How do you improve at rebuttals!

1. one on one rebuttals:

person a: pick a disad/case/counterplan. present it.

person b: respond to it.

person a: rebuild the position.

person b: reattack it.

2. rebuttal redo:

get a flow from a debate (especially one where you lost)

redo your rebuttal

identify flaws in what you did; redo it again

3. rebuttal diagram:

pick a debate you were in. diagram the debate:

1. sq/counterplan vs. plan/perm

2. list the advantages and disadvantages that the sq/counterplan has versus the plan/perm (really think this through--would just the counterplan get the advantage?)

3. weigh the advantages/disadvantages. how likely are they? how much impact do they have?

4. now, think through the arguments that your opponent probably/may be winning. why do you still win even though they win their position. this leads to "even if the opp. wins x and y, we still . . . win"

4. bad word economy?

video tape your speech/have someone watch you

pick out extra words you can get rid of, for example:

--avoid long statements about what your opponent said "my opponent argued that the russian missles are a danger because they are subject to terrorism blah blah blah" switch to "off the second, russian missles are dangerous."

--avoid long intros/numbering for your arguments "i would argue several points that illustrate why russia's economy is going to go into a backslide" switch to "russia's economy will backslide. first, . . ."

--avoid long explanations to backup your arguments "first, russia faces a serious mafia problem. there are many mafia groups in russia and they roam the country all over and they are bad and they are dangerous. the mafia is a serious problem. we need to address the danger that the mafia poses . . . blah blah blah" switch to a tag followed by ONE SENTENCE "first, russia faces a serious mafia problem. russian mafia take money, kill, corrupt the government, and threaten the entire nation."

5. top heavy (where you spend too much time on the issues you address first in your speech)?

redo a rebuttal and give fewer responses in the beginning and move through them quicker

be sure to start on the issues you are winning, then the issues you have to answer so you don't lose, then cover the rest of the stuff.

6. too defensive?

--check to make sure you sound confident. don't get up there and wheeze and look nervous because you have so much to cover in so little time. that's an instant cue to the judge that you're in trouble in the debate. look calm, poised and in control.

--are you just responding to your oppponent's arguments? THAT'S AN INSTANT WAY TO LOSE A DEBATE. you need to rebuild what you said in the constructive speeches. for example:

NO: "on our disadvantage, their first response was that we have no uniqueness. . . . "

YES: "On the Military Diversion disadvantage, we argue Russia will take the aid given by the affirmative plan. They will use that money to buildup their military. This will pose a serious threat to world peace. They have only 3 answers to this . . . "

another example:

NO: "on solvency, the affirmative argues that their plan is the only hope because it gives Russia money. i would argue 2 responses . . ."

YES: "on solvency, we are showing the plan cannot solve because it does not give enough money and it gives the money to the wrong people. they try to claim "it is the only hope." wrong. first, . . ."

7. too cryptic/blippy/tag lines only?

--make sure each of your arguments is supported by a reason/explanation/evidence

--refer to arguments you and your partner made

example:

NO: "cross apply b2; it takes it out"

NO: "extend that we have solvency"

NO: "Jones proves the turn"

YES: "aid to russia helps the economy. the b2 evidence says the money fuels the infrastructure that is critical for the russian economy"

YES: "we solve. the jones and donaldson evidence shows financial aid gives russia the needed boost and that it will go to the right sectors of the economy"

hope this helps

jim :)