I have coached debate for 20 years. I have coached multiple state champions and National qualifiers. I like to see strong clash in the round and prefer the traditional style of should/would argumentation in LD. I don't like to see policy plans and K in LD. I don't mind them in CX, but do not like to see generic argumentation that you pull out round after round. That being said, I will adapt to you - your job is to make sure you define the framework of the round. Don't assume I have read your advocacy authors. Spell it out.

Slow down if you want me to flow it. There is a big difference between hearing and being able to process the information that is being presented.

Semantics are important. Rhetoric is important. A strong speaker with solid word choice is always going to score better than a spewing gasper. Analysis presented well, weighs as much as evidence that is not supported with argumentation.

I LOVE CONGRESS! and speaking events, and actors, and readers, and the forensic community. Don't be a jerk and we'll get along just swell.

Please include me in your email chain: shyller.byrom@granburyisd.org

I have been coaching debate for 16 years. Before that, I debated in HS and college. I am fairly traditional in all aspects and will always prefer an on-topic debate to a kritik.

CX

I will judge a debate round both as a decision-maker of the debate and as an educator of oral argumentation. I will vote for the affirmative if its proposal is inherently more advantageous than the negative option (the present system or the counterplan). The affirmative must meet its obligation to the burden of proof on each of the stock issues to win the debate.

The purpose of debate is to deliver arguments so that anyone listening to the debate may make an informed decision as to which side presents a stronger case. Debaters speaking rapidly, or making random arguments without sign-posting, do not communicate and therefore cannot win.

LD

I am very traditional. The VC debate is the most important debate. Your arguments should all link back to the VC. I do not enjoy progressive debating in LD and will not vote on a K. Regarding delivery, you should primarily have well-developed arguments. Now having said that, if I can’t understand you, I won’t flow. If I’m not flowing, you lose. Please stay organized and signpost your arguments.

CONGRESS

Rate of Delivery

Your rate of delivery should be such that a layperson could understand and follow your arguments. See footage of actual senate floor debate for reference.

Quantity of Args

Quantity of arguments is not as important as the strength of your arguments.

Evidence

I'm not listening just to check off that you used sources. Use your sources to add credibility to the argument.

Parli Pro

You MUST know parliamentary procedure in this event! Show me but don't delay us with frivolous motions.

Clash

Speakers should incorporate some direct clash on the issues previously brought up by others. Avoid repetition of other speakers' points.

Questioning

Ask purposeful, straightforward questions. Challenge the speaker on their knowledge of the topic.

Extemp:

I evaluate rounds based on three things in the following order for priority:

1. Structure- Please please please have at least a basic structure to your speech; if I cannot follow your speech I cannot give feedback or evaluate your speech. But in more competitive tournaments/rounds substructure and micro/macrostructure are important and will be rewarded.
2. Speaking- This is a speaking event primarily and I will judge accordingly. Make sure you are confident and have your own style. You should seem confident and your mood should convey the subject of the speech. Just be a good speaker. Minimal fluency issues (filler words, stumbles, speech breaks) will be understood as the nature of limited prep, but after multiple or if it’s obsessive or distracting I will dock you. Variety is also important
3. Analysis- This more important in competitive rooms. Source quality, content depth of analysis will be rewarded and will make you stand out in a room where everyone is a good speaker with structure.

Other than that just make sure you answer the question. I love this event and can’t wait to see your speech.

Congress:

For congress I don’t necessarily prioritize certain things I just compile them for my ranks:

Content: strong and unique args are valued. Your speech should have powerful rhetoric that engages me and convinces me you are the best speaker on your side and in the round.

Speaking: Similar to my extemp paradigm. Confidence, style, mood with minimal fluency issues will put you in a good spot. Your speech should be extemporaneous, please don’t read me a canned speech off of a paper. You are a congressperson, so act like one and not a debate kid. Your speech should be accessible to a layperson. I know minimal debate lingo, so don’t tell me about link/impact turns.

Clash: Overall the round should be an actual debate, so please further your side and address the other Rep’s args. Please know when to give your speech, round vision is super important. Early round- speech should be polished with strong args with beginning clash. Mid round- Deeper refutation, expanding on arguments, furthering debate, and offering new more unique args. Late round- crystallize and weigh. tell me why I am voting on your side and which arguments matter and have held up throughout the debate.

FOR POs : Have good chamber presence. I personally won’t keep up with recency and precedence, but I will read the room and check point of orders and with the parli. Make sure to minimize mistakes while also being as fast as possible. If you do this you will PROBABLY (not always) be ranked.

Interp:

Best speaker/performer(s) win. Make sure you have dynamic blocking and acting vocally, physically, and facially. Your performance should be genuine and believable. Other than that wow me with your performance.

Platform speech:

To be honest I’m less experienced with OO and INFO, but I will judge similarly to extemp, but your speech should be more entertaining and polished than extemp. Please be creative with your topic and what you say. Inform or persuade while also entertaining and telling your story.

Debate events:

I am genuinely sorry if I am your CX/LD/PF judge because I am lay, so explain it in simpler terms. Write my RFD for me using simpler debate lingo. DO NOT SPREAD, if I do not understand you minimum speaks and you will usually lose.

• I believe content is the heart of any speech, and its potency lies in its ability to inform, inspire, and engage. From captivating anecdotes to thought-provoking statistics, every element should serve a purpose in driving the narrative forward. As an Extemporaneous Speaker, competitors should be able to enforce their content with valid and timely sources. These sources must be part of the presentation.

• Delivery is the vessel through which content is conveyed, and its impact cannot be overstated. From vocal modulation to body language, mastering delivery techniques is essential for commanding attention and conveying confidence. By practicing articulation, pacing, and posture, we elevate our presence in the room we leave a mark on listeners.

• Authenticity is the cornerstone of effective communication. Audiences can sense sincerity from a mile away, and it is our genuine passion and conviction that truly connect us with them. By embracing vulnerability, sharing personal insights, and speaking from the heart, we forge authentic connections that transcend the boundaries of rhetoric.

As a IE judge I look for a clean and polished performance. Good Analysis and Interpretation of characters and a powerful performance.

For Speaking events - Structure and Sources are important as well as a polished performance.

For Debate - LD I prefer a traditional format and value debate. PF I want to see clash, evidence and a clear job going down the flow to show rebuttals of arguments.

I am conflicted with Cypress Park High School

I am a coach and teach my kids the traditional formats of speech and debate for all events.

Congress: I am looking for an AGD and proper sign posting in the introduction. I want to see evidence for each point and clash unless you are the first speaker. I don't want to see you bring up a laptop. You should use a paper tablet. Make sure you leave time for a short conclusion. Make sure your pacing and verbiage are in a conversational manner. Answering questions are just as important, make sure you know the topic thoroughly. Activity in the chamber is also important, especially when I'm trying to break ties in my mind. Make sure your questions are well thought out before asking.

Lincoln-Douglas: As stated above, I teach the traditional format for LD Debate. I expect value, value criterion, contentions, warrants, and impacts. If you were taught policy jargon, make sure and convert it to LD Debate format. I do not want spreading. Make good sound arguments. The person who upholds their framework will win the round.

Public Forum: As stated, I am a teacher/coach and I teach and expect traditional form of debate. PF is intended for anyone to be able to judge, therefore, use evidence for your facts and provided impacts to your points. There should be no policy/LD jargon in PF debate. There should be NO spreading in PF debate.

Speaking Events: I am much better at judging Extemp, Original Oratory, and Informative speaking events over the interp events. However, I have judged all interp events at local, state, and national levels.

I tend to be a more traditional judge, but that does not mean I oppose different styles of LD Debate. While I am not fully accustomed to CX-style debate in LD, I am comfortable with CX arguments. If you feel more comfortable running policy arguments, go for it. It won’t impact your ballot simply because it is policy.

Spreading: I’m pretty comfortable with spreading, but if I can’t understand you, I will put my pen down and stop flowing your arguments.

Impacts/voters: Please weigh your impacts in your final rebuttal! Give voters! If you don’t tell me why I should vote for you based on the arguments in the round, I will default to your opponent's voters.

Overall, keep it classy. I will dock major speaker points if I feel a competitor is deliberately attacking their opponent.

OO/INFO/Extemp:

As long as the speech is organized and easy to follow, how you organize it is up to you. I know there are different standards everywhere. Make sure you back up your points and arguments with sufficient evidence!

INTERP:

I have no preference for how you put together your piece as long as it helps the plot structure overall. I love good character work! While pops and tricks are nice, what really wins me over is getting lost in the character's story when it is genuine.