Gutierrez,+Mirella

__Experience__ Claremont High School Was on the team for 3 years 2010-13 Events: Parliamentary Debate, Congress, IX, Extemp

__Judging History__ Stanford Invitational (2014), Varsity LD Wolfpack Invitational (2014, 2015, 2016), Open/Novice LD, Congress, Parli State (Modesto, 2014), Varsity LD, Extemp Cal Berkeley Invitational (2015), Open Congress Stanford Invitational (2016), Open and Middle School Congress National Qualifiers (Los Osos 2016), LD, Policy, IX

__Paradigm__ I consider myself a "flay" judge. I will always flow the round and tend to make my final decision based upon that. However, if you are going to run something like theory, then you will need to spell it out for me. As long as you present it clearly, I should be able to get the gist of it. (Though I don't recommend running theory unless you can do it well) I am a blank slate judge and do my best to remove any personal biases when coming into the round. I place a large amount of importance on LINKS, WARRANTS, and IMPACTS.

__Preferences__ As a former debate student, I have seen a lot of rounds in a variety of debate events. I have no expectations of debate having to conform to a certain style, but rather enjoy the surprises that could happen in a round with good arguments.


 * Be courteous to your opponent, myself, and anyone else in the room. Being pretentious or rude will not win you points in the round or in life. It will in fact lose speaker points.
 * Give me some good clash. You should be ripping up your opponents in cross x, but not by calling them names.
 * Give me a road map. If you are meandering and lost in your arguments, I will be lost, too.
 * I am fine with spreading as long as it's clear. If your spreading is hard to understand then it is in your best interest to speak at a normal pace.
 * Know what you are talking about. You should understand your case and not just read something other people wrote.
 * You need to clearly make your own arguments, and not count on implications. Even if I understand that your opponent(s) are messing up, you need to verbalize that to actually win the round.
 * I don't recommend you run a K unless you know how to do it well.
 * Topicality should only be used if absolutely called for in the course of the debate.
 * Don't use outdated evidence. Keep your research current because the world changes every minute.
 * Time yourselves and be honest about it. Sneaking extra prep time or trying to do "off time road maps" will not win you favor. The teams that win have learned to use their allotted time well.
 * I do not disclose at the end of the round, unless instructed to do so by the tournament officials. If you ask, I will give feedback that may not already be written on the ballot.

I enjoy an engaging and fun round as much as any other judge or debater. Best of luck!