FTN - Judge Philosophies

Home Contact Tournament Schedule Registration Entries Headquarters Postings Results

Judge Philosophies

Adam Testerman - Wilson

Allison Quarles - RPHS

n/a

Ameena Amdahl-Mason - Clackamas

I competed in policy debate in high school, APDA in college, and I have been coaching all forms of debate, but primarily parliamentary, policy, and LD, since 2001. To me, your jobs as debaters is want to provide me with compelling reasons why you should win the debate, including organized refutations and voting issues in your final speech. I keep a rigorous flow, so organization, including a clear organizational system of lettering or numbering is important. Line-by-line refutation as well as overviews and underviews can provide clarity to the debate. CX:  I would consider myself a tabula rasa judge, as much as that is possible. I feel comfortable with any line of argumentation, including theory and kritiks. However, I do not appreciate rudeness, including cursing, either between or among teams. Generic argumentation, weak links, and time sucks are not appreciated. I enjoy judging policy, especially when new and interesting ideas enter the debate. LD: I feel comfortable with any line of argumentation, as long as it clearly linked to the topic being debated. I prefer philosophical argumentation in LD, rather than more policy style argumentation. However, I do judge a lot of policy debate, so I am capable of evaluating a policy oriented round. Parli:  I will evaluate what I hear in the round, not what I wish I had heard, so if there are things that need to be pointed out as fallacies, etc., please do so. I am not a fan of topicality/definitional debates in parli, unless the affirmative's definition is extremely skewed. PF: I don't flow PF, because I don't believe it is intended to be flowed in the same way as other debates. Otherwise, everything above applies.

Anu Khaira - Sunset

Benjamin Agre - Cleveland

Cameron Nilles - Sam Barlow

I believe that the debaters ultimately frame the debate round. I am open to all types of arguments and styles of debate. Tell me explicitly how you want the round to be framed and weighed and then in the closing speeches debate that issue well. Speed is fine, be clear on the tags.<o:p></o:p> Topicality: It is a procedural and I will evaluate it first, unless otherwise told not to. Typically I believe there is some sort of T argument to be had in most debates, done well I can definitely pull the trigger on T. I also recognize its strategic advantages beyond just winning, so RVIs are not that compelling of arguments for me.<o:p></o:p> K: I am less likely to vote on the K because many times the debate degenerates into the K team having a non-specific link, and a poor alternative. I will default into a policy framework but if there is good argumentation not to then I can evaluate that.<o:p></o:p> DA/CP: This is a very effective way for the negative to gain leverage in the debate, use them well.<o:p></o:p> <span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family: "ï¼ï¼³ æ˜Žæœ";mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language: JA;mso-bidi-language:AR-SA">Theory: Most debates fall back onto reading shells and pre-written answers, if this is what you are going for make sure it is argued well, I am opening to hearing all theory arguments.

Don Steiner - Wilson

Elizabeth Caswell - Westview

Gus Garcia - Cleveland

Jacob Van Baalen - Sandy

n/a

Jaya Bilakanti - Sunset

Jeff Smith - Sunset

Jenny Owen - Lincoln

Previous debate and practical experience: High school policy debate (1977-1981); legal career; past seven years judging all forms of debate, individual events & Student Congress in Pacific NW for 15-20 tournaments/year as well as 2-3 ToC Tournaments/year; and, six years of coaching a large, comprehensive speech and debate team. I value and thank debaters for pre-round research and preparation, but I view the actual round as the place where even more is required, namely: Engagement, clash, aggressive advocacy/defense of positions, respectful behavior and proportionality. Use of canned arguments, kritiks and counterplans without specific links into the actual debate fail even if they are entertaining, well planned and/or superior to the alternative. I prefer the substance of the debate over the form. Taglines make flowing easier, but do not warrant claims nor constitute extensions of arguments per se. I try to flow all of the debate but not robotically. I aim to judge competitors on their round at hand, not on all the arguments that could have/should have been made, but were not. I do not view the ballot as my chance to cure all that is wrong in the world though I wish it were that easy. I offer a caveat: Rude or malicious conduct are ill-advised. I will default to the rules of that form of debate (to which I will refer if they are called into question) as the base for my decision within the context of debate before me.

Jim Raible - Ione

n/a

Jimmy Nguyen - Westview

John Pavlik - Glencoe

n/a

John Watkins - Glencoe

n/a

Justin Wyle - Gresham

n/a

Kenneth Bisbee - Ridgefield H.S.

n/a

Matthew Kuhn - Lincoln

n/a

Matthew Lacy - Sam Barlow

Molly Radon-Kimball - Cleveland

Patrick Johnson - Westview

Real world arguments win- theoretical/improbable impacts do not Comparative impacts critical for a win Topicality is legit, again, only for real world probability CLASH! and signpost where your arguments clash with opponents AND why your impact is more significant No tagteam when prohibited Speed is not your friend when I'm judging, if you have firmly established your contentions and have time, then spreading ok w/o speed

2012 Barlow Debate Tournament

Judge Philosophies

Adam Testerman - Wilson

Allison Quarles - RPHS

Ameena Amdahl-Mason - Clackamas

Anu Khaira - Sunset

Benjamin Agre - Cleveland

Cameron Nilles - Sam Barlow

Don Steiner - Wilson

Elizabeth Caswell - Westview

Gus Garcia - Cleveland

Jacob Van Baalen - Sandy

Jaya Bilakanti - Sunset

Jeff Smith - Sunset

Jenny Owen - Lincoln

Jim Raible - Ione

Jimmy Nguyen - Westview

John Pavlik - Glencoe

John Watkins - Glencoe

Justin Wyle - Gresham

Kenneth Bisbee - Ridgefield H.S.

Matthew Kuhn - Lincoln

Matthew Lacy - Sam Barlow

Molly Radon-Kimball - Cleveland

Patrick Johnson - Westview

Peter Tan - SHS

Rachel Wilczewski - Sam Barlow

Ram Vemuri - Westview

Sam Sun - Sunset

Santosh Bhatt - Westview

Sofia Ellis-Curry - Glencoe

Susan McLain - Glencoe

Susan Oh - Westview

Thurman Miller - Glencoe

Tracy Habecker - South

Vinay Chikarmane - Westview