Phalen,+Lauren

West Des Moines Valley '15 - debated for 4 years University of Iowa '19- Currently debating

If you want to contact me, my email is phalenlauren@gmail.com

Argument preference- Read what you wan't as long as you can explain it to me and debate it well. In high school I preferred to read policy arguments,but I am open to judging kritiks as long it is contextualized to the round and not just you reading me your pre-written blocks and sitting down.
 * General Info-**

Don't clip cards and don't cheat, its annoying and you will lose the round.

Pls do line by line and evidence comparison

One thing I struggled with and alot of other debaters do is understanding that slowing down in your speeches and being clear is much better than being slightly faster and tripping over you words/ having the judges not be able to understand what you say. Clarity is a pre-req to a win <3

I don't take prep for flashing, but don't take a billion years to flash.

Narrow the debate in the rebuttals. Don't just throw every argument you can think of and hope it sticks at the end of the day- spend more time on the most important parts of the debate and capitalize on the most critical arguments your winning. Depth over breadth.


 * Specifics-**
 * T**- In my opinion this is really hard to win on in well-debated rounds, but if you can do good impact and internal link analysis, go ahead! I usually default to reasonability most times, but you have to tell me what that means.


 * CP's-** Aff should do comparative analysis on why solvency defecits o/w risk of the net benefit, and neg should do the opposite. It's up to the debaters to decide if a cp is cheating or not. Neg, explain the counterplan to me. Slow down on the CP text.


 * Disads-** Do line by line, comparative impact analysis, and have warrants! I like disads.


 * K's-** Like I said above, I am fine with them. Please do comparative analysis and explain things. Obviously I don't need you to dumb it down for me or spend an unreasonable time explaining the basics to me, but you need to have warranted explanation of how the alternative works, impacts, etc. Basically have warrants. Neg, you need to have more than generic topic links, or atleast make it seem like you do. If you win the framework debate you probably will win the debate!