Heilig,+Lindsay

I'm a coach and have been a coach for the last 5 years. I did not compete in Debate at the collegiate level. That being said, I have a lot of background knowledge in different types of debate and a solid foundation about the current topic at hand.
 * Background:**

I go into every round under the assumption that the competitors should know more than I do. You should make an effort to show me that you know what you're talking about but don't adopt a "I know this so you should, too" attitude. Explain. Use analogies.

I prefer a policy round. I am not a "stock issues" judge, but I'd rather the round be based off of political justification and the weight or severity of disads and CPs. That being said, I'm fine with kritical affs as well.
 * Judging Preference:**

At the end of the day all I care about is a good debate. I believe it is the burden of the aff to present the style of debate that will be present in the round. If the aff wants to present me with a kritical round then I will judge the round based on the groundwork you lay out - unless of course the neg presents a better case as to why I should judge the round based off of another style.

I expect organization - don't be messy. Go down the flow every speech. Line by lines. Full underview during the rebuttals.

DON'T LIE during rebuttals. I pay attention, believe it or not.

I *DONT* like PICS Topicality

However, running these will not 100% result in losing a around. All I ask is that you ONLY run these if you *KNOW* you can win with them - because if you run them I will automatically look for reasons to not vote you up.