater loses me, they will lose points.

Hi, my name is Holly Garrison (They/Them) and I'll be your judge.

I have done debate for long enough to understand how most of this stuff works. I'm a senior at Colleyville Heritage.

You don't have to but if you do make an email chain add me at Hollydebate22@gmail.com

PF

• Tech over truth(If you make an argument back it up)
• I'm okay with progressive arguments
• Please don't spread My therapist said it was bad for me
• No bigotry, please
• It's PF so please don't run a K, there isn't enough time in a round to do the discussion justice so you are just reading it for a win
• When it comes to weighing my value, unless otherwise disproven, is utilitarianism(most good for most people)
• I don't flow crosses but I do pay attention
• #abolishgrandcross

LD

Short and Simple

• I will value any argument so long as it is not racist, sexist, homophobic, or anything bigoted.
• DO NOT spread. Even if you have a speech doc if you are not coherent I will not flow your argument.
• I'm very tech so if you are going to present an argument please provide some sort of evidence(either analytic or sourced)
• I prefer if teams disclose without it being a big deal but feel free to not disclose as long as you are speaking clearly
• I have experience with a lot of the theory arguments but if you are unsure if you should run something then show up early and ask me

Long and Complicated

Framework- I will value any framework. I do believe when submitting a framework you should have some definitions of your value and your criterion that way there can be an actual framework debate. I do like a good framework debate but I believe that they should have substance more than "framework is better." That said, I will still flow all framework debates. I also do not need a philosophy with your framework but if you have one more power to you.

Disclosure- I would prefer if everyone discloses sometime before your speech. I'm open to any form of disclosure(Speechdrop, Email chain, the new Tabroom speech drop, case list) so long as I get the speech doc. I also don't believe in this new contact disclosure theory so please don't run that.

Spreading and Speed-I'm fine with spreading and can handle a decent amount of speed. If you are going to go 80+ words per minute please send a speech doc and be clear in your delivery. If you are just mumbling to try and get out all 6 of your contentions then I will shout "clear" that way I can understand you.

Topicality -I need either limits or grounds to flow them and I need appropriate voters to properly value them. Do not just stand up and call your opponent abusive and tell me to strike them. Tell me why your opponent's argument shouldn't be valued or I will still keep it on my flow.

Theory- Like topicality, I typically need some grounds and you CANNOT just stand up and call your opponent abusive. Theory(when done well) will be valued first before impacts so please if you are reading some sort of theory or theory shell please just do it well.

Kritiks- I've read some of the literature(Edelman, Puar, Marx, Engles, Fisher) but I've never loved K debates. If you want to read a K I do have high expectations because you are purposefully changing the round away from the resolution so I need this to be a well-thought-out argument if you are planning on running some like a K.

DA's- For the Disadvantage to win it needs to either Turn, Outweigh, or Solve the case. And I am not going to be doing the work for you on this one. Tell me why you are winning and show me where you are winning.

Counter Plans- I will always love counter plans. I think, when done well, they are really strong. Just make sure that if your opponent doesn't provide their own plan text your counter plan is against the whole resolution.

Perms- I understand perms and I think they are strong counters to counter plans but I need proper answers to the counter plan and not just "perm do both"

Plan/No plan aff- I do not require a plan on the aff and I'm ok with any type of affs so long as they're clear and understandable. So long as the argument isn't bigoted I'll flow it.

Tricks/Spikes/Small Abusive stuff-Please don't. If you do decide to run these arguments just try to keep them fair.

I prefer if everyone keeps their own time. I will have a stopwatch going to keep your time but the round will go a lot smoother if you keep your own time. I will allow a grace period of about 10 seconds before I just stop flowing and I will cut you off after about 25 seconds over.

Also, try to pay attention during the round but if you need to check your phone or type something just don't be disruptive

If you have any questions before or after the round please email me at Hollydebate22@gmail.com

Let's have a good round y'all

I am a new parent judge.

In PF, I’m traditional. I don’t like spreading in PF and there should definitely not be CPs, Theory, critics, or anything like that.

I competed in Policy Debate and Extemp at the Varsity level in High School where I lettered and was awarded Distinguished in the NFL. I also competed in numerous public speaking events and contests both in an academic and business environment. Hosted a radio program, acted in legitimate theater, commercial stage productions, conducted commercial seminars nationwide, and acted in motion pictures and a member of SAG.

I look for developed, effective, public speaking delivery utilizing your personal style. I do not like spreading in any Debate. I reward logical arguments, persuasive rhetoric, solid evidence based on quality not quantity. You must be able to convince me to win the ballot. I reward those who can adapt their arguments as needed to make their point. Don't rely on reading a manuscript from a computer without fleshing out the information as appropriate. I reward debaters who are well informed on the topic and are able to apply evidence that supports their contention.

Decorum, respect, and courtesy, are required from all contestants. Bullies will not prevail or be tolerated. All students are respected regardless of their culture, background, or individual preferences.

Please no spreading! Be concise and clear. Ultimately what decides the round is how cohesive the team is and the unified voice. Also how you attack your opponents contentions.

Hello, I’m a former debater that has competed in UIL, TFA, and NSDA tournaments at both the state and national levels. I’m ok with any arguments as long as they make sense and are warranted.

Participated in PF Debate and IX all 4 years at Richardson HS

Now attending Southern Methodist University

General Paradigm: Honestly as long as you explain your arguments well and tell me why they matter (I'm big on impact calc.), I'll flow any case. This means clear warrants and links. I like to have my job be easier so tell me right from the start what I need to vote on and what stuff is important in the context of the round. If you don't do that I'll be forced to become a policymaker which means I may default to impacts that you may not have focused on. Summary and final focus speeches should be mirrored. This means the arguments that you flesh out and extend are the same ones you should be speaking about in the FF. Don't bother bringing up dropped/dead arguments near the end of the round. You are just gonna be wasting my time. When extending args, include the (warrants, links, and impacts). There is no excuse to not do this considering summary speeches are 3 minutes now. Again for me focus on Impact Calc. Make sure you give me voters on why your args matter, and why you win.

Speed: I can deal with moderately fast speed as long as you are clear. Slow down on taglines and for warrants that are crucial to your case. I will say clear once if I cannot understand/keep up. (Do not try and policy spread. I will not flow.)

Keep your own time. I will be keeping time as well.

I may ask for evidence at the end of the round

During CX , feel free to go all out. The more clash the better , and be well mannered during CX. Do not be afraid to go at it , but do it respectfully

Feel free to ask me about anything I may not have covered.

Hello Debaters!

Good for you at checking paradigms.... I judge several different types of debate:

As a communicator, you should be able to adapt to your audience...ie Judge.

Have fun! Debate is a wonderful activity where you can be smart, have fun, and learn at the same time.

Some items I think you should be aware of that I think weakens your presentation:

Being rude, forgetting to tag your cards, not having cards formatted correctly, and not making some kind of eye contact with judge during cross.

DO NOT say please vote for Aff/NEG...your argumentation and evidence should demonstrate your side should win.

Things to help your presentation: Smile, being polite, and organizing your arguments with internal signposting...sharing cards and evidence before using them.

Public Forum- DO NOT PROVIDE AN OFF TIME ROADMAP- I do not need it.***NO VERBAL PROMPTING**

Please have started the email chain and flipped as soon as you can.

include me in the email chain macleodm@friscoisd.org

Or use a speech drop

General Ideas

There is not enough time in PF for effective theory/K to run. I will not vote for you if tricks or theory are your only arguments. I expect the resolution to be debated and there needs to be clash.

I think you should be frontlining offense (turns and disads) in rebuttal. Straight up defense does not need to be frontlined, but I do think it's strategic. Summary to final focus extensions should be consistent for the most part. Overall, the rule of thumb is that the earlier you establish an argument and the more you repeat it, the more likely I will be to vote for it, i.e., it's strategic to weigh in rebuttal too, but it's not a dealbreaker for me if you don't.

To me warrants matter more than impacts. You need both, but please please extend and explain warrants in each speech. Even if it's dropped, I'll be pretty hesitant to vote on an argument if it's not explained in the second half of the round. Also, I have a relatively high standard for what a case extension should look like, so err on the side of caution and just hit me with a full re-explanation of the argument or I probably won't want to vote for you.

The most important thing in debate is comparing your arguments to theirs. This doesn't mean say weighing words like magnitude and poverty and then just extending your impacts, make it actually comparative please.

Technical Debate

I can flow most of the speed in PF, but you shouldn't be sacrificing explanation or clarity for speed.

I will try my best to be "tech over truth", but I am a just a mom of two seven year olds and I do have my own thoughts in my head. To that end, my threshold for responses goes down the more extravagant an argument is.

If you want me to call for a piece of evidence, tell me to in final focus please.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me before the round.

Policy ***NO VERBAL PROMPTING**I am a stock issues judge when adjudicating Policy. I am fine with speed/spreading with signposting and roadmaps. I will say clear if you are losing me and going too fast so please slow down at that point.

I can't stand the K. Please don't run one. Most debaters do not understand their own ALT and have trouble defending it from our current world- again I like POLICY MAKING not pretending reality doesn't exist. Debate the resolution or run a T argument but very rarely will I vote off case arguments that are just theory or analytically based without actual reputable evidence- make sure your cards are formatted correctly I will ask for them if I need to and will not spend time trying to decipher.

Parli/World Schools- Need to see fully developed warrants, impacts and confidence. I love stories and learning new TRUE stuff...

LD- I love debates about Criterion and no neg cases are great if ran with logic, links, and detailed examples. Tell stories. I will buy it if presented professionally and with logic. I need weighing of worlds and chrystalization.

Congress- Please make sure to reference previous representatives speeches and show me you have been flowing and are responding to what has been said in round.

Showing decorum and being polite- like thanking the previous representative always a good thing :)

PLEASE DO NOT ask if I am ready- I am always ready or I will say to please wait.

World Schools- I love the decorum/Parli element and terminology usage. Attacking the premise of arguments, call out logical fallacies, and weigh the worlds please....Make sure to give examples that are not just made up- I know Harvard studies everything, but please refrain from making stuff up.

I do appreciate puns/tasteful humor and use those POI requests and answers strategically.

Add me to your email chain - colleyvilledebatedocs@gmail.com AND mathison.debate@gmail.com OR add me on your speech drop.

My name is William Mathison. I'm the coach at Colleyville Heritage High School.

If you spread make sure to add me to your SpeechDrop or email chain. I can flow off of the doc but if I can't understand you while spreading, you'll lose speaker points.

I'm the most familiar with PF and LD since that's what I've judged the most of.

Preferences

FW Debates - 1

I've learned something about myself recently, I really like a good FW debate. At the very least you need to weigh yours against your opponent's, but if you want my vote oftentimes you'll need to tell me why yours is to be preferred or it's a prereq, etc.

CP/DA/Advantages - 1

T, Theory - 2

Kritiks - 3

This is pref'd lower simply because I have not read the literature on the most common K's and don't feel entirely comfortable evaluating these. I'm open to hearing the argument but if I have to vote on it that could be tricky for both of us. I certainly doubt my ability to provide feedback on them as well.

Non-T Affs, Tricks - 4

It's my opinion that the resolution is as stated for good reason and there's a lot of benefits to gain from remaining topical, such as the educational value of the topic. If you decide to run a non-topical affirmative, I believe it does need to have some semblance of relevancy to the topic. That might seem like a backwards way of thinking but I think there's more value to gain from having some sort of link to the topic. This does not mean I'm going to vote them down immediately, it just means I'm less likely to vote on them if I don't see any shred of relevancy.

Friv Theory, Spikes, Tricks - 5

I simply have not heard enough of these, I don't understand them well enough, and have not been apart of enough discussions to feel confident enough to vote on these, so run them at your own risk. I try to be open minded, but if I simply don't understand something I don't feel as though I can vote for it. Don't be afraid to ask me about something specific, but also don't be totally shocked if you run these and lose.

Speaker Points:

30: Perfection

28-29: Great with some notes

26-27: Needs significant work

25: Offensive comments were made

I have competed in or coached various debate formats for over 20 years. Namely, I competed in policy debate for 7 years and competed and coached public debate for another 12 years. Ultimately, I value being a tabula rasa judge at the core.

For PF in particular, my desire is to see debate focus predominantly on persuasion and reasoning. Evidence should be a guide to the debate, not the debate itself. Impact calculations should be obvious, explained, and well defended by logic and reasoning. Debaters should not depend on evidence to speak for itself, nor should they be unable to explain basic warrants when prompted. Kritical argumentation and topicality should only be used if it is applicable, provides needed negative/con ground, and should not be used as a time suck. Finally, debaters should be well rehearsed with signposting and telling me where they want arguments on the flow; I shouldn’t have to make that judgment for them.

For email chains: jbagwell05@gmail.com

I have been a public speaker during my school, college and work years. Its something I have always enjoyed doing.

Growing up, I did not participate in PF but have been judging PF events for 2 years now. Things which appeal to me - clarity of thought / argument, research and data backup in framing arguments, voice projection and intonation, and ability to ask sharp and direct questions.

Treat me like a lay judge.

Please do not be too fast in speaking, please be respectful to your opponents at all times, and please stick to schedule.

I hope to enjoy this tourament with you guys and wish you all the best!

I am a parent judge, and I have mainly judged PF on the TFA circuit.

Public Forum Debate

Please speak slowly and clearly. Facts are great but I mostly focus on how you use common sense to present your statements and arguments. You will have my vote if you demonstrate how quickly you think critically to defend and counter.

Keep the flow and repeating your arguments are ok, as long as you word differently each time adding more substance.

Congressional Debate

Clear, engaging speaking is what will have my ballot in your favor. I love to see engaging speakers bringing up round-changing statistics and warrants. Public speaking goes a long way in Congress, so please use it effectively. As for questioning: try and convey something by taking up an offensive position against the questioner/questionee (not sure if that's a word but you get the gist). Whoever does this the best will get the higher rank from me.

POs usually get the bare break unless it seems like you aren't well-practiced in your parliamentary procedures and/or don't know how to operate a chamber off the top of your head.

That being said, good luck everyone!

I am a parent judge, who has judged a reasonable number of rounds. You may speak fast, as long as you are understandable. Cite your sources as much as possible. If you call for evidence outside of cross-ex, you will be using your prep time. Also, please avoid asking super long questions during cross-ex, and allow the other team to answer. I give speaker points based on strategy and presentation. I may dock your speaks if you take forever to pull up a piece of evidence. To avoid this, please start an email chain and add me at subashri.r@gmail.com.

Debate is about having fun, enjoy it!!

I competed in Speech and Debate from 2020-2023 in mostly speech events (informative, oratory and extemp) but I have competed in every TFA debate event (CX, LD, Congress, PF, and Worlds). I judge mainly on organization, content and delivery, in that order. Treat me as a flay. I will flow the round, but I will only flow what I understand. I value weighing and clarity above all else. If I can't understand it, I won't vote for it.

Debate:

PF - I personally believe that this is the most clear-cut debate event, and I consider clash and weighing is the most important thing in this event. Not only does it clarify and remind me what happened during the round, but it also engages the opponent's arguments and provides me with a better basis to make a decision on the debate. That third speech is critical to gaining my vote and make sure your arguments are linked and extended or they will be forgotten.

LD/CX - I'm not well versed in theory, Ks, phil, etc. so I don't advise running those. If you do, be prepared to explain a lot because there is a 90% chance my brain has short-circuited and comprehend anything besides simple arguments. I enjoy CPs and disads a lot, but I need it to be explained thoroughly. Make sure your arguments are warranted and extended cleanly or I won't evaluate them at the end. Speed is fine but again - I will only flow what I understand and my flow is what I will base my decision on.

Congress - Please, please, please be creative. I think Congress is one of the most fluid events with so many different avenues to take, and yet more often then not, competitors fall into the same mold and it makes it very exhausting to judge. Half of Congress is delivery and production but the other half is content and argumentation; if you can only do one or the other, I will rank you lower. Questions shouldn't just be asked for the sake of questions.

Worlds - Strategy, content and delivery is key. Have a clear framework to build your arguments off of. I don't care too much about the particulars of arguments and value the holistic understanding more. That being said, your argument needs to be realistic and should be extended. Voters are especially important in this event and I really value delivery.

Speech:

I define speech events as those that require no acting or interpretation and rely on arguments. I am well versed in speech and value delivery first and then content. Fluency breaks, forgetting part of your speech and limitations of the human body happen to everybody so don't stress too much about it; how you recover after is what matters. Have fun, be passionate and don't let your audience affect your performance.

Extemp: My only caveat here is that organization of the content has a higher value then the delivery of the content. How you present your argument and how your organize it to defend your position matters more than whatever flowery words you use.

Interp:

I believe that connecting with your audience is one of the most important parts of this category. You are telling a story and the number one job of a storyteller is to make your audience care about your story no matter who they are. Everything you do needs to be intentional - every movement, every word, every tone should be used for a reason. Screaming, crying and extensive action are not necessary to tell the story and should be used to convey the feelings of the story, not the details. Your blocking and voices should be consistent throughout and there should be meaning behind every performance.

Hi , my name is Satya Vanukuri. I am a parent judge . I'm a novice at judging. I'm open minded looking for well spoken arguments, slow , clear and loud speeches .

Clearly state why you think your argument is better and deserves to win. Go Slow.

Hi there!

I’m excited to be your judge! The first thing I’d like you to know is that I’m proud of you. Yes, I know you’re probably reading this before we meet, but I’m certain you’ve put a lot of effort into prepping your round and I admire that. Get up there and give it your all and know I’m cheering you on! Second, I want y’all to know that I’m a parent judge, and a novice one at that, but I assure you, you’ll have my full attention and respect during every round I judge.

Speaking of respect, I believe it is paramount in speech and debate. If you don’t show respect to your opponents or your judges, it will negatively impact your ballot. Any homophobia, sexism, ableism, racism, etc. against your opponents or your own teammates will result in an automatic loss. I will immediately stop following the debate and will report the behavior to your coaches. I understand that many students are cross entered and will be entering and exiting after rounds have begun, but please do so as quickly and quietly as possible between speakers. Additionally, please keep any disruptive behaviors-talking, texting, eating, moving around the room-to an absolute minimum during rounds. Treat others with the respect you would like to receive when you are speaking.

Debate Events:

As I mentioned, I am a novice debate judge; please keep a couple of things in mind if I am judging your debate round:

Speed is ok, but please articulate and speak at a volume that I can hear from several yards away. Spreading is difficult for me to flow, so please avoid it whenever possible.

Please don’t present any theory or K’s, because I don’t know how to flow them appropriately.

Again, respect toward your opponents and your judges is critical.

I most likely will not disclose after round; I like to take time to articulate my thoughts on your performance in writing out of respect for the work you've put into your debate.

Speech Events:

I have a little more experience judging speech events; I absolutely love when I am assigned these rounds at tournaments. Here are a couple of things I always consider when judging speech in general:

Confidence, creativity and character! Show me these during your performance. Whether you are performing an original piece in Info or OO or making a piece your own during an interp event, I not only want to watch a well rehearsed and professional performance, but I also want to get a glimpse of who you are and why you connect with your chosen piece.

Again, respect for fellow speakers, judges, everyone in our room, please.

If you make a mistake, remember, I DON’T KNOW! I don’t have your script! Stay calm, and keep going! You’ve got this!

Info/OO:

I am looking for a well structured, well supported speech. Enunciate clearly. Sourcing is important but make sure that the information you’re citing is relevant to your topic. Movements and actions are always fun and engaging!

And if your boards fall, don’t worry! I’m not going to rank you down for it, accidents happen!

Interp:

Bring your character to life, make it seem natural! I love when an interp performer makes me feel as though I am experiencing the scene with their character. I understand the nature of these events is to elicit emotion and am comfortable with the mature topics and vulgar language that can be included to make the piece more impactful. However, I do think it’s considerate when speakers offer a trigger warning for their audiences.

There’s a chance I’m going to cry. And maybe a lot. But! Please don’t feel like you haven’t impressed me if I’m not sobbing; some pieces are more touching for personal reasons than others are. Just make your character as moving and piece as powerful as possible and you will like your rank!

POI:

I am looking for a program that tells a story as seamlessly as possible. Do your sources work well together, do all selected sources tie into the topic of your program? I’m also looking for the ability to differentiate between your different sources in your program through your characterization and blocking.

Extemp:

I’m looking for:

-Structure: intro, 3 points of support, conclusion
-Sourcing: not just for the “I added some sources to my speech to check the box” but rather to support your point and give validity to your argument.
-Engagement: it’s out of your control if you get a boring question, but keep me interested and engaged and it won’t really matter what your question is!

I’m an animal lover (we have 2 adult cats, a 5 month old kitten and a 6 month old puppy-let me know if you’d like to see pictures!), a big baseball fan(Go Cubs, Go!) and a Swiftie at heart if you’re looking for an AGD that I can connect with, too!

Other speech events:

I haven’t had the opportunity to judge other speech events, so beyond watching a few videos from NSDA Nationals, I don’t know a whole lot about them. I love to see new events and new styles of speech though! If you don’t see anything on here for specifics, ask me about them or maybe even tell me something useful for judging before.

Thanks so much for taking the time to read this! As a judge, and a mom, don’t forget that I’m proud of you, I’m rooting for you and always want you to do well! GOOD LUCK! See you in rounds! -Andrea :)