Policy

I am a policy maker – an impact calc. is crucial to me. Really provide in-depth analysis for risks/scenarios/advantages. Whatever you run in the round just make sure you do it well. I like intelligent clash and not getting stuck in a time suck over less relevant arguments.

T – Please make sure to provide a quality definition and show why your interpretation is to be preferred. Do not use it was a way to wrap the entire debate up on a T argument and waste time.

DA – The more specific the link the better. I don’t really care for super generic canned disads. Show why the big bad is more likely to happen with what you read than in aff world.

K – I am open to a Kritik, but you need to really understand and explain it well. It really comes down to your explanation though if I buy it. Don’t run one in the 2NC – I find it to be unfair to aff.

CP – Like everything else if you run it well, I am a fan. I think naturally it makes more since for it to be plan inclusive, but you can set it up anyway you’d like with the right evidence.

Theory – I strongly dislike theory arguments. You can run one if it is necessary but don’t wrap the whole debate up in a theory argument.

Speed – I think I can flow just about anything, but I will say “clear” if needed or stop flowing.

• I believe content is the heart of any speech, and its potency lies in its ability to inform, inspire, and engage. From captivating anecdotes to thought-provoking statistics, every element should serve a purpose in driving the narrative forward. As an Extemporaneous Speaker, competitors should be able to enforce their content with valid and timely sources. These sources must be part of the presentation.

• Delivery is the vessel through which content is conveyed, and its impact cannot be overstated. From vocal modulation to body language, mastering delivery techniques is essential for commanding attention and conveying confidence. By practicing articulation, pacing, and posture, we elevate our presence in the room we leave a mark on listeners.

• Authenticity is the cornerstone of effective communication. Audiences can sense sincerity from a mile away, and it is our genuine passion and conviction that truly connect us with them. By embracing vulnerability, sharing personal insights, and speaking from the heart, we forge authentic connections that transcend the boundaries of rhetoric.

I believe that first and foremost all debate should be based on communication. To that end be sure that you do not utilize forms of debate which leave the audience more bewildered than informed.

When it comes to speed, don' get a ticket. But, I will hang with you until about 350 words per minute. Exceeding that barrier will leave me with the impression that you are yet another lost narcissist with dreams of sugar TOC fairies dancing through your head.

Style, I consider myself a policymaker, although my wife seldom agrees. In argumentation, I like most arguments, however, I hate K debate when it turns totally ridiculous, i.e. time machines, comfort (keep your clothes on), pinkwashing, etc, I like theory arguments to be justified and tied to other arguments in the round that warrant their use. Humor is a plus when used appropriately.

I don't care about your WIKI. I won't ask you for your evidence after the round (Unless one of you is lying, then the liar loses). And, I don't care what your coach thinks. You're the one debating. Speak like your life depends on it.

In the end, I want to think, wow he/she would make a great president, not argh, ...another cute dog catcher. Represent the sport well.

Let the games begin.

Coach at Abilene High School

General Notes

For Debate, I'm looking for quality, strong arguments delivered effectively. Style is important to me because this is still fundamentally an act of communication. For Speech, I want to be engaged and drawn in. As a coach myself, my goal is to give you constructive feedback that you can use for future rounds.

Event Specific Notes

CX - Competed for 1 year, judged for 15 years, & coached for 3.

I learned policy debate as a stock issues debater and judge, but have been moving towards being a policymaker ever since. I want to see clear, focused cases. That said, do not alter your normal style to fit me--I promise I can keep up structure-wise. Signposting and clear tags should be used throughout speeches. If I'm unsure where something goes on the flow, it may not make it on the flow. This is important because I ultimately decide based on my flow. I'm fine with new in the 2, just be sure to clearly signpost and tag so things end up in the right place on my flow. While we're at it, I'll be flowing on my computer.

AFF: I understand that AFF cases can be structured in a few different ways, so as long as you signpost and are clear with your tags, you'll be fine. The AFF has fiat except for funding. I expect the 1AC to be smooth and polished since you bring it into the round with you.

NEG: I love DAs and CPs. T should be addressed, but don't camp out there unless your opponent is very obviously out of bounds. Theory and Ks are welcome as long as they are adequately explained; if I and your opponent do not know what's going on, you've wasted everyone's time.

LD- Competed for 2 years, judged for 15, & coached for 3.

I am a traditional LD judge, meaning I need structure, clear value and criterion, and clash. Framework is key. Do. Not. Spread. Communicate. I'll be flowing along on paper, so be sure to signpost and give clear tags.

Extemp - Competed for 4 years, qualified for UIL State, judged for 15, & coached for 3.

Answer the question! Clear organization and sourcework are how you set yourself apart for me. If you don't cite sources, I'll drop you to the bottom of the round. I should be engaged the entire time. I'm a big fan of strong AGDs that run as a controlling metaphor throughout your speech. This shows your deep engagement with the question at hand. That being said, don't burn your time on your introduction: you only have 7 minutes!

Congress - Judged for 3 years, coached for 3 with UIL State Qualifiers every year.

Congress rounds are long so you win by standing out; you stand out by being active in the chamber. Since speaking time can be limited in a competitive room, make your speeches count. You're more than welcome to bring notes, but this is a speaking contest, so don't read straight from your manuscript/notes. Use your sources. After the initial AFF/NEG speeches, I want to hear new arguments and/or clash with previous speakers. During cross-examination, I want the speaker poised and ready for whatever the chamber throws at them. For the questioners, I want cutting questions to get at the real implications of the speaker's ideas. I want a PO who is in control, confident, and keeps things moving along. It is the PO's responsibility to get as many speeches in the round as possible, so keep things moving quickly.

Speech and Interp Events- Judged for 15 years, coached for 2.

Entertain and engage me! I'm picky on the specifics of each event, so stay in that lane. I rank as I go, so if you're early in the speaker order, swing for the fences and give it your all. You've got to be so good that no one who follows can keep up. If you're later in the speaker order, know that you're potentially having to follow other good speakers, so be big and make me forget everyone who came before you.