The best debaters combine argumentation, analysis, persuasion, and presentation skills in delivering well-researched cases and refuting opponents’ arguments with responsive evidence.

Speaking rate / speed - An effective debater need not speak at an unintelligible rate. Superior argumentation skills may be demonstrated through argument choice.

Judge background - former college debater (nationals competitor), licensed attorney, high school speech and debate coach.

Hello,

I am a student at the University of Oklahoma. Prior to college, I competed in speech and debate events for 8 years. My main events were LD, PF, DEX (a little FEX), PO, PR, SO and I went to nationals for world schools debate.

What I look for in debate rounds:

Civility. If you can not be civil in the round, you are not truly debating. It is okay to be passionate, but it is not okay to be rude.

Clarity. I do not want to struggle to understand you, your point, or what you are referring to.

What I look for in speech events:

Emotion. I want to feel something. If it's a humorous piece, I want to laugh. If it is dramatic, I want to feel the sorrow.

Quality selection. If you are doing a piece or a topic I have heard a million times, chances are you are not the best rendition I've ever heard. If you are doing a piece and someone else in the room is doing a similar one you will automatically be pitted against each other, so be wary of using common pieces/authors.

Overall, have fun. If you care about what you are doing, I promise it will show.

Best of luck.

I mostly judge Lincoln Douglas, but I have coached all events offered by the NSDA and the OSSAA. I was the coach at Cascia Hall from 2007-2021 and have worked at the Tulsa Debate League since 2023.

I am more comfortable with a more traditional style of debate, but will make my best effort to judge the round in front of me, even if it isn't stylistically what I am most comfortable with. That being said, no matter what style you prefer, debate is pretty much the same. Tell me how to make an evaluation and then tell me why you win under that evaluation.

If you have more specific questions, I'm happy to answer them before the round begins if all competitors are present.

I am a former national qualifier in both LD (2014) and USX (2015 and 2016); I'm now a PhD student in the biomedical sciences. I still regularly read domestic news and semi-regularly read world news. I do not keep up with debate arguments anymore, and I do not coach in any capacity -- so please make the topic at hand clear to me.

When it comes to extemp, I am traditional: give me a good speech, standing, with no notecard, and you will do swimmingly.

When it comes to debate, I am most familiar with value debate with a clear framework. I weigh the framework and contentions equally, and want debaters to cover the flow in its entirety. A dropped argument is a lost argument. I do not have experience with the funkier arguments -- if you are using a K or some kind of theory, I will need you to explain it to me without too much jargon. (NB: I am fine with and happy to hear out progressive argumentation, but it must be clear, good, and not abusive to your opponent)

I have little to no experience with policy debate. Similarly, I believe that debate is, at its core, a communication activity. Therefore I do not value speed, nor do I value putting excessive arguments on the flow.

NB: please make the citations for your evidence clear to me - as a researcher, I highly value accuracy and authenticity of sources. If you cannot provide your evidence with full citation and highlighting (if applicable) to me or your opponent if asked, I will strike it from the round.

Debate is fundamentally a speaking competition in which the art of rhetoric is utilized – speaking effectively to persuade or influence the judge.

As such, please do not speak at a pace that is not understandable to the average person or read arguments that are detached from the resolution in question.

It is your job as a debater to persuade me, meaning you also carry the responsibility to explain all the arguments presented.

I request that you maintain a healthy relationship with evidence - if you are going to make a claim, support it with evidence. Alternatively, if your opponent states something that is within the canon of common knowledge, please do not demand that they cite it. (i.e. do not demand evidence for the claim that Paris is the capital of France.)

Provide clear voters and an explanation of why you should win the round.

Ask any other clarification questions before the round!