Olivarez,+Matt

I debated for four years at Stony Point High School in Round Rock TX and graduated in 2004. I have a B.A.'s in English and Philosophy and am currently in law school at St. Mary's University in San Antonio.

In terms of the round, I look to the standard first unless the debators give me compelling reason to vote off of something before it. I don't mind weighing other arguments that are independent of the standard as long as the debator gives me (1) a way to determine how I should view the argumen in terms of the ballot and (2) analysis as to where the argument fits in regard to the ballot when held in relation to other arguments that are being offered. If the debator fails to offer a method of weighing for arguments that are independent of the standard I have no way of putting them into context and can weigh them in my decision.

Insofar as framework debate, I will look to the debators for guidance first. Competing frameworks will be weighed and measured, hopefully by the debators, and I will allow for them to set the method of how arguments should be viewed in the round. If there is no clear framework debate the I will rely on my deffault views on the round. Absent of affirmative offense I most often deffault negate, unless the affirmative has built-in argumentation that provides compelling reasons to presume affirmative. To balance this, if both the affirmative and the negative have offense on the flow that is not wieghed by either debator, I tend to look to the affirmative's offense first.

Speaking wise, my assginment of speaker points takes in to account presence, clarity of arugmentation as well as speaking itself, responsiveness to opponent's argumentation, and the ability to step back and put the round in perspective. Most common speaker points for me are 26-28, however I give 29's and 30's to the most polished of advocates. Speed is a little bit of a issue in that as long as the debator is clear I usually don't have a problem following them, however if they are blazing there is an inevitable point in which I can't physically keep up. I.e. if a speaker is blazing there is an assumed risk they take that I may not be able to flow every single thing they say.

Finally, debate rounds I enjoy the most are the ones in which the debators take a step back and put the arguments in perspective. I like the debators to be able to engage thier oppenent and have an educational discourse about the issues.