I often think "side bias" claims are overblown.

We can't derive that more teams flipped a particular way from the available info (Scott's conclusion.) All 16 teams that won the debate could've lost the flip, the other side selected Neg and the Aff just happened to win most of them.

What we can do is control for skill and widen the data set by looking at the prelim win-loss records for the elimination-round qualifiers.

Elimination-round qualifiers went a collective 191-65. 96 of those wins went to the Neg and 95 went to the Aff.

An identical number of teams were "very" strong on one side (5 teams won 4 Aff debates and 2 Neg debates, 5 teams won 4 Neg debates and 2 Aff debates.) There were 7 teams who were "slightly" stronger on the Neg than the Aff (4 Neg wins, 3 Aff wins or 3 Neg wins, 2 Aff wins) while there 6 of those on the Aff. There were 9 teams who won an equal number (3) on each side of the resolution.

I am as hopeful as anybody for an Aff renaissance but it doesn't appear that one is in the offing at Kentucky. That the 2A has managed to battle to an equal share of victories in the era of Neg traveshamockery is impressive enough.

There is, however, a youth renaissance. Is Peyton the only Senior in the Quarters?