Jump to content
EasleyTheBest

Need to improve my 2N overviews

Recommended Posts

Hello, my name is Allen Easley, and I suck at my 2N overviews. I find them being ineffective and a time suck to my speech. If you have any general tip for the construct of my overviews that would be fantabular. Also, If you have any general tips that would be radical. Thanks y'all.

 

 

*Notice the non-gendered usage of y'all? Yep, I am not sexist at all. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the 1AR doesn't have to flow/answer it, you probably shouldn't waste time on it in the 2NC. 

 

The 1AR has to answer the 2NC :/

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why? If you have the proper framing cards built into your shells/arguments you shouldn't be reading overviews. The evidence does the work for you. In the rebuttals you just win framing and tell the judge why your impacts matter so much to drive the nail in the coffin.

Edited by Kirito
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The evidence does the work for you.

I disagree. Overviews are used to put things that don't go on the line by line, or it can be used to highlight concessions.

 

Also, evidence isn't a substitute for arguments

  • Upvote 10
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. Overviews are used to put things that don't go on the line by line, or it can be used to highlight concessions.

 

Also, evidence isn't a substitute for arguments

To build on this overviews (on each issue you cover) are an effective way to make the judge understand the story you are telling.  The first time around are all the cards - doing the work of making that cohesive for the judge is worth the 30 seconds total it takes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For critiques (particularly complicated ones), I think you need a pre-written overview to tell the judge a story, and you can adapt it to the round at hand.

 

For other arguments you should not necessarily have a written out overview and instead use it to clarify things/highlight key concessions.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For critiques (particularly complicated ones), I think you need a pre-written overview to tell the judge a story, and you can adapt it to the round at hand.

 

For other arguments you should not necessarily have a written out overview and instead use it to clarify things/highlight key concessions.

 

i agree to an extent--typically i've always been told that thinks like the link overview/extension and any alt-solves-case args should be prepared before the round.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In most policy rounds, I don't see the point of overviews. If your aff is really technical or complicated than maybe I understand, but especially in the 2NC I don't think a good flow judge needs a separate flowed overview. Might as well spend the time you would be using to do important stuff like extend cards and call out the 1AR's bullshit. 

 

In K rounds, they are Kritikal  

 

See what I did there?

 

No but for real you need them for Kritiks. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

overviews are fine, if you use them to explain your argument quickly (thesis, link, impact, alt if applicable), to make specific arguments that aren't used in the 1NC if needed, or to clarify. And they must be short. Most judges will hate your overview and not get the full point if it's too long, or especially if it's complicated. Also you need to make sure you don't take time away from responding to the 2AC.

 

A rule of thumb is if your overview takes more than 30-45 seconds you're doing it wrong and are only hurting yourself in the round.

 

Edit- this is only for K 2NC's or framework I guess, most other arguments don't require a long overview, or one at all honestly.

Edited by Firewater
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean I never really run K's, so my rounds are pretty policy, meaning I pretty much never have overviews in my 2NCs. I use my 2NCs to try and fuck over the aff with as many arguments as possible, and 2NC overviews usually inhibit that from happening. I always have them in my 2NR though. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean I never really run K's, so my rounds are pretty policy, meaning I pretty much never have overviews in my 2NCs. I use my 2NCs to try and fuck over the aff with as many arguments as possible, and 2NC overviews usually inhibit that from happening. I always have them in my 2NR though.

 

Generally the point of a k overview is to

1. Highlight concessions

2. Put things that can't really be inserted anywhere else without messing up the flow

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are a couple of things you can do there:

1) Highlight concessions

2) Highlight drops

3) Highlight the macro level of the debate & your overall story  (macro is the big picture....its the level above the line by line).  This is the part thats critical.

4) Big distinctions that win you the debate (i.e. offense vs. defense) or the type of evidence they are reading in relation to yours

5) I think some folks do a "their only hope to win is X......but thats wrong for these reasons..."

6) Some people do impact comparison there (for instance our arguments turn the case)

7) Some "no new arguments" type pre-empt.

 

In K debates the overview might be pretty big.  In other debates....45 to 60 seconds is usually sufficient.

 

The object isn't to stick as many of the above in the overview....but to pick and choose what fits your situation....based on just under a minute of time.

Edited by nathan_debate
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In K debates the overview might be pretty big.  In other debates....45 to 60 seconds is usually sufficient.

I consider 45 to 60 seconds to be very big..?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps 25 to 30 seconds?

 

Length = proportional to effectiveness & saving you time & explaining things clearly as they need to be explained.

 

If you are short on time--you need to think more proportional to your situation.

 

....There is also the matter of the issue specific or regional overview (usually these tend to be 2 to 3 sentances long)---but again these standards are quite general.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My overviews typically take around 8-14 minutes. Am I doing something wrong?

 

No but seriously, my overviews used to be really long, I think that the overview is also a great time to deploy any tricks hidden within a card/argument (I.e. this non-uniques their impact, serial policy failure, etc.)

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...