Hancock,+Casey

Experience: 3 years, High School, Policy - Kansas (Primarily Plan/Adv vs. DA/CP). 1 year APDA Parli (it just eats at my soul). If you are familiar with KU's team, they taught me. Policy is king in Kansas. I find that I am fairly lazy when it comes to committing to some sort of broad paradigm, so I generally like intelligent, warranted arguments. I will subscribe to any speaker point guide published by the tournament (because I honestly don't know what the norm is around here). If they don't have one, 26 is awful, 27.5 is average, 29 is a minor crush on your debating abilities - 30s are unlikely. - Roadmaps should be off time and you must sign post because I won't try to structure the flow for you. If I don't know where you are, I will put my pen down. - The round will come down to impacts of some kind, so I need them well explained, clearly highlighted, and warranted The kinds of impacts are up to you to provide. - Rate of delivery - I can probably handle most of what HS debaters can achieve if they are comfortable with their own speed. It's been 2 years since I debated, clearly pronounce tags and args. Again, if I don't know whats going on I will put my pen down and you will need to adapt. - Ks - If you win them, I will vote for them. I need them very clearly explained and I need to understand what you are trying to say - I won't just assume that alt solves case because you say it in your 2NR. If it's not clear that you know what your tags mean, I will probably notice. I also go to Vassar... - Theory - I tend to consider conditionality, multiple cps, etc. to be okay. That also seems to make it harder to be the aff. On either side, if you win theory, I will weigh the round accordingly with no hesitation. - Evidence - it should be good stuff that actually says what your tag claims it to. I will likely call for evidence if I am stuck on an arg and it seems truly necessary, but I am lazy, so I'd hope both teams will do the comparison for me. - Sketchiness - Debate is competitive. I'm okay with legitimate strategic choices. So, a 2NC floating pic generally seems to be unnecessary but okay. Actual detriments to education such as lying about the number of perms read, clipping cards, lying about what you read, refusing to share evidence, etc. are all sufficient reason for me to destroy your speaker points.