CSUF and GSL

David L. Steinberg dave
Mon Jan 24 11:07:29 CST 2000


Sue says she looks forward to "many bigger and better GSLs in the
future."

I am not sure how Geoff could have made this GSL BETTER.  It does not
need to be brought "up to par."  It is better than Par.  It was a
friendly, accommodating tournament which was efficiently run and offered
nice amenities.  The rounds were on time. The days ended early enough to
allow us to have relaxed dinners in Salt Lake City and still get some
sleep.  Our fellow competitors were cool people with whom we enjoyed
interacting.  The debates were excellent and diverse.  The hotel was
convenient and reasonable.  We loved it.

Why is bigger better?  The University of Miami has attended many GSLs in
the past, and was lucky enough to attend again this year.  We have
appreciated the Mega-tournaments of the past, but particularly
appreciated the friendly atmosphere and manageable size of this year's
tournament.  I am not disappointed to see the tournament "shrinking."
It has grown in accessibility.  The debate community would benefit from
more small to medium-sized regional tournaments and fewer giant
national-type tournaments.  The smaller, regional tournaments lower the
entry barriers for programs and debaters.  One of the reasons CEDA
thrived in the 80's and into the 90's was the availability of
comfortable regional competition.  We have also been very lucky this
year to attend other great, primarily regional tournaments at Lewis and
Clark, Loyola, and Vanderbilt.  The current emphasis on Mega-National
type tournaments is a step backward.

Congratulations to Fullerton and Utah (and everyone who hosts those
reasonable sized tournaments) for offering more (not less) great debate
opportunities.

David L. Steinberg
Director of Debate, University of Miami




Sue Lowrie wrote:
>
> I concur with Joe's viewpoint...I have many wonderful memories of my GSL
> experiences and was disappointed to see the tournament shrinking with each
> passing year.  I am happy that the tournament was a success this year and look
> forward to many bigger and better GSLs in the future.  BUT, having come from a
> JC background when beginning in debate, I also think it is important to realize
> that there are many two year schools (and some four year schools) in Southern
> California that would never be able to make the trip to Utah.  For them, this
> weekend was an added benefit in that it was local AND it offered good
> competition and good judging.  It sounds like GSL offered some of the same for
> some smaller schools in their area that would never be able to make the drive to
> Fullerton for the weekend.  I, like Joe, would like to applaud both programs for
> offering a chance at competition in their local district/area.  It seems to me
> that regional competition is a dying breed in debate and anything we can do to
> bring some tournaments back up to par (albeit small, but challenging and
> educational), is something we should be encouraging, rather than discouraging!
>
> Thanks to Fullerton for offering a wonderful tournament that Southern California
> can be proud of and thanks to Geoff and Utah for continuing the tradition of
> GSL!
>
> Kudos to all...
> Sue

>From  Mon Jan 24 11:35:25 2000
Message-Id: <MON.24.JAN.2000.113525.0600.>
Received: from LIST.UVM.EDU by LIST.UVM.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with
 spool id 123843 for EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 12:51:18
 -0500
Precedence: bulk
Received: from ccis01.baylor.edu (ccis01.baylor.edu [129.62.1.18]) by
 list.uvm.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA15260 for
 <eDebate at list.uvm.edu>; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 12:42:40 -0500
Received: from [129.62.132.160] (debate-cc139.baylor.edu [129.62.132.160]) by
 ccis01.baylor.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA05869 for
 <eDebate at list.uvm.edu>; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 11:36:30 -0600 (CST)
X-Authenticated: <Robert_R_Little at ccis01.baylor.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Message-ID: <MailDrop1.2d7j-PPC.1000124113525 at debate-cc139.baylor.edu>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 11:35:25 -0600
Reply-To: Robert_R_Little at BAYLOR.EDU
To: Team Topic Debating in America <EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: Robert Little <Robert_R_Little at BAYLOR.EDU>
Subject: Correct Baylor Results

Sorry, the first post had incorrect information in it.  These are the correct
results for teams clearing and the teams in the octos:

Teams clearing in Open:
Wake Forest CL
Whitman CO
Wake Forest DS
Michigan MS
USC MS
Macalester KK
UMKC BC
Michigan St. BC
Mercer DH
Gonzaga KM
North Texas HM
Whitman BC
Texas EG
Kansas St. HZ
Iowa HM
Louisville CC
Wake Forest AF
Texas DM
Emory CR
Redlands GM
Michigan BS
Texas RS
USC HH
Fort Hays RR

Octofinal Debates:
Wake CL vs. Whitman CO
Michigan MS vs. USC MS
UMKC BC vs. Mich St. BC
Gonzaga KM vs. North Texas HM
Texas EG vs. K.St. HZ
Louisville CC vs. Wake AF
Emory CR vs. Redlands GM
Texas RS vs. USC HH


Clearing in JV:
Abilene Christian MR
UMKC MM
SMSU KR
Gonzaga EL
UMKC GR
Biola LP
Whitman WW
Whitman DT

In the Semis:
Abilene Christian
Gonzaga
UMKC GR
and one of the Whitman teams(Don't know which, don't have it in front of me)


Sorry for the earlier mistakes and we will try to keep yall updated as the day
goes on.
Karla Leeper
Baylor Debate




More information about the Mailman mailing list