Jump to content
kylerbuckner

Cutting Blocks?

Recommended Posts

My partner and I are the only team from our school, and have problems keeping up with the research burden for circuit debate. We plan on breaking a new aff at our next tournament, but are having difficulties given it's incredibly hard and time consuming to cut blocks for every off case position. 

 

What is the best way/most efficient method of cutting blocks? Any tricks? Is it better for the long run to create a giant 2AC masterfile with generic answers to all off case then filter in specific answers as you cut them?

 

What does a 'generic K frontline' look like if you don't read a plan text?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My partner and I are the only team from our school, and have problems keeping up with the research burden for circuit debate. We plan on breaking a new aff at our next tournament, but are having difficulties given it's incredibly hard and time consuming to cut blocks for every off case position. 

 

What is the best way/most efficient method of cutting blocks? Any tricks? Is it better for the long run to create a giant 2AC masterfile with generic answers to all off case then filter in specific answers as you cut them?

 

What does a 'generic K frontline' look like if you don't read a plan text?

Well, 1) read a plan text.

2) Your generic K frontline should include

1 - Perm

2 - Link defense

3 - Impact defense/turns/case outweighs/root cause debate (if you're being cliched)

4 - Alt doesn't solve the K, alt doesn't solve the case

5 - Answers to tricks that you're predicting that aren't tied to some other part of the debate yet (you probably don't have to deal with 'serial policy failure' or whatever, but I'm sure there's something or another you can think of)

 

As for cutting blocks, start with the biggest threats then work out from there. Since you're not being topical, that means probably framework, cap, and then answers to the impact turn. A lot of 2N's can make bank just impact turning the aff because no one could ever think that they're just wrong about the world, could they? 

Then work your way down the 'threat list.' This should primarily be informed by

a. How commonly read it is (aka work done here applies to a lot more teams)

b. How dangerous it is. Especially with left affs, most K's you don't really need a card on, just do work on the perm and link debate and you should be fine. Thus, those positions can be de-prioritized. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did similar work in high school for aff. I always swept through camp files by the dozens and picked up a handful of impact D or turns, uniqueness thumpers, and then read did as the above post mention priortizing threats. Learning to swiftly read their cards and analytically take them down from their ununderlined sections is also extremely useful when you do happen to hear a surprising argument. I love squirrel affs or new affs, but teams run not only generics but generics that dont make sense. Although sometimes judges need it explained why the Ebola DA isnt realisitic.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition to the excellent advice above: Write your case to have built-in answers to common or dangerous positions.  

 

Of the 3 plan text affs i've written in the last 3 years, 2 are Neolib K alts.  Most of them have had easy 'no link' arguments to common disads.  Two of them also had built-in Security Ks, and a third had clear 'representations good / threat is real' evidence built into the 1AC.  One of them was also a feminism K alt while the other two had good built-in answers.

 

And the one 'advocacy statement' aff i've written in that time (Beast of Blasphemy aff) pretty much obviously didn't link to anything anyone was going to have cut except maybe some high theory.

 

Ie, being clever about how you construct a case frequently makes answering off-case really easy.  Also, to the degree you think those off-case represent real problems, you'll be happier writing cases that inherently answer them.  

 

And if you're going to write a standard policy aff (i know you're not in this instance, but if you ever do), your answers to things like Cap Ks will probably be portable to other similar cases.  Don't reinvent the wheel if you don't have to.

  • 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...