Nemerow,+Seth

I spent two years at Potomac Senior High School specializing in LD, as well as doing a decent amount of PF debate. Afterward, I've helped to introduce students into debate and working on the finer parts of debate with the more advanced students.

LD debaters need to establish a very strong Value and Value Criterion, and keep those ideas flowing throughout the case, otherwise the debaters risk losing their value and possibly the round. I prefer a philosophical-based case, but will not ignore a stat-based case or other types of cases as long as they provide proper impact; I also accept theory shells that are constructed well. I can function under basic speed, but past a certain speed I cannot guarantee I will catch every point. As well, I prefer a few strong points as opposed to a 10 minute cased spreaded into 6.

PF debaters need to, first and foremost, be polite and be calm during crossfire; nothing is more angering than a crossfire that I have to plug my ears for fear of becoming deaf. The debaters need to provide strong points backed by evidence that can be provided to the opponent if questioned. PF provides for a little more leniency for speed, but still be careful to not move too fast.

To guarantee a win in the round in both LD and PF, hearing at least a basic road map will help me greatly to understand and follow your case. Pulling a creative spin for a case will usually precede the common stock approach to cases, but not set in stone. As well, I'd like the last statements to crystallize the round to voting issues which make the judging that much easier.