Proffitt,Rob

Head Coach- Parkway Central High School 4 years of High School LD 3 years of college policy-CEDA

I have judges about 30-40 rounds on the topic this year and have been pretty split on it. Parkway Central had never debated on the national circuit until I got there 3 years ago and we dont debate on it as much as I would like because of budget and travel constraints. I am ok with speed as long as it is clear. I am for the most part a policy maker but will let the debaters shape the round and tell me how they would like me to decide. If the teams in the round dont agree then that is part of the debate.

Topicality- I vote on "t" more than I thought. I enjoy this argument and I am ok with theory on it well. If it is just a time suck I am going to see right through that and most of the time will not pick it up. The Aff still has to answer it. A well presented block that has the defs, violations, standerds and voters are all necessary. I will also listen to the Aff placing a reverse voter on it, espically if it was a time suck. I do look to "t" first when deciding my ballot.

DA's- I am fine with any Da's. Most come down to the link story with me. If you run a DA that has a real generic link to the Aff plan and it is answered as such I am probably going to give the argument to the aff. I like the offense/defense flow here. I think the negative to win needs to have some offense on the flow unless they win the "t" debate. The offense is more important to me than just playing a lot of defense with the case debate.

CP's- I am fine here as well and love a round that has a good CP with net benefits. This again helps the Neg with offense in the round. K's- my least favorite of all the arguments and I wish most teams would stay away from them. No real use for them in debaqte. The debaters tend to just read a crazy block that nobody understands that has nothing to do with the resolution. I would stay away from this argument.

Performance- I have seen very few over the years but have found them to be humerous but not very educational. This argument is ok but I probably dont pick it up very often.

Theory- I will listen to a good theory debate but they are few and far between. I would rather have a debate on the substance issues (aff plan, politicies, healthcare, states solve for examples). Dont be shy about theory, just make sure you understand what you are running and explain it well. I would rather listen to the theory debate than the "K"

Overall, again I am going to let the debaters frame the debate. I will always listen to what is being said and will evaluate what is said in the round to reach my decision. Because we dont debate that much on the circuit teams tend to shy away from me but I enjoy judging these rounds and when given the chance have had no complaints.