Martinez,+Sofi

Debated policy debate for Centennial High School for 3 years. Travelled nationally. First year policy debater for Towson University.

This is my first year judging, during high school I was more of a traditional debater and mainly ran things like disads, counterplans and stock kritiks. Now in college I have run more kritikal type arguments, but really I will listen to whatever arguments you are comfortable with running.

In terms of specific arguments...
 * Topicality** if you want to win on topicality you need to really go for it and spend the majority if not all of your 2NR on it. I especially like specific arguments about why them being untopical is bad for you in this round. Also on the aff if you are running a kritikal type argument and have arguments as to why your plan does not have to be within the traditional norms of debate I am fine with that as well.


 * Disads** I am a fan of a good disad in conjunction with a counterplan. If you decide to run a disad without a counterplan make sure that its impacts are large enough to outweigh that of the plan, if not then I would suggest you reconsider running it. Also make sure you do good impact analysis in the debate, please don't make me do it myself after the round.


 * Counterplans** I'm fine if you run generic CP's, just make sure it can solve for what you say it does. That being said, I do prefer more specific CP's as I find them more interesting to listen to. Also I am more sympathetic to affirmative theory arguments when the negative runs a PIC that does the whole plan except for some miniscule piece.


 * K's** I like kritiks and run them a lot myself, but please make sure you thoroughly explain your argument to me if your cards have very technical language or you are running something very non-traditional that I've probably never heard of before. Also don't forget to explain what you think the role of the ballot should be in this round and why specifically what the other team is doing is bad.


 * Performing** go for it, just make sure you explain to me the reasoning behind what you are doing and what it is supposed to mean in the round.


 * Theory** I'm not a huge fan of teams running generic things like condo bad or ASPEC, this doesn't mean I won't vote on it, I just think there kind of cheap shots. But, if its the only thing you have going for you in the round, by all means spend your whole last speech on it. I am fine with more specific theory debates though, where there is some more substantive abuse in the round, like severance or multiple perms bad.


 * Flowing** I do default to flowing and line by line in rounds, unless you tell me not to. And if you don't want me to flow in the round make sure you tell me how I should be evaluating the debate round instead. Also I am generally fine with spreading but if you look at me and I look really confused it probably means you should slow down because I'm not getting all of your arguments. And make sure you slow down when having short one sentence arguments, like for theory debates.

Open cross-x is fine.

If you have any other questions feel free to ask me before the round.