I'm Tyler Crivella, current freshman at UTD and former Seven Lakes High School ('24) competitor. I have competed in every event TFA offers except POI and DUO. Slay all day.

Loud sounds, eating, chewing gum, sniffling, gaveling, and other sounds will down you. I have hearing disabilities and your articulation and reasonable (but not overbearing) projection are crucial to my participation. If I put headphones on, do not adjust to speak louder, it means you are too loud and you should likely adjust.

Debate:

Logistics first: you should do the following. Respect tab pronouns, show up on time, don't paraphrase, send speech docs quickly after prep time stopping, don't be agro in CX, warrant your extensions/turns/voters in back half because I will not vote just off a card saying it happens-- why tho? Email chain, please: crivelladebate(at)gmail(dot)comandtcrivella(at)me(dot)com. If disclosing, flip and send email chain tobothemailsbyposted round time, with or without me in the room. The second speaking team should reply in a timely manner relative to their event (PF gets about five minutes). Failure to meet the above standards will hurt your speaker points.

Not the best at handling spreading online. Talk to me before round if you want me to say clear or something of that matter. I can handle speed but I'm not flowing off the speech doc and most teams just cannot articulate well enough to get ink on the flow. I evaluate the round based on only arguments in the round. Your evidence means nothing to me without methodology or application. The warrant debate is something that I value more than most judges; still impact weigh but don't drop your delinks in the back half. I'm more than happy to vote for a K if the link is clear. You do you-- I'll vote for whatever you tell me.

PF: I am more than happy to vote off of theory arguments or Ks-- you obviously must win them but I can and have voted for them.I don’t think you should read any more than three contentions. If you spread and your articulation is bad or you read two words off a card, I probably won’t flow it and it’ll have been a loss of your time. I understand that you might be tired after all these rounds, but I am really a fan of dedication/enthusiasm. I know this is PF but you need to cite a warrant on your offense if you want it to be a voter in back half of the round. On this, extensions need to happen in the back half if you want to get my ballot. Obviously, please weigh. I will only use the metrics provided in the round and use as minimal judge intervention as possible. Tech over truth but the less truthful you are, the less the burden for responses.

CX:I try to be Tabula Rasa. Cool with Ks and T, but I don't have a very familiar understanding of a lot of the literature. If you cannot explain the K in plain English in cross, I'll likely drop that sheet of paper direct to the bin and bump your speaks down too. Check hearing disabilities above and look into reading a more flay case with me in terms of speed. I can handle it but I'm not flowing off the speech doc and most teams just cannot articulate well enough. Tech over truth but the less truthful you are, the less the burden for responses.

Congress:

If you PO, do not expect a free break. In a round of great speakers, you will be ranked under them even with perfect PO'ing. Do not gavel as PO or I will straight up kick you out of the room. Use the end of the stick, use hand signals, knock, get creative and be consistent. POs should run the room: asking for splits if needed, moving things along rather than a representative. I prefer two point speeches but I can ride with one argument speeches too. Refutation is a must if you are not giving the first three speeches and even those one should have some. Questioning is not a screaming match. More speeches ≠ better speaker. The "PO" and "two speech" meta is bad. I would rather the round hit four bills with good, short, and dense debate than a prolonged, dead round after twelve speeches on each bill. AGDs, fluency, stance, and general speech skills do actually matter; it's not just the flow. Amendments are a dead medium that should make a resurgence. Bryce Piotrowski is a mentor that has a lot of ideas on this event that I agree with.

Speech:

Don't adapt your speech for me unless it's a concern of volume/sounds, in which case that is existential to your placement. I will do time signals and if I mess them up, you will not receive any retribution or penalty. I suggest you ask me about how time signals will be given and about how the structure of the round will go if you aren't sure. Be a good spectator; no phones and no leaving during speeches.

Extemp:This event is my baby and I love it. Please don't break that opinion. I have a modern view on how extemp should be run but still a pretty basic rubric in most rounds. For 90% of all speeches, I don’t think the question gets answered enough. I care more for answering it than giving me a good, narrative impact or something. Focus on that and you will do good. For higher level extemp, I prefer speeches to be both comedic and dramatic: doing both in a speech is a lot more skillful than just one. No layered analysis unless you really, really think it'll work. Priorities are as follows:

1. Answering the Question
2. Quality of the Points
3. Quality of Analysis (Including background)
4. Stucture and Fluency
5. Presentation
6. Number and Quality of Sources