Spurlock,+Christopher

I have been involved with policy debate for 10 years. I debated for 4 years in Southern Colorado for Canon City High School. College: 1 Year at Wyoming 2 Years at Fort Hays 2 years at University of Central Oklahoma 1 year at UT San Antonio

Current Coach at UT San Antonio and Winston Churchill High School.

Here's what you care about:

I think that the coolest thing about debate is that it has no rules, or rather, that the rules of the game itself are up for debate. This offers debaters the ability to make debate into whatever you want it to be. It is also why I will not be very persuaded by claims that certain arguments are outside of my "jurisdiction" to vote on.

Theory - I generally hate it. Technical theory debates that are mostly just blocks being read at each other do not interest me.

Policy Debate - if you are a straight up, disad/counterplan type debater and this kind of literature is why you are in debate, go for it and defend it. I'd rather you do something that you are really good at than try to appease me.

Kritik Debate - This is what I have done for the past 8+ years. This is why i do debate.

Flowing - I'll flow however you want me to. I'll usually default to either divide pages on my laptop or seaparate pages for each speech when I am writing out my flows. Just let me know. Even if you don't want me to flow your speeches - I don't care.

It's your game: make it awesome, destroy it, render it inoperative, queer it, politicize it, whatever - just tell me why what you do is good (or why not being good is good!)

If it helps, these are the judges I try to draw upon that I have a tremendous amount of respect for: Luis Magallon, Omar Guevara, bill shanahan, Mike Hester, Phil Samuels

This list is nowhere near comprehensive - but these are the names that stand out as I'm writing this.