National Speech and Debate Tournament

2024 — Des Moines, IA/US

Randall Martinez Paradigm

Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)

Coach of a team
NDT/CEDA debater in college
Policy debater in high school
Frequently judge Policy Debate

How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?

0-10

Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?

Tabula rasa
 

RATE OF DELIVERY

8/91 = slow and deliberate
9 = very rapid
 

QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS

8/91 = a few well-developed arguments
9 = the more arguments the better
 

COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES

9/91 = communication skills most important
9 = resolving substantive issues most important
 

TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:

2/91 = often
9 = rarely
 

COUNTERPLANS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

GENERIC DISADVANTAGES

2/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS

2/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks: I am open to all debating styles and can handle speed. I appreciate all the skills that go into being competitive in the debate space; updated research, comparative analysis in rebuttals, making strategic decisions with time allocation, and creativity in argumentation to name a few. Tailor-made Kritiks are probably my favorite type of argument, but conversely, generic link of omission K's are on the opposite side of my preference spectrum. Love the politics DA, make sure your cards are updated! Will vote on theory if we all wasted our time and education was lost in the round. If you're having a non-traditional debate, a discussion of the role of the ballot is important.

Note: if you wish for your pronouns to appear the debaters you judge on text/email blasts, log into Tabroom, click Profile at top, and add them in the Pronouns field.