Jump to content
John Quinto

The 1AR

Recommended Posts

On aff, I'm the 2A since I feel that I need to be the one to give the 2AC/2AR since I'm the better of my team. However, I'm noticing my partner is having plenty of difficulty giving the 1AR because of the negative block. An example of this is at a recent tournament my opponents ran spending, ozone, ASPEC, two Ts, and On-case, which were all defended in the block. We had the cards to counter the arguments but my partner couldn't get to the ozone so we lost the round. Also, as a note I can spread, but my district frowns upon it and my partner can't. Does anyone has advice on giving the 1AR and should I switch to the 1A?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what we did was have the better spreader do the 1AR, for the 1AR try to have pre-made blocks and on answering arguments just attack 1 thing and move on. This way you or your partner should be able to get through all the arguments. Then you can go back and extend. Don't be afraid to underattack arguments as long as you didn't drop it. The 2AR should be able to extend upon the arguments made. Also try grouping and then attacking, instead of attacking each card just group them. For example if they read resource wars don't happen and resource wars good group them all and use 1 card to attack.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On aff, I'm the 2A since I feel that I need to be the one to give the 2AC/2AR since I'm the better of my team. However, I'm noticing my partner is having plenty of difficulty giving the 1AR because of the negative block. An example of this is at a recent tournament my opponents ran spending, ozone, ASPEC, two Ts, and On-case, which were all defended in the block. We had the cards to counter the arguments but my partner couldn't get to the ozone so we lost the round. Also, as a note I can spread, but my district frowns upon it and my partner can't. Does anyone has advice on giving the 1AR and should I switch to the 1A?

 

On the 1AR, if you or your partner have to answer a lot of arguments like the situation you mentioned, try not to read as many cards. Extend the cards from the 2AC for off-case and from the 1AC and the 2AC for on-case, because these are usually the strongest cards that you have. You shouldn't have to read that many cards in the 1AR, it's more making warranted arguments that are backed up by extended evidence. For example, they read an Ozone DA in the 1NC, you read a N-U, a no link, and an impact turn in the 2AC. In the Block, they extend the 1NC arguments and read some cards against those you read, say a couple more impacts, a uniqueness, and a link wall. In the 1AR, have your partner give warranted analysis on why the disadvantage is non-unique, why it doesn't link to your case, and why even if it did link, the impact isn't very bad. He shouldn't have to read cards if you read good cards in the 2AC. A lot of debaters use new cards too much and don't use evidence from their old speeches enough, make sure you don't do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the 1AR, if you or your partner have to answer a lot of arguments like the situation you mentioned, try not to read as many cards. Extend the cards from the 2AC for off-case and from the 1AC and the 2AC for on-case, because these are usually the strongest cards that you have. You shouldn't have to read that many cards in the 1AR, it's more making warranted arguments that are backed up by extended evidence. For example, they read an Ozone DA in the 1NC, you read a N-U, a no link, and an impact turn in the 2AC. In the Block, they extend the 1NC arguments and read some cards against those you read, say a couple more impacts, a uniqueness, and a link wall. In the 1AR, have your partner give warranted analysis on why the disadvantage is non-unique, why it doesn't link to your case, and why even if it did link, the impact isn't very bad. He shouldn't have to read cards if you read good cards in the 2AC. A lot of debaters use new cards too much and don't use evidence from their old speeches enough, make sure you don't do that.

 

What he said.

Also, its a good idea to have all of the common on case arguments & DAs blocked out with its 1ar extension in the aff case, so you can just pull out the pages with answers to whatever the 1nc reads as they read it.

 

eg: say your case is SPS

" (label on top) 2AC A2: Mil DA

1) no Uniquenss args

2) no link args

3) no impact arguments

4) a2 any common turns they put on case"

etc

 

then have

"(label on top) 1AR Mil DA extensions

1) they say __(neg's arguments against 2ac in block)____ but our _(evid from 2ac)_ evid from the 2ac says _(specific story in the card that the neg's card doesn't answer)___, meaning _(significance of what you just said in the round)__. you're going to prefer our ev cus this guy is _(why we listen to your evid author)_ while their author is just a _(derogatory, but legitimate title of their author)_.

 

1.5) any additional ev you want to read to bolster position

2) ... see #1"

and of course, your partner doesn't have to read everything in the extension blocks, just against important arguments that they make.

 

at least that's how my partner and I have been debating this season. any other ideas anyone?

Edited by RTFMF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And you also don't have to answer every argument they make on a DA, just the really important ones. If you could take out the link for sure, you wouldn't really need to answer any other arguments. (but that's just if you're going to be short on time.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On aff, I'm the 2A since I feel that I need to be the one to give the 2AC/2AR since I'm the better of my team. However, I'm noticing my partner is having plenty of difficulty giving the 1AR because of the negative block. An example of this is at a recent tournament my opponents ran spending, ozone, ASPEC, two Ts, and On-case, which were all defended in the block. We had the cards to counter the arguments but my partner couldn't get to the ozone so we lost the round. Also, as a note I can spread, but my district frowns upon it and my partner can't. Does anyone has advice on giving the 1AR and should I switch to the 1A?

If the 2AC blocks are more efficient it makes the 1AR more efficient as well. I can almost guarantee you that you can make your 2AC blocks more efficient. Spend a half hour today trying to cut the amount of underlined words in half. If it doesn't make a relevant argument, don't underline it, no matter how snappy the rhetoric or compelling the warrant. Don't make redundant arguments. Throw out cards that you'll never extend into the 2AR because they ultimately do nothing for you.

 

Additionally, the 1AR should know which arguments to "go for" against your opponent. They don't need to extend every argument made against the negative, they don't even need offense on every flow, they only need to extend one piece of terminal defense on all flows and one piece of offense. Obviously that's the bare minimum, but achieving it is almost always necessary for you to win the round. From there, you should add a weighing mechanism that makes your offense outweigh theirs, and whichever other pieces of offense and defense have the greatest impact upon the round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do more effective grouping of arguments: your judge will usually give the 1AR A LOT of leeway when it comes to this, as long as it is strategic and gets the main argument across. Last year, my partner spent the entire 2nc on case, and the judge bought a 1 minute extension/overview with a few cross applications.

 

Also, insert the *tiniest* condo block in the 2ac as leverage. Our judge voted on theory that was super blown-up in the 1ar and 2ar, even though we were winning on every other flow; it began as a two-point condo bad block in the 2ac, so we didn't expect it to be a voter.

 

And like everyone said, recognize what the opponent is going to go for. It is rare that an opponent will debate and go for procedurals, and it's hard to go for disads/cps with substantial case arguments. Use hints from their strat to determine how to allocate your time. Other than that, just try to set a time for how long you want to spend on each argument in the speech: the more efficient you are with argumentation, the less of a chance there is that you will drop arguments.

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...