Lechtreck,+Bob

Bob Lechtreck

40 years in the activity. 7 as debater in HS and College 15 years coaching HS debate 21 years coaching College debate (some overlap)

Here is the important stuff......

I guess the older I get the more difficult it becomes to describe my judging philosophy. I realize that puts me into a category called “curmudgeon”, but I have learned to live with that.

There are a number of people, who like the direction policy debate is going, who have engaged me on my philosophy. They have been unsuccessful in overcoming my biases. You are welcome to try, but I tire of the discussion rather quicky. The best course of action is to meet my standards or strike me.

Here are some things I like to see in a debate: Clash, impact analysis, a topical plan text (yup, the United States Federal Government – the body of government that operates out of Washington DC - MUST take the action(s) listed in the resolution), clarity, good cards, c/plans, theory, and respect for one another.

Here are some things I do NOT like to see in a debate: Pushing the play button, poetry, choral reading, Hip-Hop music, wearing costumes or eyepatches, interpretive dance (unless you have to use the restroom), sexual assaults (even if they are staged), rudeness and over aggression, ridiculously over-tagged cards, anger of any kind, the judge having to say “clear” or “slow”, or sanctimony.

Do these dislikes mean that I will throw heavy objects at you and storm out of the room if you do them? Nope, I will watch and listen intently. Then I will more than likely vote for the other team and call it a day.

I used to pride myself on being very open-minded and lesser interventionist, but these days I just can’t find the handle on it. I know that this activity belongs to the debaters, I have always said so. To that extent, I will let you do what you want. But I have a small part in the process as well, and I am going to be true to that. You ask me to rethink, but I like the way I think. You ask me to step out of my traditional mindset, but I truely believe that my traditional mindset is correct and better for debate. You ask me to be uncomfortable and you do things to MAKE me be uncomfortable, but I don’t like that and will not reward you for it. I have a core set of beliefs, and I seriously doubt that you are going to miraculously overcome those beliefs. You are, however, welcome to try…… just don’t say that I didn’t warn you.

Some other general warnings: I am not nearly as fast a flow as I once was. I keep a very nice flow, but not a fast one. Take the time to go ahead and slow down. Don’t make me have to tell you.

Additionally, I realize that the current trend on inflated speaker points is a scale of 27-30. Again, that ain’t MY scale. My points scale goes from 20-30, and a good debater will likely get 25 to 26 points. It takes a very good debater to get 27 and a great debater to get 28. 29 is reserved for the amazing.

Finally, I have a rather different view on critical arguments. If my ballot is a tool, or if I am asked to make a real world difference, then I will vote my conscience and NOT the flow. As long as this is a game where nothing really happens, I will vote on the most idiotic scenarios. But if my decision makes a real difference, then I will ballot MY beliefs and not yours. And to give you fair warning, MY beliefs tend to be rather conservative………….

Questions?????