Shatzkin,+Daniel

A little about me first, I was a policy debater for 4 years in high school, went to college stopped debating. I'm currently a coach at American Heritage Plantation/Boca. I have no problem with speed just try and slow down on the tags a bit. Other then the specifics below, I'm open to all arguments, use this as guide to how to debate in front of me using whatever strat you want, at the end of the round I'll vote on what you tell me to vote on.


 * __Lincoln Douglas__ (**Updated 1/19/16)

I __**do not**__ want to listen to a theory debate and you will probably not get very high speaks if you force the debate in this direction. This means I don't want to hear frivolous theory arguments like OSPEC, ASPEC, ESPEC, FSPEC etc. I probably wont vote on an RVI in most cases and will almost always just reject the argument it will take a very convincing argument to get me to pull the trigger on RVI's.I'm fine with AC's having minimal theory spikes but those spikes should help move the debate into a topical discussion. If you run an AC where the only way to engage it is to run theory will not go over well with me and I will be very prone to listen to neg theoretical objections to the aff but it really needs to be a very abusive shell. Aff's should be topical and negs should be able to challenge the aff in multiple fashions. You don't need a traditional value structure but please provide my with weighing mechanisms and some sort of clear advocacy that at least for the aff should be topical. If you are going to run theory in front of me make sure you slow down and I really mean slow down. Theory is incredibly difficult to flow especially when you want to get everything exactly as it is stated in the round and when these debates come down to nuanced interpretations of debate it becomes very difficult to evaluate. I'm fine with K's and larp style debate as long as it's topical and you can explain the link and internal link stories really well. If you want a 30 don't force a theory debate and make intelligent arguments.

__**Policy**__

I haven't judged policy regularly in about 2 years so my knowledge on the current topic lit is pretty low. Aff's should be topical even if they don't have explicit plan texts. I'll vote on pretty much everything as long as it's a topical aff or the neg arguments have explicit links and are logical and understandable.