Smith,+Brennan


 * Bren Smith **


 * Debate 1 vs Ruby and Xiaojing **
 * Judge: Mimi **

bren - smart cross-x arguments about other instances of capitalism 2ac: use all of your time! you should think a bit more about what they're going to want to go for. probably the cap k because it's an insulated strategy with a lot of cards read on it in the 1nc take a moment before the 2ac to think about the round strategically - where are you able to get offense? the double turn is an obvious spot 2ar: when you're going for a conceded impact you have to do more than just tell the story you need to do impact calculus - the important thing is not the internal link story because they've spotted you that you should present the 2ar as a speech describing why you should win - you do a great job at the top of the speech when you begin to talk about that write the ballot for the judge think about the 2ar more strategically

6/27/12

cx of 1ac - I'm not sure where you're going with your questions. You should be either making an advantage go away or getting disadvantage links.

1nc - delivery fine. you missed the energy advantage. this is where 2n needs to help out--if your partner misses something, make sure he or she gets to it. the link to the cap k is a little dicey.

2nc/1nr (block) - the cap response cards were pretty good. you had enough time to explain in depth how they take out the perms. iffy job covering the big fat drop of the energy advantage. if something like this happens, 2nc needs to be on it. an explanation that the solvency responses take out all the advantages or that the cp solves for all the advantages would have helped cover this problem.

2nr - 2nr strat was completely telegraphed in the road map to the 2nc. If you mix it up a bit and put some effort into going for the 1nr arguments, 2ar will suffer a bit more.

7/1/12

bren, try to slow down for tags

good overall 2AC coverage, nice balance of analytics and evidence. you were pretty clear, especially for your speed

on the kritik, thanks for questioning their sort of shady alt

on ptx, you say obama will only get elected with your plan, bt then you read "ctbt bad". they can turn that on you, be careful

bren, you seem like you know kritiks well. good. this kritik in particular is super weak, i'm glad you recognize that you could have used your perm as offense. i mean, you didn't need to, to win the debate. but you could have thanks for speeding through case, makes the 2R more interesting thanks for the imapct weighing, over all a good 2AR

7/9--Neg v. Sam/Yassin--baxter

Bren—little to say about this speech, it was overall very good, perhaps too much time on t and not enough on the cp, you need to win it with a net benefit obvi—good job on topicality, develop a case list, clear examples of what bad shit happens under their interpretation