Bogan,+Brandon

toc =6/28/2011= 1A –Brandon/ 2A- Katlyn vs 1N-Josh/ 2N-Blaize

__1AC/Brandon__

You’re very clear with the tags and less so with the text of the card. Make sure to do speaking drills that focus on clearly enunciating each word when you spread. Watch out for mush mouth in the text of cards J Think about read the qualifications for your more qualified evidence with the strongest authors. This provides an inherent warrant about why your evidence should be preferred over a team that does read and focus on qualifications. Also try to lock up at the judge as much as you can by reading ahead and knowing what comes next in your evidence or as you switch between cards/tags. Eye contact is key to connecting with the judge and getting good speaker points. You have excellent charisma and eye contact will make judges like you even more. Excellent cross-x. You knew your evidence well

__1AR—Brandon__ Excellent speed and diversity of arguments. Don’t have a new “overview” on case. Instead just make those arguments at the top off your first 1nc argument. When extending case arguments refer to 1nc order and numbering. When you are answering DA’s always refer to the 2ac numerical structure.

=6/29/2011= You should be asking more strategic CX questions of the 1AC. Relate them to the arguments you are making. Let them explain their aff. You have become a much better line by line debater, and I appreciate your attention to impacting your arguments on the flow. On this K extension, I'm not sure you need an overview. It seems like you can explain the whole argument on the line by line and it will save you time. Put evidence throughout the flow and identify where the arguments fit in comparison to theirs. Also, learn different uses for your evidence so you can maximize their effect. For example, when you pass over the Kovel card because it says permutation in the tag- it's a perfectly good link argument as well. Your kick-outs on the K and the DA could be cleaner. Make sure you make the argument that if you win your case arguments they can't win any offense on the offcase flows.

Tim

=7/7/11=

Good job getting John to admit the contradiction on the DAs. I think you need to be spending more time explaining the impact to the arguments you’re extending. What does a non-unique mean? Just extending that the DAs non-u and ur card isn’t sufficient. Talk about things in contrast with the affirmative impact. I don’t think this theory argument is the best ever, you do a pretty good job extending it. I think (if you do wanna go for theory) you need to be very explicit about what you want me to do with it (do I reject the team? Reject the cp? Make sure you’re explicit). I think you do a good job deciphering the line by line on the CP and extending that it links to the NB. Make sure you extend a no solvency argument on the CP. You get much stronger as you go on in the speech. Move the impact calc you do at the end up to the top.