College Policy Debate Forums
November 01, 2014, 02:42:26 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
   Home   Help Search Login Register CEDA caselist Debate Results Council of Tournament Directors Edebate Archive  
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 on: October 31, 2014, 03:29:31 PM 
Started by max bugrov - Last post by max bugrov
CSUN 4 rounds
Wake 7 rounds / tabroom up.  Talk to me before picking them up.

 on: October 30, 2014, 08:51:44 PM 
Started by BrianDeLong - Last post by BrianDeLong
The 5th Annual Hoosier Invitational Tournament (HIT) hotel block is now active. We have a block of 40 double-double rooms (with the opportunity to expand if needed) in the Biddle Hotel in the Indiana Memorial Union.

Block Dates - January 30 - February 2nd
Double-Doubles are $109.00
Singles are $99.00
Code: HICT15
Expiration: January 5th

Click on this link:, go to reserve online

 on: October 30, 2014, 04:41:39 PM 
Started by louiedebate - Last post by louiedebate
The dates are 2015 not 2014.  Sorry about the error. 


 on: October 30, 2014, 04:33:24 PM 
Started by louiedebate - Last post by louiedebate
Dear Community:
The University of North Texas and University of Texas-Dallas are excited to announce the dates of the Texas Two Step and a few schedule changes from past years.

Dates –
January 5th – 10th, 2014. Registration will be on January 4th, 2014 at the Tournament hotel
UTD competition dates will be January 5-7
UNT competition dates will be January 8-10

Changes –
1)   The tournament hotel will be the same for both tournaments.
2)   All preliminary rounds for both tournaments will be hosted at UTD
3)   We are removing the day off in between the two tournaments

We believe these changes will provide the same quality of debates and excellent hospitality but at a cheaper cost for attendees and less time away from your loved ones. 

Both tournaments will have registration open on starting tomorrow. 

Louie Petit
Scott Herndon

 on: October 30, 2014, 09:59:07 AM 
Started by Jim Schultz - Last post by Jim Schultz
There has been little public discussion of the Miami vs. the Coast occurring, at least on the internet. My understanding is that there have been some quasi-public discussions in meetings at the tournaments. That is good, but inadequate to have an informed public deliberation about the tournaments.  Jonah Feldman put forward his own proposal for how to deal with the white flight move to Miami. That is great, but inadequate to curb the growing move to bifurcate the community. The silence is deafening.
I can only use third party discussions (rumors) and conjecture to formulate the rationale for going to Miami. I can think of three reasons; regionalization, budgetary concerns, and segregation motivated by anti-black racism and hetero-patriarchy.  I am hopeful this is not an exclusive list and I am missing something. I am full of shortcomings, and this could be just one more in a laundry list of my life’s faults. Here is hoping to me wearing the dunce cap once more.

The motivation of fostering further regionalization rings hollow. There are no teams currently entered at Miami from the state of Florida. I realize that Miami is geographically isolated; I grew up in South Florida and had to go on very long car rides to tournaments or get expensive flights to places. There are few solutions to this dilemma, and that is unfortunate. I also debated at Florida State where we toiled through even longer car rides to D.C., Lawrence, and Cedar Falls. The geographic isolation on the peninsula is a dilemma. The Miami tournament, however, does not resolve this geographic isolation. It doesn’t make it less costly for the Hurricanes to get to Harvard, Texas, or the opposite coast.
District six already hosts three majors; I know it is costly for Miami to get to GSU, UK, and WFU, and that is unfortunate. It costs a lot for a number of programs to get to these three tournaments in the southeast. Adding a fourth tournament to the region seems to amplify this cost issue to everyone outside of the southeast. This is particularly true to those folks in District one and two. If promoting regional debate is a motivating factor, why are you not going to the coast to promote D1? Where were you when The Jesuit folded shop? Did you go to Weber? I’m not being pithy; I think these questions draw appropriate skepticism towards your motivation. I am unable to wrap my head around how adding a tournament to the district with the most majors promotes regionalization. The folks out west should have every motivation to be skeptical of these claims too. If the Midwest is really interested in promoting regional debate, why aren’t you hosting a tournament?

Given how expensive it is to get from south Florida to the rest of the country, I cannot imagine the reverse is cost competitive. The hotel costs were prohibitively expensive for my high school team to travel to Miami with any frequency. Are the costs suddenly and dramatically lower?
The Coast is expensive. I thought that was why we strung together two tournaments; to get the most value out of those squeezed dollars. Having two tournaments in California was a way to flatten those costs. Yes, it is expensive to fly to California for one tournament, but the high plane ticket costs are not as prohibitive when spread over two tournaments. I know Miami has increased the number of prelims to offset the disparity in total rounds participated in, but this is not the same. Getting to debate in elimination rounds is essential for those folks making a jump from going 3-3 or 4-4 to being able to hang with those racing for first rounds. Getting to debate in a different set of prelims is helpful for those still trying to hit the .500 mark. I find it difficult to think the 0-6 through 0-9 debates (or 1-5, or 2-4, and so on) are as useful as a second tournament to those that are still finding competitive success difficult to attain. The quality of the opponents, and likely the judges, will diminish in a 10 round format. The dollars are being invested poorly.
If the budgets of the perennial powerhouses are suddenly so threatened that they need to make major adjustments to their schedule, where are the other effects to this? Is this really a solution? Is pushing for more D6 tournaments really the way to remedy budgetary constraints in programs from the Midwest? If there is a budgetary crisis, shouldn’t there be more collective forbearance in dealing with this crisis than just trading out CA for a weekend to FL?

The enormous elephant in the tiny room may occlude my ability to see the full weight of other justifications. I don’t think many, if any, are conscience in the retreat from black, female, and queer success. I also don’t think the timing of this move can avoid being read in a way that promotes segregated tournaments from blackened, gendered, and queered success. Sometimes the truth hurts. It is uncomfortable to have your failings, faults, and deficiencies called out. It stings to be told you are being racist. It should sting. It should sit with you uncomfortably. Not because it is an unfounded attack on your character, but, because your actions are deficiencies that harm others.
“I don’t want to have to debate those teams.” This is the mantra that resonates the most with me. I understand that many folks think their way of debate is the best model and that some of those folks would prefer most (if not all) of their debates operate in the same model. I always thought this was best resolved through deliberation; the best argument wins. That is ultimately what I thought was the foundation for what it is we do here. We are a persuasive activity, a community that requires a level of commonality in participation, but a level of agonistic disagreement in the participation itself.  Is the fear and/or frustration of men and women of color, and women without color, so heightened that the only solution is pick up your ball and go home? We are a better activity and community when we come together and argue things out than we can ever be if we take our differences and retreat to likeminded corners.
It is also a bit absurd to me that such a little crack in the armor would cause such a reaction. “New debate” has won the NDT exactly one time. “New debate” has one the Copeland exactly zero times. Harvard is a good demonstration that the old guard isn’t going anywhere. There was exactly one team that doesn’t engage in the topic from a traditional standpoint (all apologies for Mimi and Michael if you prefer to identify as a “new debate” team, but I read you as a flex team that defaults to policy). The old guard dominated the top 10 speakers. Kentucky and GSU were mostly segregated, but the teams that can be coded as “new debate” were all gone by the semis there as well. Old debate is still winning when we come together. How insecure are you? You aren’t satisfied with all of the semis teams, 7/8 quarters teams,  8/10 top speakers? You are unwilling to “settle it on the field?” That’s a shame. It’s a damn shame. It’s a shame because debate is doing so well right now. Twenty years ago there was not a better depth of understanding policy. I have seen the cards, and watched the tape. But it has added in the value of being able to speak to a more diverse set of arguments than previously. Your opponents have been making you better. They always have, and they should continue to do so. Running from an argument does not make you better.

“Thank you competitors. Every one of you, coach and debater, who face our teams and push our teams to think harder, research deeper, get outside of our narrower confines. You pose questions to our coaching, without which questions we could not learn and improve.
On occasion, hopefully rare, we do not reciprocate or we fail to appreciate. When we (being human) are at our worst we might denigrate. I hope and trust not, but know that we mean not.
We can’t do it without you.
What are the best debates you have judged or debated in? They are closely contested. They reflect a commitment to excellence. That attribute can never be one sided.
We are at our worst and best when we put everything we have into a debate and come up on the short end. But who gave us the opportunity to be triumphant and feel that the win was meaningful in the first place?
Our competitors.” - RKS

One last thought, where are those that dissent? Can we do no better than Jonah’s one plea? Where is our collective conscience? Have we stood so long on the shoulders of the giants that came before us that they are over burdened? It shouldn’t be hard to stand up to white flight; it shouldn’t be hard to find the ethics necessary to refuse segregation.

If you disagree with any of this, then please let me know. I think the most effective response would be to find me in California and talk to me about it. I look forward to seeing you all in California.

With love,


 on: October 29, 2014, 07:37:58 PM 
Started by kelly young - Last post by kelly young
Bump - still looking for a JV swing partner for Liberty. Contact me at either or 3133186328 after 4 pm tomorrow.

 on: October 29, 2014, 05:39:24 PM 
Started by Neil Butt - Last post by Neil Butt
Vanderbilt would like to hire up to 5 rounds of additional judging at Liberty, if anyone still has rounds to sell, last minute drops, etc.

 on: October 29, 2014, 02:18:13 PM 
Started by lukephill - Last post by lukephill
Help us compile a one-stop-shop for urban debate students thinking about debating in college. Send us your financial aid pitch + let us know the best contact person/email address to share with students who are beginning the search process.

Thanks to everyone who has replied so far, great to see an interest in recruiting students from urban debate leagues across the country. Follow the link to find the information we have gathered so far.

Email info to: lukehill at

 on: October 28, 2014, 07:16:04 PM 
Started by neil berch - Last post by neil berch
WVU debater Stephen Mullins is looking for someone to debate with in JV this weekend at Liberty.  Mr. Mullins reached Novice Semifinals in both of his first two tournaments (Rutgers and West Point), and he was top speaker at Rutgers.  In our usual fashion, he has been preparing to debate in JV.  Please let me know if you have an interested partner.  berchnorto at msn dot com

--Neil Berch
West Virginia University

 on: October 28, 2014, 10:42:50 AM 
Started by Hester - Last post by Hester
Dallas and Sherry deserve special thanks for their continued dedication to providing a uniquely wonderful tournament experience. They (along with Stefan and the Harvard debaters) work tirelessly to make it the great experience that it is. i hope all of us who benefited from their efforts were as gracious in our being hosted as they were in hosting us.

What i love about it is they simultaneously set a standard of how to approach hospitality for all to model, while staying true to aspects of the Harvard tournament (e.g., clear to octas, power 6 off the first 4 prelims) that are not intended to be mimicked by others. Different tournaments being, well...different from each other is a welcome respite from monotony that those of us who've been around awhile can find disfavor with.

Thank you Crimson!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SMF customization services by
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!