Henkle,+Richard

I did policy debate and speech (everything but OO) at Garden City (KS) High School from 1996 to 2000. I also debated for a semester at Wheaton College in 2000. I currently work on Capitol Hill, and coached for two years at W.T. Woodson High School in Fairfax, VA.

General notes:
 * POLICY**
 * I will default to a policy-making paradigm (weighing advantages v. disads) unless you tell me to look somewhere else first.
 * Speed is fine with me, as long as I can understand you. I would say on a scale of 1 to 10, I prefer somewhere around a 7 or 8. If you are not being clear, I will tell you so.
 * Yes, I work on Capitol Hill. I will not let my political inclinations affect my view of the round, but take my experience there into consideration before running political arguments. I would be willing to bet money that I know more about the status or importance of a particular bill or treaty than you do.
 * I really appreciate it when tags aren't as long as the cards, and are clearly identified as being different from the previous card (go ahead and say, "subpoint B"). Without any indication that you have moved on to the next card, a 3 sentence tag sounds like you're still reading the prior card.

Topicality:
 * This was my favorite argument when I debated. A good 2NR going for T is a real thing of beauty.
 * Don't keep it around if you don't care about it. I would rather see you kick out of it than to keep it just as a time suck in rebutals.
 * I don't really like RVI's, but I will listen to the argument if you make it.
 * ASPEC--I don't like this argument. I think it shows a lack of understanding of how our federal government works. But if you run it, I'll listen to it.

Critical arguments:
 * I enjoy a **__good__** critical argument, but those seem to be very few and far between. Just calling it a kritik does not make it so. In order to be a true kritik, it needs to have a direct, pre-fiat implication for me as the judge. If you're not telling me specifically that your kritik needs to be considered pre-fiat, then I'm going to weigh it against the other team's impacts.

Counterplans:
 * I am not a huge fan of them, again, because I very rarely see them done well. I will listen to PICs, but I think they tend to make the debate even messier.

General notes:
 * LD**
 * I have only learned LD within the last year.
 * My policy background is helpful, but it is probably a good idea for you to slow down a bit more for me (think like a 5 or 6 in terms of speed).
 * It is very helpful for me if you can tie each of your contentions back to you value and v/c.

If the tournament will allow, I am happy to discuss the round with you once it is over. If not, I usually give out my email address so you can follow up with me.

Any questions, just ask -- sobchek@gmail.com.