Frydman,+Alejandro

I debated LD for University School in South Florida for 4 years and graduated in 2015. I broke at a couple of national tournament my junior and senior year and ended with one bid my senior year. I currently am a freshman at Washington University in St. Louis

= DISCLAIMER: I haven’t judged a round since the summer and haven’t flowed since then either so my flowing abilities probably will not be able to handle your top speed. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE start a little slower and then usual. I also don't know anything about current trends or the topic so don’t assume I do. =

I also generally sucked at flowing so really focus on signposting and clarity. I’ll say clear as many times as I need to but if it starts getting ridiculous I’m not going to stop flowing but I will get annoyed and that's not good for you.

I hated when judges had super dogmatic views of debate and attempted to impose their views on everyone. Therefore, I will try to intervene as little as possible and you should read whatever you want to in front of me.

My only real default is truth testing because that was how I debated.

You probably shouldn’t pref me if you read mostly utilitarian/policy oriented positions because I probably can’t properly adjudicate them.

SLOW DOWN for tags, interps, etc

K’s can be cool but I never read much critical literature so if you are going to read it please explain it as best as you can.

I don't really have any views on the k vs. theory debate; I think both sides have merit and depends on the particular shell and kritik

If you are reading a complicated position err to OVEREXPLAINING because I wont vote for something I don't understand. If I am confused, you will probably be able to tell because of my face and expressions.

I thought speaker points were the most arbitrary element of debate and I hated when judges cerates random scales that they claimed to determine what counts as an “out rounds” debater vs. a “3-3 debater.” You will get high speaks if you execute a good strategy not if you are a known debater. Regardless here are some things that will increase your probability of getting high/low speaks:

For high speaks: 1) Good strategic choices 2) Cool/unique positions 3) Quality framework debates 4) Strategic theory shells 5) Efficiency and signposting 6) Lots of weighing 7) Being funny or entertaining is always good. For lower speaks:  1) Being means 2) Being offensive in any way 3) Really bad strategy 4) Excluding other debaters i.e. novices 5) Lying not being straightforward about your position. Sketchy strategies can be good (I occasionally read them), just don’t like about them to people who clearly don't know what you are talking about.

This probably isn’t very helpful so just ask me questions before the round.