Oberoi,+Sidharth

I debated in High School for four years as Public Forum being my primary event. I received a TOC bid in PF. I now debate for the University of Utah and am in my second year of Parli debate.

I never actively participated in Policy debate but was constantly exposed to it throughout high school and have judged multiple tournaments in policy.

I am pretty chill with whatever you want to run and whatever you want to do. I am perfectly fine with speed, it will not throw me off. Procedurals are chill if you prove in round abuse and aren't using it merely as a time suck. You don't have to win in-round abuse but it definitely helps your story! I do love the strategy aspect of debate, so feel free to run procedurals, theory, or anything you want and not go for it in the end if you don't want. This is fine as long as it isn't abusive to the other team. I don't really vote on RVI's but if it is legit and goes conceded by the other team then I have no choice but to vote for it. If you run theory, be sure to put voters on it and it renders to be useless, I will vote for theory if it is articulated well.

I am fine with the K debate, make sure that you have solid links that are applicable to the round that you are debating in. I really don't like generic K's they ruin the debate because either there is no clash because the other team doesn't respond to the K because they don't understand it, or the K just gets lost in the round due to the lack of real links. But really just do whatever you want, it's not my job to control where the debate is going, if the K is solid, cool and interesting, I'll probs have a better time as a judge.

If it comes down to the big MPX debate be sure to include analysis about the time frame of the arguments and probability in your rebuttals, this makes it much easier for me to evaluate the round because then I don't have to do as much work. Trust me, you don't want me to have to do the work because we know that all teams get pissed when there is any sort of judge intervention. I refuse to intervene which means I might end up voting on some argument that you may not agree with. To avoid this tell me what matters!

Do not hide behind your evidence the entire debate. Nothing bothers me more than teams that just have frontlines written and don't add analytics to the debate or apply their frontlines to the round that they are in. Make sure that you engage the other team in the debate and not just make non-responsive answers to your opponents arguments.

I'll really vote on whatever you want me to if you're winning that debate, whether it be a DA, T, Perm, K, Theory, anything, just prove that you're winning and that your arguments take precedence over the rest of the round. If you're able to do this you'll pick up my ballot.

If you have any additional questions feel free to ask me about it before the round starts!