Jump to content
bond1

Breaking New Affs

Recommended Posts

hey, I will be participating at the California State tournament, and I was wondering if it would be a good idea to break a new aff/how often to do so. I mean, should I use the same aff I have used all year through this tournament, and if not how often should I switch out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hey, I will be participating at the California State tournament, and I was wondering if it would be a good idea to break a new aff/how often to do so. I mean, should I use the same aff I have used all year through this tournament, and if not how often should I switch out?

 

It all really depends on the magnitude of the tournament and whether or not you'd be comfortable breaking and running a new aff. If you want to break a new aff, you can either use your current plan with new advantages or something completely different.

Some teams run the same aff the entire year and are successful with it throughout, some teams run the same aff with different advantages, and some teams switch up their aff every few months or for major tournaments.

 

During a tournament, it would be better to break a new aff either in elims or against teams that you know are well prepared against your old case. Otherwise, you'd probably be more comfortable with your old aff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hey, I will be participating at the California State tournament, and I was wondering if it would be a good idea to break a new aff/how often to do so. I mean, should I use the same aff I have used all year through this tournament, and if not how often should I switch out?

 

Since it's a fairly important tournament (state), what I would do is break one aff for prelims or use the aff you've used all year, then break a new one for outrounds. If it's looking like you either won't clear or it's going to be close, BREAK THE AFF YOU BROUGHT FOR OUTROUNDS IN YOUR FINAL AFF ROUND!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two biggest disadvantages of breaking a new affirmative. Often when people do so they don't have 2ac blocks (whether for T or for common disad, critique, or counterplan arguments) which are specific to the new affirmative.

 

Second, you sacrifice your time spent with the case ratio to the negative. For instance, you may have had 20 to 40 rounds arguing the ins and outs of your affirmative.

 

What happens versus various types of negative teams you will debate?

 

1) the critique team- you're probably inevitably going to link to capitalism and biopower--unless your new affirmative positions you for the impact turn you haven't changed much. (although you may live in a region where the link turn and perm combination affirmative strategy works)

2) the counterplan team with specific net benefit--they'll probably run their agent counterplan...or if it doesn't link they will move to consult or some backfile check strategy like malthus (or the K)

3) the counterplan team with politics net benefit--how does your affirmative change this?

4) other types of teams in your area--given I'm not in your area--you will have to answer this one for yourself.

 

This isn't to say don't break a new aff--but rather there are alternatives--like making your old affirmative better (new advantages or going more in depth on a particular advantage to pre-empt the K you are losing to--say capitalism).

 

Also, you're affirmative is only as good as your 2ac blocks. Great 2ac blocks set up soooo much in a debate.

Edited by nathan_debate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that Greenhill ran a new case every round two years ago at the TOC. They won.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Remember that Greenhill ran a new case every round two years ago at the TOC. They won.

 

There are counterexamples going the other way as well--both in terms of success with single case years and with failures with running new affs for no reason.

 

Good arg. So my statements apply to generally to teams excluding teams that get out at TOC bid tournaments.

 

Remember they are Greenhill.

 

My premise is simply:

1) Write good 2ac blocks

2) If you run a new aff--do so with a very strategic purpose

3) Know what you're getting into (Practice rounds before hand, talking with people who have run the case before, research, and writing 2ac blocks are probably the best way to do this)

Edited by nathan_debate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hey, I will be participating at the California State tournament, and I was wondering if it would be a good idea to break a new aff/how often to do so. I mean, should I use the same aff I have used all year through this tournament, and if not how often should I switch out?

 

I'd normally agree with pretty much all the advice on the thread. There are a lot of pros and cons of breaking out a new aff but most of those apply on the circuit. aka one of the biggest risks is the neg reads their generic stuff that they're really good at like wipeout (and that they might have run anyways) with the added disadvantage of not having the experience with the new aff.

 

The CA State Tournament gets ripped on every year I've been involved in the community and here's the common complaint: you have all lay rounds. In fact they intentionally make it that way. What's the difference? To be successful at state you need case arguments, sound persuasive and talk purty, and/or generic neg strategies easily explainable to a lay judge.

 

This is where a new aff is golden. They won't have case arguments if it really is new. If you wrote a good new aff, most of their generics they have just in case won't apply so if you suck in sounding persuasive and talking pretty you have a much better shot. If you planned on winning (and if I qualed any teams this year I would be working on this myself) I'd cut new affs to break out every round, at least 3.

 

The neg has a greater likelihood of convincing the bus driver / parent / IE coach to eat his/her ballot than to vote on malthus or wipeout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The two biggest disadvantages of breaking a new affirmative. Often when people do so they don't have 2ac blocks (whether for T or for common disad, critique, or counterplan arguments) which are specific to the new affirmative.

 

Second, you sacrifice your time spent with the case ratio to the negative. For instance, you may have had 20 to 40 rounds arguing the ins and outs of your affirmative.

 

...

 

Also, you're affirmative is only as good as your 2ac blocks. Great 2ac blocks set up soooo much in a debate.

 

For once, I agree with nathan_debate. There are a few really stellar teams that can run a brand new Aff every round and win (hell, there are probably a few that could win on a case made from cards drawn randomly as they speak), but they are the rare few. Being familiar with the case that's gotten you this far is an incredible asset; you already know your weak points and how to answer attacks on them. In fact, you may have left some "weak" points unfixed simply because the answers you developed are so strong that you want opponents to try to attack you there...

 

Even the teams that use a new Aff every time would generally do even better if they had season-long experience with the case.

 

Particularly if you have never switched Affs mid-tournament, I suggest that states probably isn't the time to start. But if you try it, consider swapping out elements of your standard Aff, rather than the whole thing (e.g. different Advantage scenarios, different evidence authors/sources, different agent of action, etc.).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Breaking a new aff can be pretty strategic if you've spent lot of time writing blocks and frontlines for common arguments. I would also suggest having practice rounds running your new aff against team mates who want to help you. That way you have some experience reading it.

 

One last thought, you should be mindful of who you are going to break the aff against. If you have intel that you're hitting a team who always goes for a really generic K or some other generic strategy (XO, Consult, etc) then you're probably better off saving it for another round because reading a new aff is unlikely to give you some sort of strategic advantage.

 

That being said, its an absolute necessity that you have Agent CP's and other generic CP's blocked out, because when hitting a new aff most teams will default to a some sort of CP/DA strat so they're guaranteed to solve the case.

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...