I am looking for the students to show honesty in the piece but also what it mean to them. No matter what it is being perform there is a story and a message or a point of view that is being made. I am also looking for detail in a character because no two people look alike so what does this person look like to the competitor and how are they different from other characters they are performing. Finally I look at blocking and how sharp , clean , and creative your mind can go with it.

Hello, welcome to my paradigm! I debated for 4 years in high school and I was also involved in a lot of speech events (e.g. impromptu, poetry and oratory). While I was a teacher, I also served as a coach for middle school speech and debate for 2 years.

Things I appreciate:

(1) Solid, current evidence coupled with logical analysis. I find it frustrating when debaters try to squeeze massive impacts out of lukewarm evidence. I wish debaters would go for higher probability, lower magnitude impacts. It’s okay if you claim global war as an impact, I am just inclined to find it a steep hill to conquer.

(2) I really appreciate good manners in debate.

(3) If this is an online tournament, please turn your camera on and try to look as presentable as possible. I think it devalues the experience if we can't see each other. I promise I'll also turn my camera on, too!

Things I don't appreciate

(1) Protracted arguments about a studies' methodology or an author's credibility. If there is a critical issue with a key piece of evidence, please just make the issue clear in a speech or cross. I’ll be sure to call the evidence and do my best to read it thoroughly.

(2) Rudeness/shadiness: Please be professional and courteous to one another. Please promptly provide evidence to your opponents if requested and do not attempt to verbally contextualize evidence as you are handing it over.

To tell you the truth, I'm not sure that reading a paradigm ever gave me tactical insight as a debater, but I hope you find this useful. I love debate and I love that you are invested enough in the proactively to read paradigms. Good luck!

SJ 28'

Third year debating, PF in MS and freshmen, i know LD pretty well

I coach Pin Oak MS

Add me to the email chain if above 300 WPM and for EV checks (jsegraves28@mail.strakejesuit.org)

Yall pls have fun, i love debate u should too

General:

Speed- 8/10 (articulate, I prefer good arg>rapping)

Flex prep

Tech>Truth (I’ll buy anything properly warranted unless it’s abusive ie nobody suffered from war)

No new EV after 1AR (LD) 1st Summary (PF) but can’t be EV extending ur case for first summary

Defense usually isn't sticky, depends on the day (ask me)

I won’t flow CX, just extend to ur speech if it’s important

WEIGH WEIGH WEIGH, easiest place for me to vote and resolve clash for me, if not I’ll wash it or resolve myself and lower spks and you HAVE TO WARRANT IT (obv nuke war probability is low but WHY)

Frontlines are NOT extensions u must say the whole link chain but my threshold is lower if there wasn’t any defense on it

Signpost to make my flow easier

just bc the rest of the panel may be lay doesn’t mean I won’t eval properly

If I have to intervene in a round to stop abusive things, auto 20

Novices and MS scroll to bottom

PF:

If you run any prog against novices I will tank speaks and won’t eval identity K or tricks

1-T, trad, stock all my favs

2-Tricks/theory (u can make the shell ur whole case but I'd prefer topicality substance too, tricks are fun)- make it carded, not eval self based analytical shells

3-LARP (luv DAs)

4-Topical K

5-Nontopical K

6-Phil (idk all the literature)

T>K is my default cuz I like trad debates more than prog but warrant it and I’ll eval

Err on overexplaining K

If you take more than 30 secs to find a card I will tank ur spks

Card dump in rebuttal is fine but 2nd rebuttal must frontline or its dropped

Aff has burden of proof for solvency

Defense is NOT sticky (I’ll allow it EVERY OTHER JUDGE on the panel is alr with it tho)

Bc i'm rly nice i'll eval dedev but if u run on novices u will get a max 25

Wipeout is a big lie and the stupidest thing ever

I'll buy crazy args if it's WARRANTED properly and i'd prefer internal links

if u drop case and only go for turns I’ll eval properly but max 27 speaks

LD:

Basically same as PF

util vs util is very boring for me

CPs are fine, im annoyed by 50 state cuz most ppl are bad at it

Novices:

In case the above doesn't make sense:

Be really articulate, I care about hearing your arguments more.

Give me a roadmap before speeches (Start my case then opp case)

Extend in all of your speeches

Explain to me what are the biggest issues/impacts for me to vote on

Contextualize and warrant everything but my threshold for yall is lower

My threshold for card cutting isn’t super high especially if it’s ur first time but if u blatantly take the card out of context or smth rly weird it’s breaking ethics (novices only)

Feel free to ask me post round how to improve, etc. (if you want improvement feedback in depth just lmk before the round and I'll try and focus some flow to that in between speeches/CX)

Spks Boost:

Auto 28

+1 make a good joke/pop culture ref

+1 if u bring my fav soda (cold not room temp)

+1 if u name both priests from Count of Monte Cristo AND prison name (+2 if u name the four ppl he got revenge on and how)

Answers cuz imma forget