UIL Speech Judges

Rounds judged: 9
Judging approach: Tabula Rasa
Policy priority: Communication skills and resolution of substantive issues are of equal importance
Evidence philosophy: Quality of evidence is more important than quantity of evidence
Paradigm: Policy Maker/Tab I view the round more or less as a Tabula Rasa judge, but you can run just about anything. I'm pretty flexible I just need to know what your talking about, why its important, and what impact is has in and out of the round. Pen down means your judge isn't following your argument. Spreading at a speaking event makes no sense, but I'll listen to it as I grew up with it in round. Spreading Theory blocks I listen to a lot because this is a speaking event and I have to give you speaker points. Theory I'll vote on it, but it has got to be obvious and perfectly executed. The logical ground work must be there as well as standards and voters. If you go for everything AND theory in the end with no strat, expected to be voted down. The K I'm more of a realist, so abstract Alts are just that to me... abstract. real world Alts are good. I'll definitely listen to and vote on the K because I'm a bit of a games player judge but it must be ran correctly. Be sure you give me framework and do the logic leg work. Stock Issues I like a clean clashing rounds. If you can give me that, more quality evidence over quantity, and have a good strat and build in the 2NR (no shotguns), you can have the ballot. I WANT SUBSTANCE! T Topicality is a necessary portion of debate, but one thing I really hate is time suck T's. Although, if the other team is obviously off topic, you better throw a T. CP Love them. You should definitely do it, ill bite on condo, or no condo, ill literally take anything here, just make sure its run well. No Net benefits means no vote from me. DA Love disads because many of the time they actually make sense. Humanity is consequentialist by nature so this is the most accepted argument for a reason. I am ok voting for a generic disad if you can make it stick. The more specific the better though. Practical impacts are better than the oh so common, nuclear war scene, but I will vote on nuclear war if it sticks in the round and you actually pull its weight across the debate. Just saying "drag across the impact of nuclear war" isn't going to cut it. GIVE ME SUBSTANCE, GIVE ME THE STORY. Performance I can work with performance debate. I will vote on a K AFF if its executed well. Make sure it makes coherent sense to me and your audience and its content is clearly expressed. Paperless/Prep Flash Drive out of the computer and then we stop time. Hands off mouse/computer while opponents get the files up. TIME YOURSELVES! I'm ok with Speech Drop but you shouldn't be prepping while partner is dropping speech. Have a good time... Speaker points go down if you're brash, nasty, and being uncalled for. Explain yourself well, play the game when you must, and also use this time to prepare you to become a well educated and fluent speaker. You control how the debate works, not my paradigm. Lets talk Policy and debate well!

email: raymond.fitzwater@communityisd.org
cell: 214 8370601
office:

Meet types:
Invitational District Regional CX State State Meet Congress Region Congress State

Qualified for:
CX
LD
Extemp
Prose/Poetry
Congress