Reddy,+Rohan

Rohan Reddy Debated 4 years at Westwood High School as a 1N/2A, Qualified for the TOC my senior year Currently sophomore at UT Austin

I will generally try to be as open minded as possible when it comes to judging so just do your thing and I'll be happy. There are almost zero debates that CAN'T be won in front of me, so take the following list with a grain of salt.

Below are some general points that hopefully answer most questions you have:

I have gone for a range of options throughout my debate career. Kritiks of any kind are fine with me and I find these debates to be intellectually fun. CP/DA strategies are great as well. Well researched strategies > generics. I tend to think of topicality in terms of competing interpretations. Reject the argument not the team is usually sufficient for most theory issues. Conditionality is an exception of course, and I think it is okay for the negative...within reason (the definition of reason to be debated) A well run framework argument is fine, but I'm generally unpersuaded by "not having a plan is cheating and unfair". Speed is fine but if you're unclear it will hurt your speaks. Dropped arguments are true arguments, but that doesn't mean you don't have to explain the warrant to a claim if the other team drops it Links determine the direction links Evidence comparison > evidence reading

Prep time ends when you're done editing the document. If the round starts moving slowly because of flashing documents, we'll start taking prep for the flashing process as well.

I believe in just about everything that Chris Crowe and Jeremy Martin say as well. You can read their philosophies for more information if you wish.

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