Jump to content
latinmajorac

Did i make the right decision?

Recommended Posts

i was judging a 2-2 round at novice nats at woodward. the coach for the negative team was sitting and watching the entire round (something that pisses me off on its own) but anyways, this is how the round broke down

 

1AC Wire Tapping with Prez Powers bad

 

1NC plan flaw (there was a typo in the plan text of the 1ac), XO CP (Prez powers good, AND the typo was eliminated), Midterms, and Hollow hope

 

2AC does an excellent jobn of answering everything. EXCEPT hollow hope. she didn'ty know it was there or something. Said that the CP didn't solve the case and read 3 more turns to the CP on the CP flow

 

2NC gets up and says "2 reasons we win, 1. the CP solves the case and 2. they DROP HOLLOW HOPE". she procedes to answer the CP and Plan Flaw arguments, Never getting back to the hollow hope flow

 

1NR reads the midterm stuff. goes to hollow hope. extends the tags of all the cards she read in the 1NC, EXCEPT the 'Impact' (it really only worked as a case turn AT BEST)

 

1AR reads 3 new turns on hollow hope, answers tghe rest of the flows quite well, continues to harp that the CP doesn't solve case and gives excellent (compared to other novice debaters) impact analysis on the prez power bad stuff.

 

2NR gets up, goes for everything. never says that new in the 1AR is bad, never explains why them dropping the holow hope DA is bad, (or even explains the impacts in the round of it). does a not so good of job explaining the impacts on prez power

 

2AR gets up, answers everything, great analysis on the prez power flow

 

i vote affirmative on the CP not solving case and that prez power is bad

 

theiur coach reads me the riot act becaus ei voted for a case with external turns that o unanswered, and that new 1AR arguments are bad.

 

thoughts and comments? did i make the right decision?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, if they didn't make the argument, why vote for it? I mean, you don't intrinisically "know" that new in the 1AR is bad; it's up to the debaters to make that arg. If they don't, it's their own fault. Otherwise it's interventionism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, I think coach arguments with a judge over a decision are stupid, it's the functional equivalent of a baseball coach yelling at an ump - they just do it to vent, not because they think it will make you change your decision. So don't sweat that.

 

And, if they didn't make the argument how can you vote on it?

 

Sounds to me like you made a good decision, especially if you weighed the impact of the turns against the impact of the case and the case's ability to solve the harms.

 

H.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the aff really did do the work on weighing pres powers bad i could imagine your decision would be very legit based off impact calculus alone because the hollow hope impacts are generally not very good (much less if they don't bother explaining it as it seems they did this round)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds legit to me. There is no reason that new in the 1AR is bad unless they say it and it sounds like the impact analysis justified the ballot.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for the thoughts everyone. it makes me feel better. that woman really madfe me upset that i somehow screwed up really badly. i dont' think coaches should be in the back of the room, or that they should argue with judges. it reflects poorly on them as a school/person

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thanks for the thoughts everyone. it makes me feel better. that woman really madfe me upset that i somehow screwed up really badly. i dont' think coaches should be in the back of the room, or that they should argue with judges. it reflects poorly on them as a school/person

 

I don't know what I think about the back of the room thing. I often step in to watch speeches/rounds because I want to see how my kids handle things, but I rarely, if ever make comments about the round. And if I do they are usually hypotheticals like, had we made this argument (which I know we didn't) how would it interact with your decision.

 

I agree though, the type of arguing you're describing gives a lot of us bad names.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For you to have picked up the neg would have been hella judge intervention. The neg should have picked up/explained why dropping Hollow Hope and stuff was a voter.

 

Like, in theory, this coach would have gotten angry @ your for not voting for the neg on a dropped T if the neg never read a voter. They have to impact that shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think u made the right decision but if i was u and the coach argued with me, i would have told him to go teach his team first for doing such a horrible job even for novices. its almost the end of season and they should know better abt the dropped impacts and not answering 1AR. i would have probably dissed the coach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have voted Aff (I'm writing this before reading what everyone else has already said). Neg doesn't say new in the 1AR is bad, 2NR mishandles the turns and doesn't impact the one thing in the round they're winning...yeah, I can see why that would justify an Aff ballot. I can sympathize, believe me--I tend to feel uncomfortable when a coach is watching the round, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily have a problem with a coach watching a round that I judge, it does tend to happen semi-frequently in novice rounds, though I haven't judged many of those this past year (woohoo!...sorry, novices aren't bad but I much prefer to here some K debates and that doesn't happen terribly often in noviland in MN). I guess if they want to watch that's fine, and if they want to ask me questions regarding my decision I'm fine with that too, just so long as the coach doesn't start telling me I made the WRONG decision. Most coaches have asked me before, about decisions I've made and after explaining it to them, even in rounds that they've watched, they understand my paradigm a bit better and once they grasp my paradigm they can generally understand why I made the decision I did.

 

However, it sounds like this lady was a nutcase and stepped a little far out of her bounds. It's only Novice Nats, not the end of the world :-)

 

Mandie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think the aff had won that one. i competed @ that tournament. i debated a team with their two coaches in the back of the room. we lost. the judge voted on a counterplan that the negative conceeded in the 2nr.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's an easy aff decision:

1. No impact to the disad and case impact analysis means case outweighs since the aff is winning c/p doesn't solve case.

2. The turns in the 1AR are legit, reading rights malthus new in the 1AR is legit, :D seriously though, if they don't say its bad to make new 1AR args and impact that, (i.e. new 1AR args moot the block, kills neg ground) then its interventionist not to evaluate them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coaches shouldn't argue with judges. (Neither should debaters).

 

I watch my teams debate pretty frequently, though. We don't get a lot of practice rounds, so pretty much the only chance I have to see if they are getting better or learning what they need to improve on is by sitting in the back of a round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's great when novice coaches have a chance to watch an entire round. It's the best way to assess how the novices are actually doing. Simply getting feedback from the novices usually results in more confusion than understanding (although in a way that can be indicative of certain problems like with terminology etc). Ballots and talking to the judges are more useful, but often only provide a very limited picture of the round, and only show what that particular judge thought was important which may or may not be the skills you are interested in developing as a novice coach. Most coaches have to judge or are otherwise unable to watch rounds, but it's great when they can. As a judge i enjoy having a coach watching the round, it makes me feel like the debaters are going to get an educational experience from the round rather than just focusing on the Win or Loss and ignoring what actually happened. Sure it can be intimidating, but so are a lot of experiences judging (first time on a panel, first time getting sat on a panel, judging a team you know could have beaten you, judging a team that actually did beat you....)

 

Even worse than the coaches who argue with the judge after the decision is made...

Novice year, I remember debating in a round where not only did the other team's coach watch the entire round, but proceeded to give an oral critique before the judge had completed her ballot (I'll give the judge the benefit of the doubt that the decision had already been made but the judge was definetly still writing on the ballot).

The nice part-my partner and I still won that round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...