Ramanujan,+Krishnan

I debated at Wayzata High School for 4 years and at Harvard for 2 years, and I am currently a coach in the Nashville UDL.

You can basically do whatever you want in front of me. I am less familiar with critical literature and arguments, but don't let that stop you from reading critical arguments in front of me. You may just have to explain things a little more and use specific examples instead of overarching generalizations of your argument. Also make sure you compare K impacts to more policy-oriented impacts and explain why the other team's impacts are flawed/bad/whatever - that's what I have found to be generally lacking in K debates, and I'm not really afraid to be that guy to vote on "Case outweighs" if there's no meta-level analysis done or anything. I will evaluate whatever role of the ballot arguments debaters may put forth in a given debate and make my decision based on who I think wins that argument. I will evaluate any debate that I'm judging as objectively as possible and do not have any real predisposition toward either side of the debate argument spectrum.

I like a good T debate. Make sure you impact it well on both sides. Comparative analysis is clutch too - aside from just winning that your interpretation creates good limits or education, explain why the education your interpretation allows for is better than the other team. I default to competing interpretations, but I think the competing interps vs. reasonability debate is interesting and can go either way.

Counterplan/disad/case debates are particularly fun in my opinion, especially when counterplans and case args (and disads too I guess) are very specific to the aff. There isn't much to say here really. As far as counterplan theory goes, reasons why certain counterplans are bad are most likely a reason to reject the argument unless you do quite a bit of work on it. Consult, condition, and delay counterplans and the like are seemingly illegit, but if that's your thing then go for it; just convince me they're awesome (or at least not a reason you should lose).