Durkin,+Andrew

Debated for three years at La Salle College High School, have assistant coached for four years following graduation.

I like substantive debates with lots of clash and that the students are knowledgeable in. Do whatever kind of debate that you like and that best compliments your skill set.


 * __General issues__**
 * Speed is fine
 * No prep time for flashing, but if you try to steal or are taking ridiculously long I’ll tell you when I start taking time
 * I default to tech over truth
 * Don't be rude to your opponents.


 * __T__**
 * T is a voting issue. T he same goes for a negative framework against critical affs.
 * I usually default to competing interpretations, but I can be persuaded on reasonability.


 * __DA__**
 * The thing I’ll look to most on this flow is the link chain. I personally think most impacts are really bad, and most of the time the reason for that can be found in the internal links
 * Please do impact calc. Yelling extinction doesn’t count


 * __CP__**
 * CP (especially advantage CP) are great strategies if run properly. Just make sure to have a solvency advocate to back it up and to explain the net benefits
 * Perms are awesome. Do them.


 * __K__**
 * If you can’t explain the thesis of what your author is talking about, don’t run that k. I’m very skeptical when students try running psychoanalysis or other complex modernist/post-modern theory. There are students who can do that, just make sure to show me that you’re one of them.
 * I'm generally fine with whatever K you run, but I look to the link level closely. Students should explain that aspect of the debate very thoroughly


 * __Theory__**
 * I’m more than willing to vote on theory. If you don’t warrant it out properly it’s probably not a reason to reject the team (just saying the words doesn't make it true). That being said, if I have it flowed and reasoned out that’s a round winner
 * I'll vote on multi condo, but single condo is going to be an uphill battle.

Ask me any specific question when I get to the room.