Jump to content
lenin's ghost

Most Neg Biased Topic Ever

Recommended Posts

While yes, the negative literature on the topic far surpasses the affirmative literature; I disagree on you r last comment. There are incredible amounts of awesome aff cases. I think the word 'presence' in the resolution makes the aff open to too many cases in my eyes. Not to mention the "hidden" literature on police.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neg is overpowered (13 minute block way too OP, ability to frame the debate), aff needs a buff and neg needs a nerf

 

Judges need to vote aff on the basis of side bias

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While yes, the negative literature on the topic far surpasses the affirmative literature; I disagree on you r last comment. There are incredible amounts of awesome aff cases. I think the word 'presence' in the resolution makes the aff open to too many cases in my eyes. Not to mention the "hidden" literature on police.

 

Sure, i'll agree that there are a lot of theoretical affs in the sense that presence is wide open, but none of those affs are "viable" for a few reasons.

 

A) A good deal of them aren't substantial

 

B) Advantage counterplans wreck creative affs

 

C) PICs devastate affs that might be able to give an advantage counterplan a solvency deficit.

 

D) Aff lit is bad on the link level. Their DA's will link harder than your advantages

 

E) Even if your aff somehow magically has good matchups against some of the above strategies, it won't have good answers to consult.

 

There are, in my mind, around 3 exceptions to this. Generically Withdraw from Japan. Generically Withdraw from South Korea. COIN. These affs have some really really good literature on them, the size necessary to beat advantage counterplans, the coherence necessary to beat PICs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Judges need to vote aff on the basis of side bias

 

RFD: To sum up the debate, you won because you lost.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B) Advantage counterplans wreck creative affs

 

C) PICs devastate affs that might be able to give an advantage counterplan a solvency deficit.

Multipe advantag counterplans "wreck" creative affirmatives.

 

Advantage counterplans make it viable to be negative. I'm not sure why I think about multiple advantage counterplans.

 

Certain types of PICs devastate affs (regional pics, time pics, process pics, and agent pics.) PICs in and of themselves...perhaps not so much. A very small caveat. Pics still allow you to

1) Impact turn the net benefit

2) Turn the solvency

3) Run an add-on which ultimately amounts to #1 or #2.

 

If the neg didn't have pics...they would probably run Ks all the time. Those debates would be awesome. (I'm kidding...even though I used run and coach teams to run the K). Although I would probably rather watch K debates over consult (its a special case).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eh. If next year's topic is space negs will win 60-70% of all rounds.

 

It was certainly the most neg biased topic I've ever debated (the last time, obviously). We always flipped neg in elim rounds, and that was the only period in my career that I was even tempted to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Multipe advantag counterplans "wreck" creative affirmatives.

 

Advantage counterplans make it viable to be negative. I'm not sure why I think about multiple advantage counterplans.

 

Certain types of PICs devastate affs (regional pics, time pics, process pics, and agent pics.) PICs in and of themselves...perhaps not so much. A very small caveat. Pics still allow you to

1) Impact turn the net benefit

2) Turn the solvency

3) Run an add-on which ultimately amounts to #1 or #2.

 

If the neg didn't have pics...they would probably run Ks all the time. Those debates would be awesome. (I'm kidding...even though I used run and coach teams to run the K). Although I would probably rather watch K debates over consult (its a special case).

 

I certainly don't think that those arguments are illegitimate. I simply feel that they are particularly effective on this topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My impression of every high school debater on the topic:

 

"It's too hard to debate about the military!"

 

why?

 

"there are like EIGHT COUNTERPLANS"

 

so cut answers to all of them, have an add-on for certainty, and have an add-on to read against consult counterplans

 

"but that's like TWENTY CARDS"

 

yes.

 

"NO ONE CAN RESEARCH THAT MUCH ITS IMPOSSIBLE"

 

[/impression]

 

summary: you complain because you're too slow and don't cut enough cards. Cut more cards, get faster, read the wiki.

 

 

 

 

tl;dr - The Taj Mahal was originally called the Rauza-I Munavvara which means “Tomb of Light.”

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My impression of every high school debater on the topic:

 

"It's too hard to debate about the military!"

 

why?

 

"there are like EIGHT COUNTERPLANS"

 

so cut answers to all of them, have an add-on for certainty, and have an add-on to read against consult counterplans

 

"but that's like TWENTY CARDS"

 

yes.

 

"NO ONE CAN RESEARCH THAT MUCH ITS IMPOSSIBLE"

 

[/impression]

 

summary: you complain because you're too slow and don't cut enough cards. Cut more cards, get faster, read the wiki.

 

 

 

 

tl;dr - The Taj Mahal was originally called the Rauza-I Munavvara which means “Tomb of Light.”

 

There's no reason to be presumptuous and rude. My argument isn't even about a research burden, it's about strategy. In a community that is getting more and more neg friendly on arguments like advantage counterplan + politics, the more generic nature of many aff impacts on the topic limits the number of affs that are strategic. I'm fairly proud of my ability to research and I think its probably a bad thing that you think you can call me slow and dumb without even presuming to know me. Disagree if you like, but don't be a dick.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think he's calling you slow or a terrible researcher (or maybe he is, I obviously don't know him other than debating him once).

 

What I think he is saying is, the neg bias isn't nearly as big or as devastating as you think it is. People said the same thing about last year's college topic (nuclear weapons), but smart research and add-ons allowed affirmatives to minimize or at least reduce that bias (in fact the Michigan State won the NDT on the aff, and Oklahoma won CEDA on the aff).

 

I'm not saying the bias doesn't exist, but you're making it seem like it's impossible to be affirmative unless you read one of the three affs you mentioned, which is simply not true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that there seems to have been a large shift in the direction of counter-plan debate this year. A lot of counter-plans like conditions, consult, or other counter-plans that don't compete with the text of the plan seem to be a lot more accepted.

 

One huge advantage that the affs on this topic seem do have though that I don't feel is being utilized enough is that the aff controls uniqueness a lot of the time for their scenarios. Japan probably wants us out, shit is going down on the Korean peninsula, Afghanistan is going horribly. Even if you were going to read a smaller version of these bigger stick affs, you probably control uniqueness to a lot of your terminal impacts.

 

This means you probably have a pretty convincing 2AR try or die story assuming you have a good timeframe component to your aff and 2NR uniqueness defense is absent. It also means the neg can't turn the case if you control uniqueness to your advantages.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why critical affs are a must... especially on this topic.

when you can add and remove which author you want a plan to center around, you could easily have about 5-10 versions of the same aff, geared towards specific teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Affs have been too quick to abandon their 1ACs unless they are running something critical. They also seem be unwilling to go for hard disad turns and instead have gone for weak ass uniqueness arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's no reason to be presumptuous and rude. My argument isn't even about a research burden, it's about strategy. In a community that is getting more and more neg friendly on arguments like advantage counterplan + politics, the more generic nature of many aff impacts on the topic limits the number of affs that are strategic. I'm fairly proud of my ability to research and I think its probably a bad thing that you think you can call me slow and dumb without even presuming to know me. Disagree if you like, but don't be a dick.

 

I had a humorous little mock skit written up where I called you a tool, but it's easier just to type this sentence.

 

My god, an advantage counterplan plus politics?!?!?! it's so revolutionary! it's so impossible to debate! it's not like we could expect the aff to just write answers to relevant advantage counterplans and stay ahead of the politics debate by reading some 1AR cards. That would be patently absurd.

 

PICs, specific Ks, advantage counterplans, consult and conditions CPs: all of these appear every single year. In college sometimes you have to deal with all 5 of those in the same 1NC. No one cries, no one says there is an unfair neg bias, people just cut cards and write answers.

 

If anything, this topic is absurdly aff biased because no one can say the opposite of the plan is true with any credibility. If affs are particularly generic, it's their own fault. I guess the camps failed us this year, too bad only the cream of the crop innovate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This from the guy whose idea of innovation is a new D+G card. hmm.

 

Clearly you have no idea how successful Steven is on the college circuit sans D+G. He was part of the (only, to my knowledge) team that had at least one (much less two) freshman on it that got out of the d3 district tournament last year. How much DnG was going on? Approximately 0. Winning the OU tournament? 100% less DnG than you insinuate. Beating Texas CM? 100% less DnG and 100% more framework.

 

Is Steven good at Deleuze and Guattari? Probably, I hear he's quite successful with it, but have never debated against him myself. Is Steven by any means one-dimensional? You're out of your damn mind if you think that.

 

One more thing: Murray, Colin and I bitch every time there's *two* of those in the 1nc, they're CONDITIONAL FOR CHRIST'S SAKE! Imagine if all 5 were there. We'd be FUCKED.

Edited by Studley Dudley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clearly you have no idea how successful Steven is on the college circuit sans D+G. He was part of the (only, to my knowledge) team that had at least one (much less two) freshman on it that got out of the d3 district tournament last year. How much DnG was going on? Approximately 0. Winning the OU tournament? 100% less DnG than you insinuate. Beating Texas CM? 100% less DnG and 100% more framework.

 

Is Steven good at Deleuze and Guattari? Probably, I hear he's quite successful with it, but have never debated against him myself. Is Steven by any means one-dimensional? You're out of your damn mind if you think that.

 

One more thing: Murray, Colin and I bitch every time there's *two* of those in the 1nc, they're CONDITIONAL FOR CHRIST'S SAKE! Imagine if all 5 were there. We'd be FUCKED.

 

I was more referring to the files he's produced for high schoolers. I have no doubt he is much more successful than I am and he may very well be more intelligent, i've never met the guy. I simply doubt that his perception of this particular high school topic is correct given that he's simply using insults to indicate that I don't understand it as well as he does. Considering he hasn't even debated on it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was more referring to the files he's produced for high schoolers. I have no doubt he is much more successful than I am and he may very well be more intelligent, i've never met the guy. I simply doubt that his perception of this particular high school topic is correct given that he's simply using insults to indicate that I don't understand it as well as he does. Considering he hasn't even debated on it...

 

Yeah, it's not like he judges it, or coaches it, or ran a camp for it, nothing like that.

 

Yes, he produces DnG files for highschoolers. Want to know why? He's one of the only people that can cut those cards that's willing to do so. And it makes him a shitload of money. Politics updates? Everyone else does it, it's not a corner/niche market. PICs? Great, maybe a few teams buy it because really, who is going to pay for it on Evazon when either a) the product description will be "got a GREAT PIC for Japan guys!!!!!!' or B) Give away the line of thinking of the PIC like "Hey guys, great PIC for Japan, removes all of our bases except X_______ base. Great net benefit!" Oh shit, now people can a) research why that base is soooo good and cut the PIC themselves B) spend $12 on a 20 page 1-shot PIC file or c) Cut answers to the thesis of the PIC.

 

Yes, what he sells on evazon may not be the most original work on the topic because the most original work on the topic doesn't sell like hotcakes. Stupid arguments like DnG do because everyone wants to be on the "fringe" of the K debate.

 

Steven's not a bad high-school strategist, he's just a great businessman (and gentleman and scholar).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I judged six rounds this weekend: neg won four times, aff won twice. Teams that I coach appeared in six break rounds; of these, neg won five times, aff won once. That's a 9-3 split for the neg.

 

You certainly can win as an affirmative on this topic. But even though my sample size is admittedly small, it seems that negatives retain a substantial advantage this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...