Jump to content
reptece

2NCs

Recommended Posts

I have a really big problem with my 2NCs, they are so bad. Like in my 2NRs theres only 1-2 things I have to push to try and win a round so my speech flows pretty clearly, during the 2NC i get really messy and sloppy because sometimes the 2AC spreads out a lot of arguments. I have no idea how to structure a 2NC and I'm really confused about what the overview is suppose to say. This causes me to drop a decent amount of arguments which is bad cause it takes time from my partners 1NR speech. Can anyone tell me the proper way to do a 2NC? Anything will help, thank you.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pre-prep your 2NCs with analytics and cards that you know you will have to read, especially for Ks. This will take away a lot of in-round stress and you can copy and paste A2s (perm answers, CP delay stuff, etc.) during prep in order of the flow. Don't do 2NC overviews, they're time consuming and can be done later. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wrong - you should do 2NC overviews. personally, for K's, my overview is just an explanation of the argument and its application to the round. For DA's, it's "DA turns case & outweighs, etc". For T, its kinda weird, I do interp work there. CP's, it's CP solves 100% of case, yadayadayada, etc. For case, it's conceded arguments and their applications in the round, or whatever

Agreed 100% -- overviews and impact framing are crucial to a good 2NC. You don't want a judge calling out your 2NR for being too late for impact comparison. Getting ahead of the 1AR on this question puts the 2NR in a great place to the point where the neg is already winning crucial nexus points of the debate. This also puts more pressure on the 1AR who now has to answer framing as well as make his/her own. It's far from a waste of time, and is instead very strategic

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with all of the above; impact overviews and explanations (for kritikal and tricky arguments) are great to have at the top of your 2NC, but of course you need a lot of time for the line-by-line. You asked about how to deal with a fast, broad 2AC, so here are a few tips for doing a strong 2NC against a pretty-good 2AC.

 

Be cognizant of how much time you spend on different issues--you should tailor your time spent on each section of the debate based on how long the 2AC spent on it and how likely it is that the 1AR will blow it up. If the 2AC's strategy on the K seems to be about winning a permutation and some no-link or link-turn arguments, you need to spend a good deal of time on the link debate; instead of simply grouping a bunch of bad "no-link" arguments and reading your link block as you might sometimes do, you may want to explain your links and then answer each of their distinct link-turn arguments on the flow. If the 2AC is making some theoretical issue into a big deal--say, they went ham on the framework or role of the ballot debate against your discourse critique--you want to make sure and cover it thoroughly; aim to pressure the 1AR on this issue to the point that it drops some of the links, tricks, and trap-doors that you lay in the neg block. This applies for other arguments than the K, as well; if the 2AC spent more than 15 seconds on condo bad, you may want to shut that door in the negative block rather decisively, because it looks like a substantial amount of the 1AR will be spent on the conditionality debate. Etc. etc.

 

On the note of link-turns--it's good to make some probability arguments on the comparative likelihood of your link arguments compared to the unlikeliness of their link-turns. Especially in DA debates, it's possible to show how your links short-circuit their ability to claim link turns--keeping the aff from accessing their offense is great.

 

Layer your arguments with even-if arguments; the problem with the 2AC is that it rarely has time enough to begin impacting its arguments. Usually the 1AR or even the 2AR will start explaining the importance of each argument. You should explain how arguments interact with one another in the neg block and beat them to the framing punch. Even-if arguments are a must, especially on arguments you feel like you might be behind on. On the K you might say something to the tune of "Even if they win their role of the ballot [e.g. policy-making good], the links to their implementation mechanism function as case-turns--if we prove they make the problem worse than it is now, you kick the alt and vote for the status quo."

 

On that note, in CP+DA 2NCs, win that the impact to your net benefit outweighs any potential solvency deficits--after you answer the solvency deficits, that is. If the net benefit's impact turns the advantage that they're claiming is a solvency deficit to the CP, you get a neat try-or-die argument right there. That's four arguments for the 1AR to answer: they have to extend the solvency deficit, answer the "DA outweighs" argument, answer the "DA turns the advantage" argument, and try and win try-or-die for the aff instead of the CP. That's a job well done for the 2NC.

 

Hope this helped, good luck with your debates.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wrong - you should do 2NC overviews. personally, for K's, my overview is just an explanation of the argument and its application to the round. For DA's, it's "DA turns case & outweighs, etc". For T, its kinda weird, I do interp work there. CP's, it's CP solves 100% of case, yadayadayada, etc. For case, it's conceded arguments and their applications in the round, or whatever

 

Explanations on the link debate - it's not about what the k says, judges want to know what it says about the aff. The overview is usually to highlight key arguments (dropped stuff, argument framing, etc.) and explain why it's such a big deal.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wrong - you should do 2NC overviews. personally, for K's, my overview is just an explanation of the argument and its application to the round. For DA's, it's "DA turns case & outweighs, etc". For T, its kinda weird, I do interp work there. CP's, it's CP solves 100% of case, yadayadayada, etc. For case, it's conceded arguments and their applications in the round, or whatever

(Specific to K's and DA's)

That only makes sense if you let the 2ac structure the debate in terms of your flows. For instance, when you're covering a DA in the block, don't do an overview and then go to the impact debate if that's what you do your overview on. Instead, reorder the debate (and clearly, clearly sign post).

For instance, I go

Impacts

Uq

Link

Internal links/other answers if necessary

 

When I cover the impact debate I go over all the stuff you talked about putting in an overview and then put new cards underneath. Doing this keeps everything tightly compartmentalized and organized and avoids opportunities for redundancy, which pressures the 1ar even more than an overview and then all that.

 

With K's the order is slightly different, but you can do all the same analysis on the impacts 'flow'.

Edited by SnarkosaurusRex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Explanations on the link debate - it's not about what the k says, judges want to know what it says about the aff. The overview is usually to highlight key arguments (dropped stuff, argument framing, etc.) and explain why it's such a big deal.

I agree, but I do the link debate on the line by line when they say "no link"/"perm"/etc. If they don't make any of those arguments, I'll put them at the top, though. The 2NR o/v includes dropped links at the top no matter what. 

 

Also, why the downvote? :(

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few novices on my team asked if in the 2nc could they go straight K with overview, impact framing, and alt solves overview. Good idea or no?

Ehh the first two things might be a good idea but the alt solves overview could be inn the 1nr just c so they can't ask questions in cx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ehh the first two things might be a good idea but the alt solves overview could be inn the 1nr just c so they can't ask questions in cx

 

They might not as easily remember to ask about the alt solvency in CX of the 2NC, but they're certainly able to. Nothing about the content of the speech determines what questions can be asked. In fact, if the 2N doesn't have a strong idea of what the 1NR is going to say about the alt solvency debate (in the context of the aff's advantages, for instance, where the 2N may have asked the 1N to spend time thinking of new reasons the alt solves the aff and, say, new or uncommon links to the K), the 2N may struggle more with the question; admittedly, that's more an issue of knowing your argument, but the point is that you should be ready to answer any questions about the K, even if they're about parts of it absent from the 2NC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I make a neg strat, I like to think about the round backwards. (What am I going to go for? What links should I highlight? Which impact will be the most persuasive?) In general, you need to keep the nexus, the focus, of the debate in mind, something that the judge will definitely flow for you on. Those big points should be what you put in your 2NC overview, especially on kritiks.

 

I run a 1-off strat, so this may not be necessarily applicable to me, but you shouldn't be afraid to drop an off-case (especially T) in the block. If you don't need the argument to win, then why waste your time on it? In general, your main advocacy (the K or CP that you want to go for) is best handled in the 2NC.

  • Upvote 2

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...