So this is not spam, it sounds like judges voted against you because they focused more on the solvency of a nonessential advantage than they should have. This happened to me at a recent round robin. In fact, we had five advantages and explicitly stated that we were dropping one of them and just going for the other four.
I guess the solution is to baby the judge. [...] The judge probably needs to hear this at least every 30 seconds. That might not even be frequent enough.
Yeah, I think I'll probably try it.
Consider taping your aff rounds. It's legal...just get permission from the neg.
EDIT: Also, I often see a mentality change when people switch from neg to aff. Good negs speak with conviction. Good affirmatives will do that too. But sometimes I see affirmatives get into a defensive mindset....which is the opposite of what you want.
Re: Taping. Yep. Except, I have no idea what I'm looking for. Any suggestions?
For 90% of debaters, I absolutely agree. But for me, I win on negative strictly because I turn every argument I can into offense. I do the same on aff. This is the type of issue I think is causing the problem, but I don't think it's offensive/defensive posture that is the specific problem.
But I do tend to do really well as aff. I see affirmative rounds as "free aff wins" because it's very rare that my partner or I ever lose affirmatives. Over the last 3 years I've gone 13-4, 11-2, 7-1, and 7-1 on ballots with the cases I've gotten prepped and actually focused on.
I don't really know what the problem would be with your affirmative, and I don't expect you to post it online, so a better idea might be to chat about it.
Ughhhh. Free aff wins. The sound of that just kills me for two reasons: (1) I make my living beating unbeatable cases
, and (2) because I soooo want to have my aff rounds as a "reasonably sure" round. Right now, I'm on pins and needles every aff round, wondering if we did well enough, whereas neg rounds I'm always pretty sure whether we won or lost.
Added on Gtalk, btw. Would love to chat sometime.
Have your mom critique your rounds. The most valuable feedback I've ever received came from parents and other inexperienced adults.
My mom can't stand to follow a policy round, but I may try to get someone to critique my rhetorical style. Hmm.
I also have received a lot of great help from adults. My coaches, as well as various judges I've had, have done sooo much to help me improve my case. A lot of times, adult judges have a lot of real life experience, so when something doesn't sound right to them, it sets off alarm bells in their heads. All it then takes is for the neg team to make an argument that connects with those alarm bells, and you're pretty much toast. Try to preempt that by sending your case to some responsible adults whose opinions you respect to see what their gut reaction is. Obviously, you won't be able to cater to every judge's bias, but at least try and make it something that's reasonable to a wide audience.
But see, that's the thing. I seem to be the one causing the alarm bells. It's not the case-- it's something about my presentation that's killing my position. It's gotta be something about the rhetoric I use-- surely I can't be getting that many random bad decisions.
I don't have this problem. I have always been stronger on Aff then on Neg simply because I have always known my case better than I know others' cases. The strength in winning on Aff is to know the arguments and know you're responses. If you know Neg's arguments and you know how to beat them, I can't imagine how you can lose as much as you say you do. I assume you're a good speaker.
I've memorized the majority of the evidence I read (as the 2A) in the debate round. I've probably read 99% of the literature on my case. Rarely do I run across an article I have yet to read on it. Negatives usually are unprepared for it. They usually quote newspapers, or worse. We have Ph.Ds with warrants, and better. Knowing the case is hardly an issue. And I just started to consistently get high speaks this year.
But there's gotta be something wrong with my rhetoric. Thanks again for the posts, ya'll.