Zeng,+Eric

Round #1 Judge: Raymond Zhang

Practice Round #2 (L.Smith) You know your stuff, but you need to work on developing flowing abilities. Each position needs its own sheet.
 * you speak loud and clear which is good! But you should try and pushj yourslef to go faster and read tags in a different tone. Also you should make sure to labe different advantages and solvencys ||
 * You understanding of your evidence is impressive and you answer CX questions knowledgiable ||
 * You should be flowing the 1NC ||


 * 6/26**

1NC – Eric

Push yourself to go faster. Make sure you give an order

1NR

Don’t take prep time Extend cards from your 1NC by the argument, instead of author name


 * Round 7- Ruby**

Differentiate between tags and card text with voice inflection Say when you're switching flows during the 1AC You need to respond to everything in the 2AC, t, case, k, das. Only the neg get a block where you don't have to respond to everything in one speech. Your analysis is great in 1ar, but you need structure. Do line by line in order and group arguments. You don’t need to go on T in the 2AR since the 2NR didn't go for it. Follow the order you give or else I may mess up my flow Since the 2NR only went for the K and case, you only need to go on those flows unless you think there is something you think is beneficial to say on the disads. Otherwise, you don't need to go on those flows. Great job!!!

7/1: Eric—1nc: work on having your speech organized by which flow you want me to go to. Be sure to read an impact to the cap k. Your first two case cards contradict each other (US already abides by LOST and conservatives will never agree to LOST). Try to use all of your speech time—you don’t want to stop 3 minutes early. Don’t use prep before your cx unless you need to clarify something with your partner. 1nr: Don’t take prep for the 1nr. If your partner takes case in the 2nr, you should be taking the cap k.

RFD: This debate had a lot of missed opportunities. When the 2AC drops both of your disads and only reads one card on the cap K, the neg strat should have changed to adjuct for what happened. The 2NC should have taken one DA and case, and the 1NR should have spent 5 minutes on the other DA. Instead what happened is that the 2NC extended both the disads and case, which did not allow time for much indepth analysis. The 1NR gave a very good explaination of cap and why each of the advantages link, as well as why cap is the root cause of their impacts. However, there was no explination of the alt, and you didn't respond to the sustainability debate. This allowed the 1AR to spend a lot of time on sustainability, and wins that their impacts happen before cap could ever collapse. It was a close debate that could have gon either way, but the lack of 2NR cap analysis and the 2AR's extention on cap sustainable means I vote aff. Great debate!
 * Tournament Round 2- Ruby**