Kamath,+Yash

ykamath [at] usc [dot] edu [add me to email chain] can't judge: Wichita East, Loyola Rounds on Draft Topic: 30 Last Updated: post-Greenhill 9/19/17

Wichita East '15 USC '19 4 years HS policy, currently coaching Loyola policy + LD

Important things:
 * 1. Flashing is not prep. **
 * 2. Clipping cards, reading ahead in speech docs, falsifying evidence, all auto-losses.**
 * 3. Disclosure is absolutely necessary.**
 * 4. Arguments need //warrants.// No warrants = not an argument.**

T- Neg- Case list, impacts to your standards, and topical version of the aff are all very persuasive. Aff- Reasonability is not as a persuasive as a robust defense of your great counter-interpretation and disads to their interp.
 * I will try my best not to intervene in a debate. Execute whatever strategy you are best at, and do it well. I will listen and evaluate almost every argument tabula rasa. You do you.**
 * Here are my argument //preferences//:**

K- Neg- Explain the alt well. The link and impact story is usually what the neg is superb at, but if you don't explain the alt well, you will lose. 2NC/1NR tricks are great if executed properly. Aff- Impact turns, disads to the alt, and permutations are persuasive.

CP- Neg- Happy with most, not a fan of process cps or generic word pics, but I will still vote for them if executed properly. Aff- Solvency deficit, and defense to the net benefit (whatever page it is on), are very persuasive.

DA- Neg- Turns case, and impact framing are very persuasive. Aff- With good technical debating, I do believe in a possible 0% risk of the disad.

Case Neg- Case turns, and case specific defense are very persuasive. A ton of generic impact defense not so much. Aff- Your answers to case args should be fantastic, no excuses for a poor performance on something for which you have had unlimited prep.

Theory- Mostly lean neg, again interp and counter-interps are key. 2 condo is fine, 3 is still okay, 4 and my threshold for an aff theory arg will be very low.

No-plan affs- Aff- This is fine. Please explain what voting aff means, what you have to win for me to vote aff. Neg- Answer the case. T and framework (content guidelines), impact turns, and criticisms are very persuasive.

High speaker points: 1. Great strategic moves. Technical strength will serve you well. 2. Humor. Only if you are funny. 3. Great case debate. 4. Number/letter arguments.

Low speaker points: 1. Not clear. Can't stand this. Hurts me, your partner, the other team, and the quality of the debate at the whole. 2. //Really// stupid arguments. If you have to ask if it meets the //really// stupid threshold then don't read it.


 * Don't be rude or obnoxious. In debate and in life.**