Schwartz,+Alyssa

I debated for 4 years at Weston High School, and I'm now debating my 3rd year at the University of Rochester. I am very flow-centric, and expect you to engage in line-by-line debate. I have gone for a wide variety of both policy and critique arguments and don't have any particular argument preferences, so you're better off running what you're good at in front of me. Your best bet is to warrant and impact your arguments- that will definitely help your speaker points and who ever does better comparative impact analysis is probably going to get my ballot. Evidence quality is important, but your ability to articulate what it means in the context of the round is more important. Speed is not an issue at all, but you need to be clear. Some specifics: DAs: They're awesome. Make sure you have a clear link and internal link story. CPs: Also good. I tend to lean neg on theory questions, but can be persuaded otherwise. Case debate: yes! everyone needs more of this.... Kritiks: I can follow you in a K debate, but I might not be well read in your specific author, so I need a clear explanation of terms/concepts, and you should isolate an impact. Theory: I default to competing interpretations unless the debaters tell me otherwise. Proof of in-round abuse helps your case, but I'm also likely to vote for you if you have clearly articulated standards that are compared in the worlds of your interpretation and your opponents interpretation