Sophs+TGFL+Lab+Practice+Speech+Comments

= = =**__Comments - 2AC Politics Drills - July 12__**=

**Ben Packer**
Good speed/clarity, and good use of analytics Have more diversity in arguments - less Non Unique cards, and use that time to read more diverse link turns, or impact defense Intersperse your analytics with your cards instead of packing them at the top

** Andrew Spomer **
Good use of impact calculus – maybe fill out the warrants more Very good analytics- can be more word efficient so that you can read more cards to back them up Need more offense – reading cards for your link turns, or stick to link defense and read impact turns A little more structure to your analytics and mixing them up with cards will make them easier to flow – so make the uniqueness arugments first, then the links etcetera, and front load them with what your argument is (ie. No impact – fears of climate change have been around for decades, or whatever the argument is)

** Hebaa **
Very fast, but should work on clarity (slightly louder might help, and clear breaks between tags/cards – so go slower on tags – or use numbers and really punch them out to make it clear ) Good argument diversity – Good pointing out parts of their cards that are insufficient – Good structure in terms of attacking each part of the disad - but to be more efficient you don’t need to repeat the whole neg argument, you can just make yours (don’t need to cite 1nc #1 etc)

**Mahvee Deo**
Good argument diversity – make sure on the uniqueness evidence you’re reading cards with diverse warrants Your analytic should have the argument frontloaded that you want the judge to flow – like writing a tag (ex: “No impact – their powell evidence says warming won’t happen for decades” ) More word efficient – don’t need to say “on to”

** Ken **
Good use of analytics and reading their cards – make sure to phrase card attacks as distinct arguments Very Fast – can work on word efficiency – you can cut out the “absolutely” “Specifically” “completely” “clearly” etcetera. Distinguish arguments – number punched out, or NEXT, AND etcetera Distinguish tags/cards a little bit more – either louder on tags or slightly slower etcera Good impact analysis but make sure you’re not stating what you’re going to do, but instead just go ahead and make the argument (so not “even if we lose lal the rest of this we’ll still win because,” just make the “case outweighs” arugment)

** Max **
Good job on the impact debate – in terms of taking out their offense for cap and trade when you’re going for a turn Good volume - will definitely help with your persuasiveness/command of the room I would recommend not just straight impact turning, unless there is a larger strategic reason to. It puts you in a tougher place in later speeches because you have nothingng else to go for Careful about possible tension between the “bad science” mead evidence and your ice age turn.

** Conor **
Great volume/speed/clarity Work on strategic choices (see comments to Max about not necessarily just impact turning, maybe read some link/uniqueness defense, and about the Mead card having some tension with your turn) Careful about reading the Internal link defense – the congressional action doesn’t solve argument takes out your ice age turn and seriously reduces your offense/makes part of your speech irrelevant.

**Konstantine**
Great Clarity and use of their cards- maybe work a little on speed really good diversity in terms of arguments and having some offense on the flow as well You can be more word efficient on analytics - and frontload them so they make succinct arguments (you don't need to cite their argument as extensively) Maybe cut out one of the Uniqueness or impact defense cards wth the same warrant and instead read an internal link takeout, or make your other analytic.

**Anshuman**
Good speed and clarity Good argument diversity- but need to be a little more careful about what arguments you're choosing to run. Be careful not to double turn yourself - you've read both a link and an impact turn which mean that if the Negative concedes your uniqueness args and turns on the disad, then it is functionally a new disad against you that you don't have answers to. So in this case you've said that Cap and trade won't pass, Plan makes it pass (boosts Political Capital), and that it passing is bad (because of economy/ and because it solves warming which is good at preventing an ice age). We'll talk about this more in lab - but you should choose to EITHER link turn OR impact turn (in this case I think Link turning is more strategic) Can be more efficient moving between arguments - so instead of "next B." just number your arguments, or say AND or NEXT between them.

Luke
Good use of distinguishing between arguments - try to keep numbering consistent (so instead of letters stick to numbers of Next/And) Good volume, can work on enunciation a little bit. Good use of impact comparison - but try not to resummarize the argument you've made in this speech - save arguments about why yours outweigh or are better for comparative work in later speeches. Always bring up more than you think you have time for so that you use up all of your time. Good job taking out their impact when going for impact turns.

**Shreyas**
Good posture but try to work on your clarity in cards a little bit Great analytics - good comparison of uniqueness evidence and hte first one is well structured - maybe group 4 and 5 into two subpoints (a and b) of a prefer our evidence argument on the uniqueness debate Second set of analytics could be more word efficient - so instead of "card is irrelevant and wrong - it's talking about a UK treaty which can't be used to asses the situation currently" - front load this into a stronger argument at the front and try to make it a little more efficient (something like "No impact - their evidence is about a UK Treaty not Cap and Trade" or whatever your argument is. Good use of impact comparisons - but maybe phrase the "We capture their advantage" as "Case solves the impact" ... and why.

**Erik**
Good volume, you can maybe work on appearing confident right off the bat, even before you start speaking Good card comparison on the uniqueness debate - maybe structure your "newness" arguments a little more succinctly and offensively instead of just stating it's newness - so "Prefer our evidence - it post dates and... " that's important because .... Be careful about double turning yourself - see Anshuman's comments about this.

Great speed and volume, you have a very mature/comfortable style - it sounds great Work on endurance – you slow near end Start slower and speed up in order to help judges flow you more easily. Careful about double turn- see Anshuman comments Try to take up more than you think you'll have time to read - you want to use all of your speech time.
 * Matthew**


 * __Matt's Labbies:__**

__**Ken**__ - - Good volume – that will be a nice help for commanding the room/presence - Good diversity of arguments – although you read three non-uniques, they all had different warrants - Continue to work on building up speed - Always be aware of your height – always build a tall enough podium. - It is good to have analytics – make your analytics more arguments, than questions. Make your timeframe arguments more comparative with the Aff. Always give the “why” to your arguments (the warrants), even with analytical. - Typically, it is better to link turn than impact turn on the Politics DA. You need to view the link level as your ground – those are cards specific to your Aff. The Aff should always have better quality link turns to a politics DA than the Negative’s link. - When impact turning, you need to take out the impact before you externally turn. - Good volume – you have a nice command of the room - Good to point out that the shell link card is not specific to Afghanistan - Good diversity of arguments. - Great argument to claim that Afghanistan troop withdrawal now to non-unique the link – be careful with that argument, however. You don’t want to non-unique the internal links to your Aff. - Keep like arguments together – we jumped around a lot. Give all of your non-uniques, then all of your no links/link turns. - Answer the DA as one story – “My 1 – Energy Bill won’t pass now” – avoid answering the DA story card by card - You have a nice speed already…we want to keep that up with more speaking drills. You already have a nice rhythm started which is half the battle. - Good diversity of arguments – although you four non-uniques, they all had different warrants. I think we probably could have read one less non-uniquness argument. It is good to have a diversity of non-unique arguments but it is better to have a diversity on all parts of the flow. - Typically, it is better to link turn than impact turn on the Politics DA. You need to view the link level as your ground – those are cards specific to your Aff. The Aff should always have better quality link turns to a politics DA than the Negative’s link. - When impact turning, you need to take out the impact before you externally turn. - Instead of reading “Warming is all hype”, it is better to make an argument that “warming does not equal extinction” or “we can adapt”. The arguments that you read take out your impact turn (Ice Age). - Great volume. - You have the start of a good rhythm to be a nice, fast clear debater. You should really see some progress these four weeks in your speed. - When building up your speed, we want to work on the “scan and load” technique. There were times that you got caught up on a few words. To be super effective at speed reading, your eyes should be scanning and loading a few words in your brain ahead of what you are speaking. - Good variety of uniqueness arguments. - Very well-organized – clear transitions between arguments/cards - Great to have offense, but choose – either read link turns (preferable) or impact turns. Your double-turn creates a new DA against you. I would nix the “Cap and Trade hurts US economy” card. - Good volume and clarity. - We will want to work on getting your speed going. We need to work on “scanning the information” – your eyes should always be a few words ahead of what you are speaking. - It was great to have a speech chock full of evidence. Make sure that you diversify your arguments. You read A LOT of uniqueness cards…many with the same warrant. Read a couple of uniqueness cards but make sure they are giving different reasons why energy bill won’t pass. - Make sure to either (a) number your arguments or (b) separate arguments with words like “And” or “Next” - It is great to have analytical arguments in the 2AC – any time you make an impact analytical, contextualize that argument in comparison to your Aff. - Answer the DA as one whole “story” – when answering an off-case position, don’t answer evidence piece by piece. - Use the 1NC organization structure to organize your arguments – put uniqueness arguments before your impact arguments. - Try to work in some offense! - Try to “label” your arguments – it is good to say “won’t pass” or “non-unique” before giving the warrants - Nice speed! Very nice. You kept up a great rhythm. Most young debaters start off fast and then trail off. You kept up the speed. - Great diversity of arguments. You read two uniqueness cards with different warrants. - I am VERY glad you chose the route of a very offensive speech. However, we want to make sure not to double-turn. You should choose to either (a) link turn by reading cards like the “Winners’ Win” argument or (b) Warming Good – staves off Ice Age. Reading both link turns and impact turns creates a whole new DA against you. - Good to play defense against the impact when impact turning. In an ideal world (where you have all of your tubs and any piece of evidence at your disposal), try to play defense against the impact that does not take out your impact turn. Ideally, instead of saying “No warming…it is all hype” (which takes out your Ice Age link), you would want to say “Warming does not equal extinction” or “we can adapt to the bad impacts of warming”. - Overall, your clarity was pretty good. When “starting out of the gate”, slow down a little bit. It is good to build in to your speed so the judge does not lose the first few words of the first tag. You have good speed for a debater of your experience. We do want to focus on clarity. - Great volume. - Good posture (sounds lame but this will be important as we continue to build your speed). - One “clarity’ drill I want you to work on is circling key words in pieces of evidence – this will be a reminder for you to vocally “punch” key words. If you are a 1A, do this with the 1AC. If you are a 2A, do this with some of your key 2AC blocks. - Yay! We did a good job with two key parts of a great 2AC – offense and variety. You had solid link turns (and no impact turns :)) and read a great diversity of uniqueness warrants. - I would like to see some analytical work. - Good speed. We do want to work on clarity. Clarity got better at the end, but that may have been because your speed slowed down. We want to work on keeping the speed throughout the speech and increasing clarity. - When answering an off-case position, you want to answer the DA as one whole story. We want to eliminate the “they said X”. It should just be “My 1” - One thing that will help with clarity is to work on posture - I do like the fact that you are indicting some of their evidence with analyticals. It shows that you are thinking. However, one thing we will work on is knowing what arguments are “non-starters”. To say that there card is “generic” is not a round-winner, but is a reason your link turn is preferable to their link. We need to “package” our analyticals in a more strategic way. - I am very glad to see that you had an offensive speech but did not double-turn. I am glad that you decided to have offense on the link level and then just played defense on the impact level.
 * __Tate's Labbies:__**
 * __Arjun__** –
 * __Anjay__** –
 * __Carol__** –
 * __Anjali__** –
 * __Emma__** –
 * __Imanol__**-
 * __Tanner__** –