Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Okay

About knifehandstrike

  • Rank
    Registered User
  • Birthday 07/22/1968

Profile Information

  • Name
    Jeffrey Richards
  • School
    Sammamish HS
  • Biography
    Debate coach, author of two textbooks: Debating by Doing; and Moving From Policy to Value Debate
  • Location
    Seattle, WA
  • Interests
    Skiing, reading, writing
  • Occupation
    Operations Analyst
  1. Hi, gang, need a little help. Can someone point me to any National Circuit LD tournaments (including but not limited to TOC qualifiers) post Berkeley (2/18 - 2/20/2012)? I have a student who may be competitive at the national level but will not be available until after January. Any suggestions? Thanks in advance!
  2. Yep, a rep from teh WA Debate Coalition attended our Spring Coaches meeting. She was one of the ones who suggested camp as a good idea.
  3. Hi, gang, It looks like I (as a returning coach of a Seattle-area HS debate team) have secured some funding for me to attend a camp this summer. I am a HS policy debater from the '80s and a CEDA value debater from the 90's, and I even wrote 2 textbooks on debate 15 years ago (Moving from Policy to Value Debate; Debating by Doing; both by national Textbook Co.). I am interested in re-generating interest in policy debate at the school and helping to do so in the district, and am working to capture all of the most contemporary thought on policy debate. Any suggestions out there on which camp might be best for coaches to participate in? Appreciate the assistance! - Jeffrey
  4. Hi, Dakota, Did you ever get a taker for this? I would be interested in discussing it further, as I think resources that assist NW debate should be kept up long term and promoted where it makes sense. Let me know. Thanks! - Jeffrey Coach, Sammamish HS Debate
  5. Agreed, Jessica, it makes little sense to give qualified policy debaters PuFo ballots, if that is indeed what is happening. Having coached HS debate in ID in my college days at Northwest Nazarene University, I am actually not surprised. But it just cannot be that so many years later POLICY JUDGES ARE NOT FLOWING IN OUT-ROUNDS! There will be no legitimacy to ID debate as a whole until either these problems get solved or (if these tournaments are being wrongly represented), the real story gets out there. Either way, very capable debaters in ID are being done a huge disservice under the status quo...
  6. Sounds great. I will work to generate some interest among seasoned coaches and judges in a road trip. Do you know what weekend the ID State tournament will be next year?
  7. Hi, my name is Jeffrey Richards, and I am the coach in WA who posted above. Please let me know if anyone is interested in strategizing about bringing some very qualified judges out to State next year in ID. You can e-mail me at knifehandstrike@hotmail.com. Thanks!
  8. Kate, as a coach and judge in Washington, it was a joy to get to see you debate this year. As for the stuff with Candace, it happens. It is unfortunate, because as a team, you guys were dynamite, and whatever cross-ex development Candace needed, she was one of the best at refutation I had seen in some time. In any event, I have picked you up in two final rounds this year (once with and once without Candace), in part due to your obvious strength as a persuasive speaker. The important thing I hope for you is that you are back in policy debate next year. You are one of the most gifted policy debaters I have seen, and easily one of the top six in the State. Just by being back next year, you are likely to be one of the odds-on favorites in policy debate. Congratulations on a great year, and good luck at NFL Nats!
  9. I judged Roger a couple of times this year and know that his reputation in the Washington State HS Community is outstanding. He is well-known as a very hard worker and a selfless team player. And, of course, he is himself one of the top policy debaters in the state, taking third at State and qualifying for the NFL Nats later this year. I coached Idaho debate in the Boise area a decade and a half ago, and I recall there was a need for experienced policy coaches in the State at that time. I believe that is still the case, and I would highly recommend Roger for such a position. Please ping me seperately if there are ID coaches who want to discuss my recommendation in more detail.
  10. It ought to go without saying that it is inexcusable for a State debate tournament to put inexperienced or non-flow judges into policy rounds, especially out rounds. You are clearly onto the central problem that has to be solved: The debate powers that be have to be committed to having the best/right judges in rounds. The ID tournament was a huge topic at the WA tournament and should be embarrassing to the State debate officials in ID. If they are not committted to repairing the damage, the rest won't matter. How can this still be a problem in ID almost 2 decades later?
  11. Sorry, Gordon, did not realize that was you posting. Very nice job in the round (2) I judged you in at State last weekend. Easily the best debater in the round, as speaks showed. Good luck at NFL Nats!
  12. I actually had an Affirmative run an AJ (Alternative Justification) case in front of me when I was judging at Stanford and they punted two of the three plans (when 1N beat their solvency) and added a fourth in the 2A. No reason this is not a legitimate technique and even a valid response to neg's inconsistent advocacy and hypo-testing against the resolution.
  13. Wrote an article in The Rostrum about this topic, a month or two ago, and noted (while trying not to sound like a dinosaur) that until the late 60s, affs did not run plan and case together. 1A handled the need for a change, and 2A reconstructed and then provided the plan. So 1Ns attacked warrants and 2Ns blasted solvency and provided DAs. Then affs figured out that they were in a better position running with a comp ad case than a traditional needs, since they merely had to win advantageousness over the SQ, not 100% solvency. They started with the plan and argued inherency, significance, and solvency in the subsequent advantages, all dumped in the 1A. Negs did not immediately follow suit. When I was debating in the late 80s and early 90s, 1Ns were still attacking the need for a change, and 2Ns blasted the plan. 95% of the time, all was new in the 2. Later, negs figured out that running their generics off-case in the 1 made strategic sense so they could have the maximum time to prep against case, so they occassionally ran Emory Shifts, until that became much more the standard in the mid to late 90s. But still, all was new in the 2. As some of the other theory-trained folks on this thread rightly point out, negs determined that running a shell in the 1N and then blowing up the line-by-line in the block has become a very effective (and now predominant) strategy. But here is the point. Whether new in the 2 or not, either way the strategy is to spread the 1AR too thin to adequately respond, thus giving the judge an easy neg ballot with the drops. It is incumbent on the negative to do so because the aff (1) gets to choose the case area, and (2) speaks last. And in either case, the 1AR has resources. It is generally thought the most difficult speech in the round. But look at the suggestions on this thread for some very good strategy ideas that work. Also, 1ARs have to be AWESOME at grouping and structured refutation (signpost, tag, evidence/analysis, impact). And they cross-apply. A lot. The negative block is a very powerful structure advantage for negs. But watching a 1AR overcome it is one of the most beautiful sights in debate!
  14. Best 1AR - Kayla J. from Bellingham (State semis) Best Topicality Reconstruction - Kate L. from Kamiak (Auburn Riverside finals) Most Original Blocks - West Seattle, Mae's Power Tagging framework and a Senior debater (his name escapes me) who ran an excellent logical fallacy block Biggest Trooper - Alysia L. from Puyallup, great 1A in a speed round at Auburn while battling very pronounced flu-like symptoms Best overall team performance - Dakota and Stephanie from Mercer (Octas at Stanford) Honorable Mentions - Sean and Steven from Mercer, Kayla from Bellingham, and Kate and Candace from Kamiak, although there was some opportunity to demonstrate good sportsmanship there (BTW, have not seen Kate and Candace debate together since Feb, not sure why).
  15. The Sammamish team you are thinking of for most underrated team is Hannah and Dan. Great debaters, still maturing and learning to handle spped, as Mercer Island's Sean and Steven can attest to (they took out Hannah and Dan in quarters at Auburn's TOC qualifier).
  • Create New...