Schuffert,+Justin

Justin Schuffert Experience: 3 yrs for The University of Central Oklahoma 02-05 (JV & Open) 4 yrs for Guymon High School 99-02

Rounds Judged: Local - 50+ National/TOC - 1 +/-

I tend to consider myself a flow oriented judge that tries to be as tab as any one person can be. Absent a framework argument made, I will default to a policy-maker/game-theorist judge. I view debate in an offense-defense paradigm, this means that even if you get a 100% risk of no solvency against the aff, but they are still able to win an advantage (or a turned DA) then you are probably going to lose. You MUST have offense to weight against case.

Generic Information:

Speed is not a problem T & Theory need to be impacted with in round abuse. Please make impact calculus earlier in the debate rather than just making it in the 2nr/2ar Kritiks are not a problem. I don't have a problem with multiple conditional arguments, although I am more sympathetic to condo bad in a really close theory debate. CPs are legit Dispo = Means you can kick out of it unless you straight turn it, defensive arguments include Perms and theory. (My interp, but if you define it differently in a speech and they don't argue it, then your interp stands) DAs are cool Case args are sweet