McHugh,+Joseph

Background 1 year college @ Wichita State 2 years asst coach @ Edina MN Currently asst coach @ Kapun MT. Carmel

I think I am a relatively middle of the road judge on most issues. I would rather hear you debate whatever sort of strategy you do well than have you conform to my argumentative preferences. I might have more fun listening to a case/da debate, but if you best strat or skillset is something else, go for it.

I am open to listening to kritiks by either side, but I am more comfortable and familiar with policy arguments, so some additional explanation would be helpful, especially on the impact and alternative level. I generally think it is better for debate if the aff has a plan that is implemented, but I am open to hearing both sides. To be successful at framework debates in front of me, it is helpful to do more than articulate that your movement/project/affirmation is good, but also provide reasons why it is good to be included in debate in the format you choose

To win on dropped arguments, you still need to do enough work that I could make a coherent decision based on your explanation of the argument. Dropped = true, but you need a claim, warrant, and impact

I try my best to avoid reading evidence after a debate and think debaters should take this into account. I tend to only call for evidence if a) there is a debate about what a card says b) it is impossible to resolve an issue without reading the evidence myself. I prefer to let the debaters debate the quality of evidence rather than calling for a bunch of evidence and applying my own interpretations after the fact. I think that is a form of intervening. I also think it is important that you draw out the warrants in your evidence rather than relying on me to piece things together at the end of the debate. As a result, you would be better served explaining, applying, and comparing fewer really important arguments than blipping through a bunch of tag line/author name extensions. I can certainly flow you, but if the debate comes down to a comparison between arguments articulated in these manners, I tend to reward explanation and analysis.

I like smart, organized debates. I think too few debaters flow well these days and it can cost them. I tend to be frustrated by debaters who jump around or lack structure. If your debate is headed this direction (through your own doing or that of the other team), often the team that cleans things up usually benefits.

The biggest thing that I can say on here to help you debate in front of me is to write my ballot for me in 2nr/2ar (crystalize the round)

Be nice and have fun.