MPJ does not hurt the process of judge adaptation

[asnider@moose.uvm.edu (Alfred C. Snider)]

>If all  a debater has is strict-flow judges do they lose the ability to
>adapt to other judges they dislike.
.......
>Do the debaters lose any persuasive ability with MPJ?
>That is about the only disad i could discover.

I believe that adaptation is retained in an ABCX system, because you will
be asked to name 2/3rds of judges as A or B. In CEDA that means a lot of
variety.

I would also differ in the use of "strict flow" and "not so good flow" as a
criteria for judge rating. I, as a coach, look to other factors which I
have mentioned before (objectivity, willingness to try hard) which would
come before excellent flow. I also value consistency, in that a judge tends
to be consistent through time in terms of judging the round. In fact, and I
can tell you that in the East it is very true, some judges with a fairly
skethcy flow who demand a more rhetorical style are well respected and much
preferred because they are reasonable, try hard, and you know HOW to adapt
to them. Other good flow judges are dreaded because they tend to be very
erratic in their decisions ("They write it all down, but then don't know
what to do with it."). John McCooey is always an example of a judge who was
not strict flow oriented and who demand a more rhetorical approach but was
very consistent, very logical, and enjoyable to debate in front of. He was
twice received the judging award at the Vermont tournament. The debaters
knew what he wanted, knew how to adapt to him, and knew that within those
confines he would make a good decision.

I do not wish to "not prefer" judges who require adaptation as much as I
wish to "not prefer" judges who can't be adapted to because they lack
objectivity and/or effort as well as judges who are too erratic to adapt
to.

The flow is just one variable determining style and substance, and is not
in any way the critical variable for me.

IN A THOUGHT ONLY SLIGHTLY RELATED...

Actually, I all too rarely see any of my colleagues really flowing the
cards in these debates, and unless they are I often wonder how they can
make a really good decision. How many judges REALLY can flow the cards
these days?


Alfred C. Snider AKA Tuna
Edwin W. Lawrence Professor of Forensics, University of Vermont
Mail: Box 54225, UVM, Burlington, VT 05405-4225
Phone: 802-656-0097, Fax: 802-656-4275
DEBATE CENTRAL:
http://beluga.uvm.edu/debatecentral/dc.html
gopher://beluga.uvm.edu
LAWRENCE DEBATE UNION:
http://beluga.uvm.edu/debatecentral/ldu.html

---

• Prev by Date: Coaches Poll 12-1-95
• Next by Date: Re: MPJ and Accountability
• Prev by thread: Coaches Poll 12-1-95
• Next by thread: New on Debate Central 12-95
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page