Jump to content
King_of_Crunk089

Why Speed

Why did you start to speed read?  

163 members have voted

  1. 1. Why did you start to speed read?

    • I wanted to win
    • Everyone else was doing it
    • To increase my short term memory
    • To get more out


Recommended Posts

I see fast debate as just another interest that people partake in. Some people like slow debate and others like fast debate. Some love to have a solid critical strat while others prefer counterplan and/or politics debates. Its just a taste that one finds while participating. Its not so much eilitism as it is a different interest that falls under the umbrella of debate as an activity. Some people take it to elitist extremes (on both ends, slow and fast) but i think most just want to debate the way that they feel most comfortable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My women can read faster ... except for the dyslexic one (she will work you over on the overview)

 

And word economy makes you sneaky fast. STOP SAYING LIKE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to agree with you oracle. the only people who will decend to a higher plain will be the almighty whites of the suppreme order. all unworthys, such as the blacks, mexicans, asians, native americans, muslims, and other unworldy damons will in good time be sent back to the pits of dessication from whince they were vometed forth from an eon ago. oracle you seem to be on the right track to salvation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did I personally start reading fast? Because it is a strategic choice in the round, to win more debates. However, unlike some people, I dont see this as a problem.

 

1. Speed allows more arguments to be made - as long as speech times are limited in debate, debaters will naturally speak faster - while argument quality is important, quantity is too, particularly on certain types of arguments.

 

2. Increases education - debating more stuff really is educational, and allows more to be discussed in a 90 minute round.

 

3. Not classist - anyone can learn to speak fast, you dont need to go to camp, all you need is to put aside 15 or 20 minutes a day to do drills, and you can learn how to do them on cross-x.

 

4. Doesnt favor national circuit debaters - even if people who primarily debate locally cant spread in front of some of their judges, when they compete against national circuit debaters the experience of the judge will ultimately determine how fast the round goes.

 

5. Doesnt decrease ability to understand - the more rounds you watch in which people talk fast, the easier it becomes to understand them.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just waiting for someone to post a pointed block to why they like to read fast. My dream has come true.

 

But anyhoo, I think the general reason that people speak fast in debate rounds is because it's a do-or-die situation. The problem seems to be that the contemporary judging paradigm (semi-tab) can't deal with anti-spread tactics. I've spread teams out on their 'speed bad' K and they were toast, purely because they weren't able to answer my args effectively whilst speaking at a conversational rate. Also, who knows where we set the line as to what good or bad speed is.

 

Also, it seems to me that 'slow' or 'alternative' forms of debate are much more popular and effective on the college circuit. Has anyone else gotten that impression? If so, do you know why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was just waiting for someone to post a pointed block to why they like to read fast. My dream has come true.

 

But anyhoo, I think the general reason that people speak fast in debate rounds is because it's a do-or-die situation. The problem seems to be that the contemporary judging paradigm (semi-tab) can't deal with anti-spread tactics. I've spread teams out on their 'speed bad' K and they were toast, purely because they weren't able to answer my args effectively whilst speaking at a conversational rate. Also, who knows where we set the line as to what good or bad speed is.

 

Also, it seems to me that 'slow' or 'alternative' forms of debate are much more popular and effective on the college circuit. Has anyone else gotten that impression? If so, do you know why?

thats really an interesting question.....why has college moved towards more slow, analysis oriented strategies and why has high school stayed stagnantly unprogressive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thats really an interesting question.....why has college moved towards more slow, analysis oriented strategies and why has high school stayed stagnantly unprogressive?

 

College is always a lot more progressive than highschool. Highschool is basically the waste by-product of college debate. I think that generally some K debaters have been making a splash by having a few huge really easy to understand well articulated arguments and the power of persuasion and oration lends itself much better to those types.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thats really an interesting question.....why has college moved towards more slow, analysis oriented strategies and why has high school stayed stagnantly unprogressive?

 

 

because ceda was coopted by ndt. depending on the highschool district speed probably doesn't really happen much anyway either because of community judges.

 

speed should always be an option but speed dependant teams are not sexy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea a few teams in college are all about persuasion and speaking slow is true, while the vast majority of competitve NDT teams are fast. Some teams perform free style and play music in their rounds. Some college judging pools require a slower and more persuasion based approach. All in all though, at CEDA Nats and the NDT you will see more fast than slow, especially in the late elims.

 

To me debate is not all about winning, but to claim like college is super progressive in terms of slow debate is silly. Most of those teams that embrace the slow do so for strtegic reasons and so they can access some particular arguments that relates to their chosen style. Once some teams answers those claims, they loose their umph.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's clear that most rounds in the NDT elims are fast- the question I'm asking is why teams like Louisville and Cal State Fullerton can make quarters of the NDT, but teams in HS like KCC who do 'alternative' debate (IE project/performance/slow) have more trouble picking up ballots. Is it something unique about the judge pool in college or what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is their objectivity that limited? Also, higher-tier tournaments often share at least part of the judging pools with the college circuit (IE Greenhill, St. Mark's, etc. often have a wide variety of people judging who are certainly qualified to be judging college rounds).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is their objectivity that limited? Also, higher-tier tournaments often share at least part of the judging pools with the college circuit (IE Greenhill, St. Mark's, etc. often have a wide variety of people judging who are certainly qualified to be judging college rounds).

faggot

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...