Comments on: Facing a “Debate Celebrity”

By: fitzybear

fitzybear — Sat, 24 Feb 2007 02:28:18 +0000

Maybe you’ll end up with a situation like me in trips at Berkeley, where for some (strange)fortuitous reason, a judge picked me up.

By: fitzybear

fitzybear — Sat, 24 Feb 2007 02:24:02 +0000

…or maybe not. Anyway, it’s just talking for 38 minutes. If you lose, oh well.

I want some “pot round brawl”, btw.

By: fitzybear

fitzybear — Sat, 24 Feb 2007 02:21:40 +0000

Show up, debate, do your best. If you keep doing this, maybe you’ll be a debate celebrity someday, too…:)

By: heather

heather — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 19:43:29 +0000

MAKE THE JUDGE LIKE YOU
in many instances “top debaters” have soo much reputation that their ego grows to big. in these circumstances the debater may not be known for being nice, just be known for being good (and cocky). if you hit one of these debaters then make the judge want to vote for you, and give them an easy way out. in the circumstance that the judge can legitimatly vote for you then they may want to “put the other debater in their place.” This is not true for all judges or all debaters but it is worth a shot in some instances.

ELIMINATE BIAS, CLOSE DOORS
as a judge i do fin it hard not to assume that the debater with more rep will just do better and to give them to benefit of the doubt of whether they extended an impact clearly or not. if you think they did not extend something clearly tell the judge, close window. this increases your chance to win.

LEARN
also a lot of the time top debaters have reputation because they really are good. One of the top debaters (hopefully he doesnt mind me saying this) nick t always got excited when he wasnt as good if he was going to hit a good debater. this was because he learned from the experience of “getting crushed”

so try your best to win, if nothing else LEARN from hitting a good debater and never give the judge the perception that you think you are going to lose.

By: P.Rai

P.Rai — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 06:12:08 +0000

for a second there i thought michael klinger just posted on vbd.

By: mjocon

mjocon — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:45:40 +0000

actually, 5% of the battle is the pre-round trash talk, 5% is the post-round brawl, and 90% is extending the first standard of the 1ar theory block that was dropped so the bored dweeks has an easy way out

By: dweeks

dweeks — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:27:09 +0000

i think that 80% of the battle is the post-round brawl

By: dweeks

dweeks — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:26:08 +0000

i think that 80% of the battle is the pot-round brawl

By: mjocon

mjocon — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:01:20 +0000

p.s. i think about 80% of the perceptual battle of a debate against a “celebrity” is in cross-x.

By: mjocon

mjocon — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:00:55 +0000

confidence.
confidence.
confidence.

be comfortable. be yourself. and don’t be afraid to talk back.

By: klinger

klinger — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 04:03:56 +0000

I think answers like debate your game although somewhat true are not the best advice from my perspective. I’ve been in this situation a couple times over the past few years and I have to say there are definately some benefits to adapting to your opponent as well as to your judge. I’m not advocating that you change your whole style (that’s obviously not something you want to try out in a possibly important round), but there are definatly changes you can make. In the same manner that you might run that “cheap” off case when you don’t think your opponent can handle it, you might also (if you know your opponent is good note: not all debate “celebs” are, but for the ones who are) refrain from arguments that might be easily turned by experienced debaters, or cut your neg a little in order to give yourself more time for the ac (which will probably be good). Also, there are certain cases that gaurantee that the majority of the debate will be done on their side of the flow and that could be advantagous because you get this (most likely well prepared) debater away from a lot of their prepared responses. So you probably won’t want to change your entire strat, but there are adaptations that can put yourself in a better position.

By: Jon Cruz

Jon Cruz — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 02:15:11 +0000

I tend to agree with Edward; the title came from the original thread on LDDebate.org.

By: Edward Kim

Edward Kim — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 23:57:19 +0000

I think it’s hilarious that we call good debaters debate “celebrities.” Imagine how the rest of the world would react if they knew about this…

By: Gavin Newton-Tanzer

Gavin Newton-Tanzer — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 17:53:31 +0000

Haha–I agree, Naveen, you better win Harvard. Bonne Chance!!

Though actually on topic…I kind of sympathize this thread considering my situation. The whole debate celebrity deal makes it much harder, and sometimes even a turn off, for people who want to break into the community from newer teams. I don’t really see how this could be avoided (no matter what, people and teams will get recognition for achievements over time). Though there must be some way to make debate as an activity more inviting to more people.

There’s just so many diverse politics at play which seem to me at least to be more indicative of debate “celebrities” than blaming VBD–though maybe one facilitates the other.

As to advice, as if I’m qualified to give any… I mean, what IS a debate celebrity? Getting scared of someone you’ve never met just seems kind of silly. Work hard, debate well. It pays off eventually.

By: Shea Strausman

Shea Strausman — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:40:53 +0000

cents, obviously. I have six senses.

By: Shea Strausman

Shea Strausman — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:40:01 +0000

Just to touch on something naveen said that I think is a problem. Many times, when I’ve been at a tournement and some big name dropped to some no name, the first response that I hear from the community at large is that it must have been illegitimate. I think this is a dangerous and hurtful trend. Just because someone is a good debater does not mean that they are incapable of losing a round on the flow, and to insinuate other wise IS to make them this god in the eyes of the community.

Just my two sense. Naveen, you better win harvard.

By: Al Hiland

Al Hiland — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:34:31 +0000

speaking on my experience with hitting notable debaters the best thing you can do is to debate your game. Most debaters who are good get that way because they have found a strategy that works and works a lot. The best way to beat this is to have a good strategy yourself before the round and to stick to it. If that means debating on the flow then do it, if that means taking a big picture approach then do it, if that means debating kritiks or something similar then do that. It just depends on the individual debater.

By: Facing Debate Celebrities | PFDebate Blog

Facing Debate Celebrities | PFDebate Blog — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:17:30 +0000

[...] February 10, 2007Facing Debate Celebrities There is an interesting thread over at Victory Briefs Daily titled Facing A Debate Celebrity. [...]

By: naveen

naveen — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 15:41:27 +0000

+1 to vaughan. anyone who can do physics rules =)

silly jokes aside, i have definitely had the same problem throughout my debate career. i think the trick is to really just remember that a) a lot of people are overrated as hell, b) you’re hitting them for a good reason (you’re capable of doing equally as well, if not better), c) winning or losing rounds, i think, is all a matter of perception. even the most hardcore flow judges, no matter what they say, are still influenced by your “presence” in the round.

finally, just remember that everyone in this activity is just a high school student that shares some interests with you; they’re not gods or something. plus what’s the worst that can happen? if you get completely pwned (not that you will), nobody’s going to look down on you for it, and if you win the round, people will be more likely to give you props. so just suck it up, recognize that you might have an interesting round ahead of you, and church that mofo.

By: kellogg

kellogg — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 07:07:52 +0000

Prove their rep wrong. I mean, nobody is really that much better than someone else. As long as you have decent arguments know what the hell you are doing, you should do okay. Most great debaters are simply technically sound. Insofar as you are able to be sound technically too, you should have the same shot at winning as they do.

By: Joe Vaughan

Joe Vaughan — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 03:59:50 +0000

you rule at life Keenan, because you can do physics!

By: k diab

k diab — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 02:01:15 +0000

getting freaked out and consequently losing to debaters with a strong reputation is the story of my national circuit debate career in a nutshell.

either that or i just suck at debate.

By: Graeme

Graeme — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 02:06:04 +0000

Acknowledge their reputation to yourself–that they must be good, so prepare to fight. But ultimately you have got to be on ur top game. admiration is not a bad thing, but realize the underdog can always win and sometimes does in fact beat the debate celebrity…no1’s perfect

By: demotheses

demotheses — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 01:27:11 +0000

I would say, just debate. I wouldn’t say “Debate the flow” because that can be a little dull. But remember that this is your event, your in your element. The arguments do not change based upon who is handling them.

By: Stuti

Stuti — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 20:45:58 +0000

I have issues with this, but i heard what helps is being in a mindset where you don’t debate to get the bid, but rather you debate to debate better.

By: Bryce Pashler

Bryce Pashler — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 19:13:30 +0000

Isn’t the elephant in the room, however, that a significant amount of decisions are just swayed by out-of-round perception of the debaters or their programs? I mean, I generally feel there is more transparency with outrounds, but when two debaters are sort of talking past each other, and there is no clear winner or loser, my hunch is that judges just give the edge to the debater with the reputation coming in. No way I can prove this, but that was my perception as a competitor and a coach, and I did not just perceive it happening when we dropped ballots…the more wins we accumulated, the sense I got, the more close calls we benefited from…

By: ezahler

ezahler — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:18:09 +0000

I couldn’t agree more. I sometimes hear or watch debaters talk to their opponents before round about how much they admire them or how scared they are to hit them, and from a judge’s perspective, nothing could put you at a bigger perceptual disadvantage. Plus, you’re only giving your ‘celebrity’ opponent a bigger ego boost to get through the round on. I say, treat them like any other opponent. It keeps your head clear, and with any luck, if you’re hitting one of the ‘celebrity’ debaters who’s a ‘celebrity’ in their own mind, treating them like any other debater will mess with their mind. And there’s nothing wrong with that. =P

By: Steph Ramones

Steph Ramones — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 17:16:59 +0000

Debate the flow not the debater

By: Zak

Zak — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 15:37:38 +0000

I agree!

By: andrew "dark horse" palos

andrew "dark horse" palos — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 08:04:08 +0000

beat ‘em