St. Mark’s Clarifies First-Year-Out Policy
posted by Jon Cruz on June 7th, 2006
DALLAS, TX – In response to a recent question on LDDebate.org, Jane Boyd has clarified today the status of first-year-out judges at the St. Mark’s Heart of Texas Invitational. “After discussions with coaches from all pedagogical philosophies during the last year,” she wrote in an e-mail, “the decision has been made the Heart of Texas LD tournament will not be allowing first-year-out judges either hired or provided by schools. All judges for the Heart of Texas Tournament will be at least two years out of high school. Thanks, and good luck.”
Popularity: 1% [?]
no more tag found, sorry
11 Responses to “St. Mark’s Clarifies First-Year-Out Policy”
Leave a Reply
Most Popular Posts
- Team Spotlight: Rufus King High School
- Your 2006 National Champion: Douglas Jeffers!
- VB Photos: Looking Back 2006 Grads
- FINALS: Jeffers vs. Mullins
- Stephen Babb Reviews the Final Round of Nationals
- Crystallize: Post-Nationals Edition, Part I
- Team Spotlight: Grapevine High School
- BREAKING NEWS: Topic List Released
- The Codes Keep On Comin'
- Gearing Up for LD Round 12
Posted from: 68.221.203.127
June 7th, 2006 19:53
hey, i have an idea! lets have a series of very angry posts here about the role of first-year-outs in our community. it can also meld into ‘theory debate good/bad’ and ’speed good/bad’ and ‘private coaches good/bad’ and be very innovative and totally awesome. i’ll start:
i never liked going to st marks anyway!!!
Posted from: 68.175.60.69
June 7th, 2006 20:18
I think Michael’s probably right about the kinds of posts that will likely come as a result.
I’d like to pose a different question, somewhat based on the clarification statement. By deliberate design for many years, Emory had a more ‘traditional’ feel to its judging pool. Other tournaments institute policies and design judging pools in such a way as to promote a specific ‘theme’ among its judges.
What do people think about that? I think it can attend to the distinctive character of the tournament and, on some level, differentiate the challenges between different tournaments, helping to hone different sets of skills.
Posted from: 67.9.103.10
June 7th, 2006 20:25
from a purely logistical standpoint, can tournaments as big as st. marks be ran in an adequate and on time fashion without using first-year outs?
a huge majority of judges on the circuit this year were first year outs.
just a thought
Posted from: 68.221.203.127
June 7th, 2006 20:55
tvick says: “a huge majority of judges on the circuit this year were first year outs.”
they are now 2nd year outs. problem solved. ZING!
Posted from: 75.7.148.220
June 7th, 2006 21:44
michael,
who are you? you seem to post a lot, i think u might be mm, but im not sure b/c the world is filled w/ michaels (i am one myself.) jc
-(Michael) SHAGRIN
Posted from: 66.92.163.42
June 8th, 2006 04:37
I don’t think the prohibition of first year out judges at St Marks (assuming it doesn’t lead to any really random hires of local college students solely with the offers of free food ;) ) will make a fundamental change in the ambiance of the tournament judging. With the type of national draw it gets, and either MJP or strikes (again, assuming this doesn’t lead them to some sort of shortage) will still lead it to be a fairly progressive tournament.
Oh yeah Mencher, as someone who just finished being a first year out, I’ll let you know that it’s now your generations duty to be evil and scapegoated ;)
Posted from: 128.135.173.63
June 8th, 2006 05:55
ummm
michael: Mangus
Michael: Boyle
That’s been SOP for a while now.
Although I think it’s hilarious that you think mencher has been posting all this time, so carry on.
Posted from: 66.92.163.42
June 8th, 2006 09:13
Eh, it was a Freudian slip… somewhat… same initials, same degree of knowing them… yeah, the incompetence in DC is spilling over into my thought processes. This city/federal district has already taken away my normally upbeat attitude; now it’s taking its toll on my thought processes. Pretty soon cutting taxes and expanding government expenditures at the same time will make mathematical sense ;)
Posted from: 128.135.173.63
June 8th, 2006 11:48
are you saying
that your confusion
on an internet messageboard
is
due
to
your local government?
Posted from: 72.29.87.158
June 8th, 2006 21:33
Like Marks never had that manyf irst year outs in the pool last year because they were free strikes and I don’t remember that many yellow spaces on the strike sheet. And even those who were first years dind’t judge very much although predominantly not struck by the pool. I am sure the tournament can run fine and still have really good judging. But I of course am upset because I can’t cover for my team anymore and that’s money out of the budget to hire or pay a judging fee. It would be nice if eligible judges could offer services for less than $150 (or whatever that expensive fee is) to cover rounds that’d be charitable.
Posted from: 69.153.90.193
June 11th, 2006 15:45
Has a reason for this decision been made public?