Hollins,+Kevis

__**Round 3:**__ **Blaize DePass:** Otto/Sam vs Dwight/Kevis

EVERYBODY: CX is something that should be worked on. Some good questions are being asked, but I think it’s important to be asking questions to garner offense and links to your positions. I also think that some of this round is a little more heated and tense than it needs to be. Some sensitive stuff is being brought up but I think that if everyone shows everyone some respect this will go a lot more smoothly. I like that even though this was a tense round, that people are still having a fun time with it. Everybody did a good job and sounds good and made good arguments. Just keep practicing and I’m excited to see where everyone can go with their skill sets!

Kevis (2NC)—I like the overview, and it makes a good point. However, you need to make sure that you give me an explanation of the argument and where its going. Also you should signpost, you went from a overview and onto the cap stuff. You explain the argument later, but I think its beneficial for you to keep things in order so your argument doesn’t get lost in the flow and is understood by everyone. I think that what you’re saying makes sense, but you just want to make it coherent so that I can follow. Your stuff about flowing and engaging makes sense but I think that you need to create a better link. On top of this, if you’re going for this argument, you should really scrap the rest so that you can go hard on the blackness argument. You have hella ethos, man, keep that up. With your clarity and ethos you’ll go far.

Kevis (2NR)—This speech was good and full of ethos, but you confused yourself with the capitalism and performativity flow and you get them mixed up and you end up saying things you don’t want to say. I think that this argument is something that needs work, but it is something that is doable is you do work on it. Don’t get yourself too confused with the flows, I think that if in the 2nc you just went for performativity your argument would’ve been more coherent. But regardless, keep up that ethos and enthusiasm because it will get you a long way with these arguments!

Breath control during the 1AC can be improved to maximize speed, you're already pretty clear. Don’t really need 1NC pre empts on the DA, just read more case cards Don’t interrupt the 2AC YOU SHOULD FLOW?!?!?!?!? T is always petty, but it's also strategic. Saying "T is petty" isn't a valid argument. Too much time on T based on the 2NC extension You preface your cross ex questions too much and confuse everyone, just be more direct. Good job!
 * Round 6- Ruby **
 * Kevis/Dwight vs Sequoia/Izzie **

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