Xiaojing+Zeng


 * Xiaojing Zeng **


 * Debate 1 vs Bren and Saunder **
 * Judge: Mimi **

1nc: you need to separate flows - say when you're going to the next flow.

1nr: you do a lot of good card reading and read the right evidence but you need to mention what cards you're answering. The 1nr should include analytic arguments and an "overview" explaining the story of the disad and how the affirmative functions within it. You should try to do a portion including "framing" - talk about how the judge should evaluate the debate.


 * Debate 2 vs Lillie/Jacob **

Make sure to label each adv as an adv—you just say the name of it without really signposting—

You should at least attempt to answer questions before letting partner take over and answer them—ok you regain control later

1ar

You want to be helping Ruby prep (in fact, you want Ruby to help you, not the other way around)—1 tip—after the 2ac, during neg prep, figure out with Ruby which arguments she wants for the 2ar and begin prepping those—even if you have an explanation written out, it will save in prep time for later

And, as you are giving the speech, you want to keep extending stuff, no matter what—you seem to give up after about 3 minutes—use those other 2 minutes for other arguments as well

6/28/12 1NC: Work on clarity – it’s a little tough to understand you. It’s okay if you have to go a little slower. Zizek is pronounced “Zhee-zhek” Read all your offcase first, and then go to case, instead of putting one on the bottom. Read fewer case cards instead and put those in the 2NC. 1NC CX: Good cross-x answers – I can tell you understand your arguments well. 2AC CX: Look at me when you’re asking questions. I’m glad you pressed on the value to life argument. 1NR: Kick out of the elections DA – say an impact was never read so it doesn’t matter that they straight-turned it. Good line by line. I love the overview on the budget DA.

7/1/12

please differentiate in tone/speed between tags and evidence and sign post you're not gaining speed by rushing, it's really slowing you down never admit to no threshold on a DA. you're asking for some nasty theory slow down, mama! it's better to be clear that fast. when you try to speed up, you stutter, and slow yourself down SIGNPOST i know they doubleturned, but you still have to defend your DA somehow. make sure to extend all your cards through on both budget and politics respond to their specific cards and arguments. go line by line

TOURNEY ROUND I Breacheal (Aff) v. Xiaowang (Neg) Judge: Weber (weberdebate@gmail.com for questions)

CX of 1AC: Careful in CX about asking questions that don't directly address the case ("Are there other ways to solve?"); you want to focus on more questions like your second set about the specific warrants for rural advantages. Also, work on managing your CX time a little better--you only got two lines of questioning in. Good job overall, though.

2NC: Good split of the block but why put elections at the top? I hardly think this is your strongest position. Also, once you get the oncase, work on extending specific warrants and not just the claims from earlier evidence (you do a good job of extending the solvency evidence, for example, but then don't give me any reason to believe your claim ("people want to drive") over the opponents' ("would like to use transit"). You can make this comparative analysis much more powerful by discussing the data and warrants rather than just the claims. Also--and this is a big one--work with your partner to better organize how you split the block; you shouldn't have two minutes left at the end of the 2NC. Always prep your way into what you think will be the 1NR ground so if you have extra time you can help him out and take some work off his plate. The 1NR should be prepping from the end of their speech backward for this reason.

2NR: Call me crazy, but the K should definitely go at the top here (ok, I see, kicks and drops first). Link concessions on K are key and need to be leveraged into your impact calc (they're granting you 100% probability of the link...). Excellent 2NR analysis and crystallization--you do an awesome job extending your ev and contextualizing it into your advocacy. I would like to see a bit more specific data & warrant analysis--some of your extensions just discuss the claim--but overall, this is an excellent rebuttal. Good work.  tourney rd 2 Edstrom   1a xiaojing(jj)- fill your speech time! there are a lot more good cards to put in the 1AC for this affirmative. good job questioning them on the kritik links. some of your coverage is a bit thin. you have good arguments, but in all honesty I think you will have a tough time winning this debate without condo because you don’t really have any defense to get out of your own double turn. generally, think about how you can best win the debate. there are parts of this speech where you don’t tell me why an argument doesn’t matter, and I’m certainly not going to do that for you. also, keep in mind argument diversity. don’t make one argument on each flow, decide which arguments form a strategy and go for them together.