Comments on: Chris Theis Wins the TOC

By: panda

panda — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:06:52 +0000

kamiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil merchaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaant

By: Ruch

Ruch — Sun, 25 May 2008 14:57:24 +0000

Anyone know when the final round will be posted?

By: anon

anon — Sun, 18 May 2008 20:20:22 +0000

Catterton should be 10th seed, not 12th, seeing how he hit seed 7, and how seed 12 is already taken by Cockroft.

By: Ken

Ken — Fri, 16 May 2008 14:33:09 +0000

@ Rayn:

I agree that prep-outs have educational benefits, but as I said on the other thread, I don’t think those benefits outweigh the harms of losing the ability to think on one’s feet and of not-relying on pre-round prep.

In terms of case writing - I’ve packed as many as 6 ACs at tournaments this year, but that isn’t because of prep-outs. I usually write different cases for opponent-judge match-ups (i.e. a critical case for an opponent who I think will be bad at handling critical arguments in front of a judge who is receptive towards those arguments). In terms of being able to defend your case, prep-outs can help with that, but also doing “hell-1ARs” would solve the problem.

Let’s move the discussion to the other thread.

By: rayn bennett

rayn bennett — Fri, 16 May 2008 14:24:24 +0000

I am with Mangus and AT on this one. First off, the idea that pre-outs are detremental to education is clearly flawed. Being forced to defend your position fully and to engage others positions in pre round thought increases the available depth. There is no reason that you should have to disclose your positions, but there is no problem with others preparing for rounds, after all isn’t debate all about preperation? Furthermore, this encourages people to write mulitple positions and engage the topic from new directions. If you have not written multiple cases, or do not know your cases well enough to deal with someone who has prepped an outline of the cases, then perhaps it is time to focus more on casewriting.

By: Ken

Ken — Fri, 16 May 2008 14:21:07 +0000

To Mr. Timmons and Michael:

You’re both right that prep-outs will never be phased out. My initial post was not as much as a suggestion of a realistic alternative (even though I used the world “alternative”) to Michael’s site, it was more of just an expression of a wish.

I also agree that Michale’s site will end up helping out debaters who lack political connections or experience debating a topic.

Nevertheless (and maybe this will be continued on the thread which Jon just posted), I do feel that prep-outs undermine some of the most important skills that debate should emphasize.

By: Jose Medina

Jose Medina — Fri, 16 May 2008 11:44:12 +0000

I agree with Ken… judges aren’t going to pick up the kid that looks for educational value as much as they’ll pick up the kid that scouts flows & wins rounds through prep-outs… I mean, of course it’s inevitable, but allowing prep-outs to be online? Doesn’t that just exacerbate this problem of kids knowing exactly what to expect when they go to tournaments? That just sucks the fun out of debating in general, and although winning seems to become before entertainment to the vast majority, it just seems that prep-outs aren’t necessary to anyone…

However, it’s inevitable, and people are just going to have to adapt.

By: Aaron Timmons

Aaron Timmons — Fri, 16 May 2008 06:20:30 +0000

+1 to Mangus

By: michael mangus

michael mangus — Fri, 16 May 2008 06:08:22 +0000

AT is right-on with the inevitability argument. i was not flanked by a powerhouse coaching staff when i debated and i worked for a small team this year, but i still find myself on what a lot of people claim is the “big school” side of this argument. for example, try showing up to st marks without having seen a round on the sep/oct topic and let me know how that goes for you. knowing what people are running helps kids who cant travel. the marginal benefit to the prep machines is minimal.

seen that commercial with MJ? maybe prep outs ruined the game - or maybe youre just making excuses.

By: Aaron Timmons

Aaron Timmons — Fri, 16 May 2008 04:37:08 +0000

What about having close to full disclosure akin to the way it is done in policy debate? We have these flow sharing/prep out discussions every year (at least the last 2 or 3). Cherian, Michelin and I win the line by line, yet people still seem reluctant to embrace the same ethic policy does.

I honestly find it laughable that people want to speak as quickly as policy debaters do, run plans, topicality arguments, counterplans and other conventions of policy debate, yet most are unwilling to be more open with arguments once they are run (no one says disclose new arguments).

Prep outs cant (and shouldnt) be phased out. Neither will people giving info about others cases once they are run. A Wiki that can include outlines and descriptions of arguments HELPS those that are disadvantaged by a lack of resources. The so called borgs will get your info regardless. More discussions of arguments being run during and after tournaments are educational to both students and coaches.

People always have the OPTION not to prep out or look at a wiki with a caselist. That doesnt deny that those practices are inevitable and perhaps even desirable.