Powers,+Katlyn

toc =6/28/2011=

Practice Round 1

1A –Brandon/ 2A- Katlyn vs 1N-Josh/ 2N-Blaize 2AC/Katlyn

Too much time spend rearticulating the 1nc arguments and then also work on 2ac efficiency drills. You can group the 1nr numbers 1 ---3 (the author indicts) and talk about how your evidence is strong/qualified. Especially your solvency evidence. Watch out for repeating phrasing like “pull the card”. A quicker way is “extend the ev” and then tell us the warrant. You do an excellent job knowing what your evidence says but you need to be more concise in the 2ac. The 2AR is where you want to wax poetic on all the specifics of each argument you are going for. Always aim for vertical proliferation.

Good job numbering your answers on the Disad. To help everyone flow try to alternate analytical (or non carded arguments) with a carded argument in between. You do a good job of indicted their uniquess cards to prove while it would overwhelm the link. Good change in voice inflection to differentiate tags from the text of cards—you are very clear and quick.

Use more logical arguments about why their impacts are empirically denied and overblown lines. The biggest lie in debate is always the impacts, so make sure you address all DA impacts specifically while simultaneously remembering to extend your affirmative impacts. Try to put more arguments on the Debris DA. You spend too much time on buget.

2AR-Katlyn Great thinking to start with Impact Calc. Extending your 1ac Advs are important. Try to do a little more work why your case impacts will come quickly (ie- before any risk of the DA) and also why your impacts end in the BIGGEST change (hopefully extinction)

Good job answering specific 2NR arguments with carded answers. To mae this even stronger, point out where these arguments first appeared, and how they were ignored/conceded and should be evaluated with full weigh. Watch out for saying “pull across” too much. Use “Extend ___ (authors name and warrant) along with its original 2ac number (for off case arguments) or 1nc order (for on case arguments)

Point out how they don’t kick out of the budget DA properly. If you have any turns about how the plan says money and keeps the budget process on track to use this misstep by the negative to generate the most offense for your affirmative.

If their impacts (like from weaponization) are inevitable, then why should we do the aff? Are their short term benefits. How does this complicate the rest of your impacts? Excellent delivery skills.

=6/29/2011= You are making smart arguments and have good answers to CX questions but I feel as though you could speak with more conviction. Impact your arguments more, and make sure you are not giving them any leeway on link defense. Good job explaining the impacts to your DAs, but in the future I would recommend only going for one of them in the 1NR. I know it sounds odd, but this will put more pressure on the 1AR because the extension will have more time involved. You can carefully discuss their evidence and frontload all of the 2NR impact calculus in your speech if this is the case. If your partner goes for one of the DAs this will help his speech immensely.

Tim

=7/7/11=

Explain how SPS is key to solve the impacts they concede on case. Also, when extending those impacts, explain why they outweigh the other impacts in the debate round rather than just listing them. Always make a no solvency argument on the CP. Make sure not to reiterate the negative’s argument when answering it. I think you should work on efficiency and speed–there are pauses between arguments and flows that I think could be smaller (more so on the CP than the DA). Just say the part of the debate an arg is on (“on the link debate”, “on the uniqueness” etc). Really good job on impact calc on the DA, pro 2ac. Careful making args about NASA not being able to fix climate change in cx­–isn’t that the internal to ur advantage? Your overview on top of the 2ar is muuuuuuuuuuch better than the impact calc you have in the 2ac. I think you should try frame it as what happens if you vote for the CP/DA. Good job on the line by line on the DA, make sure you articulate your turn as offense, as opposed to two separate arguments, and explain the impact to winning the turn. I don’t think you should go for theory at all (waste of time unless you’re going for it all the way [twss]).