Soczynski,+Julia


 * Round 1: Blaize DePass: ** Julia/Cecelia vs Nisarg/Aasim

EVERYONE—IMPACTS, IMPACTS, IMPACTS. You gotta explain the impacts of the arguments you all are making and pit them against each other. I want to know what I am voting for and why voting for you is better than voting for them. The other thing is CX. You need to try and garner offense or links so that you have more weight to your arguments in the actual speeches. There also needs to be a lot more communication between the partners so that everyone can be on the same page. If you want something extended, tell your partner so that there isn’t confusion between you all which could cost you the debate. Also, you all need to take your arguments a step further, and explain the WHY’s and HOW’s of your arguments. You get to the base level, but make sure to take it a step further.

Julia (1AC)—I like how you try and get through your 1ac really quick, but during your tags you should be a little clearer and slow down. I think that you try to start a little fast, and when you do that, you lose yourself a little. It’s okay to not speak as fast as you possibly can, it’s most important to speak so the judge can understand what you are saying. This also means that you should differentiate between tags and evidence and have a way to identify new evidence to competitors and judges. Also, when any judge says clear, you gotta make sure that you listen to that the first time because some judges will not flow anymore. Some speaking drills will help with this for sure, and do some clarity drills as well.

Julia (1AR)—Organization was an issue in this speech, but you still went for it and that’s important that you gave an honest attempt. I think you gotta work on organization and efficiency. Flowing practice can help with these organization issues too. You have to go into the speech with an idea of what you want to say and where you will say it, otherwise the speech gets extra messy and hard to follow. I think that once you get that down, you’re good to go. Also, DON’T BE AFRAID TO TAKE MORE PREP. I know you want your partner to have some, but if you have no clue what is about to go down in this 1AR, take a second or two more of prep, you have about three minutes to kill. It is important to use all the time possible in your speech. You only get 5 minutes to answer a 13 minute block, which means it’s crunch time for you and that you’ve gotta really be efficient and kill it.

Round 2:

Julia—I don’t think that starting the 1ac with plan text and solvency is the best way to go—you’d typically want to put that at the end for strategic and narrative reasons. You have good ethos/presence in your both of your speeches. It’s difficult to differentiate your tags from your evidence, so be sure you distinguish the tags in some way (say AND before the tag, etc.). Work on enunciation when you’re spreading. In your 1ar—you have great passion/ethos and you point out some things that they drop, but you need to spend a lot more time on the line-by-line.

cx—Think strategically about which questions you want to ask in cx so that you set up your partner’s 2ac arguments. You can use cx to make arguments, but you need to frame them as questions.

Aff impact calc—talk about poverty impacts as structural/happening right now and talk about how unlikely any kind of global nuclear annihilation scenario is.

Everyone is clear at least familiarity is beginning to sho w K has to flo w you are talented etc but you limit yourself by no tlfo wng because you can’t separate thoughts everytime you lose your place it’s because you’re not flo wing 2ac strong pretty good coverage every where maybe too much time on poverty but it’s like you caught yourself and mved on but by the end of the debate we’re no talking about Gilligan impact which wasn’t extended – write up a block so it’s fast and perfect each time. If you think they’re goin gofr k spend more time on that k. maybe try to do it again and put more on that k and time a lot. 1ar needs options and challenges blocks. If you could deter their strat is good. Learn to do it quickly blocks arehelpful that way. Extend stuff from the 1ac like subsidies k2 solve. Instead of reading ne w card just extend from 1ac and gives you more time for the k etc. overall good but timing could be better.
 * Ozzy**

Need to write blocks and then that’s ho w you will say it so it’s perf. Throughout debate on t good job on interpretation. Other args not developed tho. They even have arg that it has to be related to the govt – but everything could be related! Generic ground is a good arg. Biggest prob is the counter interp not ans wered. ho w theirs doesn’t solve limits. Chose to read a lot of correct evidence on the cap k but clash more with what the afff is saying. If you’re thinkin gi’m going to cap then you should be listening. You might no teven have to be reading all of these. Fight fire with fire is some bs that cap created to protect itself. And the card is right up to the soviet union collapse old evidence. Focus on what they’re saying and then make what you will say. Extend the card specifically like this is the ne wton card etc. a lot of stuff in ross x good in speech. Good link arg –make them separately- say that they save the econ. It’s not can yu think of it all in the moment just write it do wn. Saying cap is the root cause of poverty mbut make the comparison better like changing mindsets or making turbines? They make a lot of complaining for the alt but you have some time frame args too like ho w slo w the aff is. Look at the case with cap k glasses and then write blocks including analytics that don’t even needs cards.

1nr should never take prep. P good job on the case and stuff. Name some of the evidence the 2ac reads etc when extending our cards respond to their cards specifically. Relate author to the arg they’re making. Like a professor is qualified so we should trust him. But make into an arg like socialist websites are biased against cap. 1nr- card on poverty subsidies burden the poor relate it cap and ho w quick fixes fail. Oops we scre w the poor again!! Does the 2ac really ans wer this? Neg asks them to go farther. Decide before hand what to go for and then change if need be. This isyour house so make it nice.

Giving money is development, neg didn’t push as much as it could. Instead of just rereading the card it’s more valuable to say here’s what the neg says and this is why they’re wrong.

1ar you need to base your args on the 2ac. Like number 1 is the perm and it’s not in the 1ar. You have to extend the perm that’s whast makes it a hard speech. If you just make ne w args it’s worse bc everything else is gone. Up to debaters to say this is ho w they’re winning. When you extend you can say they don’t get to say this we do the alt!

1ar doesn’t extend defense on nuclear power neg has to pay attention to ans wer directly. Neg can’t be like oh just not talking about it bc in a round where they’re keeping track they’d notice. Nuke po wer leads to cap.

2nr definitely better than 2nc good to move cap up in the order bc you can cross apply but also bc ho w the judge receives it like once he heards cap k he will filter the rest of the speech in cap k. if you’re going for t just go for t. if not don’t waste your time. But again if you write up t blocks maybe you’ll decide to go

When the aff partner doesn’t extend the perm just tell them to do it. It’s your house so you need the pieces??? Good job talking on case. Look at aff as a practical way to do the cap k. the idea that we’ll forget cap unlikely if we want to deal with it then wind is one way to start fighting against it. We have to do something abou tit! Econ impact is an impact turn to this cap k. ok so you just crushed the system and this evidence says this causes every war imaginable basically. Neg should fight back like econ just collapsed and that didn’t happen. This aff links hard core to cap. Why is 50 bucks a month going to solve poverty? Insulting to ppl in poverty. Neg tell a story about this aff and aff tell a story too.

Choose cap or t 2nr