Jump to content
NickDB8

ODT R1 - NickDB8 [A] vs vmanAA738 [N]

Recommended Posts

1NR is CP and Fiat Double Bind

So the 2NR is a little late, I don't have a problem with it coming at a later time because 1. We're pretty far ahead of other debates, 2. It's been a good debate, I would like to finish.

 

If Beck and Ried are fine with it, 2NR can come whenever, as long as it doesn't push the tournament back

Edited by NickDB8
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats y'all on finishing off the first round! We are not disclosing for this tournament as far as decision or speaker points go, but I will definitely leave some feedback for both of y'all either tonight or tomorrow.
 

:EDIT: Also, given how far ahead you all have been and the competitor's agreeing, I'm going to go ahead and ignore the fact that the 2NR was a little late so no worries!

Edited by ExBallisLife

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bump for that feedback

 

Congrats y'all on finishing off the first round! We are not disclosing for this tournament as far as decision or speaker points go, but I will definitely leave some feedback for both of y'all either tonight or tomorrow.
 

:EDIT: Also, given how far ahead you all have been and the competitor's agreeing, I'm going to go ahead and ignore the fact that the 2NR was a little late so no worries!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, sorry about the delay y'all, it's a little later than planned, but I will definitely go over some things for both of y'all to improve on in the next rounds.

 

AFF:

I liked your extensions, they could probably be even shorter tbh given that case went conceded after the block, but I understand wanting to keep it longer. I think that you need to use your Aff more to answer things, or maybe tweak it to be better at answering things, either one. This helps with efficiency and getting you out of having to read some of the generic 2AC and 1AR cards. I also think that your offense could be more specific given that this is an online debate. I also really wished you would have gone for Condo because 7 off is a lot and I think it's pretty persuasive in that case, especially if you go hard on depth>breadth arguments. I do understand you not going for it though as it was answered pretty well

 

NEG: 

I think you might in the future cut back on some of this stuff, or maybe just move it to case (like does a FIAT double-bind really need to be a separate off case position?). However I like the diversity of the arguments that you chose, I think that it was a good mix. I think you answered condo really well and in depth, which is obviously good. I wish you would have pulled through some case arguments, as it will always help you at the end of the debate because it will put the Aff into question regardless of what off case you decide to go for, which makes weighing the debate in your favor easier.

 

 

I thought this was a really good debate though y'all and I appreciate you having me judge it! Let me know if you have any questions that I can answer without disclosing!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, sorry about the delay y'all, it's a little later than planned, but I will definitely go over some things for both of y'all to improve on in the next rounds.

 

AFF:

I liked your extensions, they could probably be even shorter tbh given that case went conceded after the block, but I understand wanting to keep it longer. I think that you need to use your Aff more to answer things, or maybe tweak it to be better at answering things, either one. This helps with efficiency and getting you out of having to read some of the generic 2AC and 1AR cards. I also think that your offense could be more specific given that this is an online debate. I also really wished you would have gone for Condo because 7 off is a lot and I think it's pretty persuasive in that case, especially if you go hard on depth>breadth arguments. I do understand you not going for it though as it was answered pretty well

Thanks! I didn't go for condo bc that's a pretty risky move, but I definitely considered doing it. I really didn't want to go all in on it until the 2AR, so I wrote the 1AR and realized I wouldn't be able to extend condo in full. I really just shadow extended it into the 1AR to keep the severence argument.

 

On another note, were the 2AC responses to the off done well? Like, were those good, responsive arguments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks! I didn't go for condo bc that's a pretty risky move, but I definitely considered doing it. I really didn't want to go all in on it until the 2AR, so I wrote the 1AR and realized I wouldn't be able to extend condo in full. I really just shadow extended it into the 1AR to keep the severence argument.

 

On another note, were the 2AC responses to the off done well? Like, were those good, responsive arguments?

 

Yeah for the most part I thought that your responses were good. There were a couple of places where I would have liked to see you  not read cards and spent that energy elsewhere (like do you really need Kappeler or Boggs ev from 2 decades ago?) but that's mostly personal preferences

 

I think you did a decent job weighing your aff against the off case in the 2AC and i think you should continue expanding upon those arguments more since they're less time consuming and come out of your aff extensions (examples of these args would be Case O/W and "The aff is True" but you also could have used args like "Deforestation is imperial violence, aff solves" or "Xi says yes because he recognizes the need to secure water for future" type args).

 

Finally, I wold like to see you get a litttttle bit bigger of a picture frame of mind. Whenever the neg kicks stuff, that doesnt mean that you lose all your offense from those flows, you can cross apply and extend whatever you want from the 2AC. I think that in this debate, the Spanos ev would be pretty damning of a sort of performative turn to the entirety of the neg, or some of your roleplaying or policymaking evidence could become an extra advantage and internal impact after the neg concedes it. 

 

If you do all of those things in this 2AC I think you set yourself for a muuuuuch easier 1AR/2AR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah for the most part I thought that your responses were good. There were a couple of places where I would have liked to see you  not read cards and spent that energy elsewhere (like do you really need Kappeler or Boggs ev from 2 decades ago?) but that's mostly personal preferences

 

I think you did a decent job weighing your aff against the off case in the 2AC and i think you should continue expanding upon those arguments more since they're less time consuming and come out of your aff extensions (examples of these args would be Case O/W and "The aff is True" but you also could have used args like "Deforestation is imperial violence, aff solves" or "Xi says yes because he recognizes the need to secure water for future" type args).

 

Finally, I wold like to see you get a litttttle bit bigger of a picture frame of mind. Whenever the neg kicks stuff, that doesnt mean that you lose all your offense from those flows, you can cross apply and extend whatever you want from the 2AC. I think that in this debate, the Spanos ev would be pretty damning of a sort of performative turn to the entirety of the neg, or some of your roleplaying or policymaking evidence could become an extra advantage and internal impact after the neg concedes it. 

 

If you do all of those things in this 2AC I think you set yourself for a muuuuuch easier 1AR/2AR

Ok, thank you!

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...