[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page
Mutual preference
Maybe this might be too simple of a question to ask, but with all the
talk about mutual preference in judging, I was just wondering how in the
world inexperienced debate teams who are good enough to make nationals will
have any idea in the world who to pick for judges?
This might seem simplistic, but I'm a first-year CEDA debater from a
relatively small school on the west cost (translation: I'm not going to
any of the "big" tournaments in the midwest this year), and my exposure
to the "elite" judges will be quite limited. If, in theory, I make it
nationals and am faced with picking judges from a list of completely
unfamiliar names, how am I supposed to get a fair shot at the judges I want.
This seems to negate the advantages of mutual preference for younger,
less-traveled teams, and I can see how this could slant rounds towards
teams from programs that travel extensively and have lots of money to
spend, placing less emphasis on the quality of debating, but rather if
you get a judge that likes your team's style and not the others.
I don't know how much of a problems this would be, and how we could
solve it if it turns out to be problematic. It's just a thought...any
replies/comments would be welcomed.
Gordon Mitchell
Mt. Hood CC
Gresham, OR
fiche@industrial.com
Follow-Ups:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page