Wolfe,+Patrick

Experience: I competed in Debate in both Middle and High School on the local and national circuits. My primary event was LD throughout this time. Since graduating, I have spent the last four years judging and coaching.

Flow: I am fairly efficient at flowing, and can keep up with all speeds, including spewing. Just make sure to dictate clearly and well. Off-time road mapping is helpful, as is mentioning when moving from addressing one case to the other.

Paradigm: I've noticed that most LD debates progress very naturally, and the two competitors will attack some arguments with more strength than others. I tend to put more weight into the argument of these major themes that the debate takes. If you tell me that your opponent has completely overlooked a contention, I will definitely take that into account, but a dropped contention cannot win a debate if argumentation of other topics was subpar. If there is anything you specifically want me to take into account about the round, be sure to tell me.

Philosophy: Introducing philosophy into the LD round is always favorable in my eyes. The Value/Criterion debate, in essence, is creating your philosophical view of the resolution that you then use to debate the ethics of the resolution. If you can bring established philosophy into your case and use it to define your Value/Criterion or use it in observation of resolution, it will bring you a long way.

Framework: I have never used a framework in my own rounds, but I have judged frameworks before. When a framework is used, you must then make sure that the entire debate is meeting the terms of your framework. If you can your opponent to accept your framework, the debate should be an easy win; good argumentation on the framework from your opponent can dictate the tide of the debate.

Ks: If you are running a K, make sure to attack your opponents case thoroughly instead of just focusing on your K.