Not a huge fan of "online communities" like this, but I'm gonna resurrect my account for a quick second because I cannot stand when people trash on my siblings.
This year, Jon is as good, probably better, than me. He's currently debating with an 8th grader with absolutely zero debate experience, and he absolutely steamrolls teams that annihilate South and OES on the regular. Not taking away from Soren and Cyrus, but I don't see them beating teams with 5,6 bids. Henry and Leo are both very very good, but Jon is, without a doubt, individually better.
Idk if you don't do logic or are just a hater, but Jon and Kacie almost never lose to either South or OES. I know they aren't going to the TOC and whatnot, but also realize that Clackamas goes to one bid tournament a year. South took half a dozen tournaments to get two bids, and OES pretty consistently gets trolled in triples, if they even make it there. And at zag, Jon and Kacie lost their bid round to basically the best team on the west coast.
There's a bunch of factual inaccuracies in here, but the main point is 100% true. Jon works incredibly hard, and as a result, he's incredibly good. Did you know Jon has a speech disorder and had years of speech therapy to over come it, but still practices so hard that he's fast even for the college circuit? Didn't think so.
Also, Jon and I learned debate without any coach (we taught ourselves). Most kids learn by having an experienced debater helping them with nuances - Jon learns purely through watching rounds online and trial and error.
He's also a genius with his argument diversity- I doubt anyone else in oregon reads the full range of ortho marx, anti-blackness, intralocality, ptix, virilio, schlag, security, t&y, heg throwdowns, framework, performance, etc., let alone takes the time to actually read and master the literature behind them.
I'm not saying that Jon and Kacie will win every round and state and the whole world or whatever. But don't give them less credit than they deserve.
Also, its all good and fine to talk about debate online and rank people or whatever. But intentionally saying "so and so sux and are actually way overrated" is a pretty low blow and is not conducive to a healthy debate community. If anything, stupidity like that is the reason why Oregon policy debate was non-existent until very recently.