[eDebate] LD, etc.--the Diet Coke challenge

Andy Ellis andy.edebate
Thu Nov 22 10:28:12 CST 2007


 I think neil's work on this is fascinating

two points....

1) we keep not naming names, that makes it really tough to do the
community shaming and ethical stances jackie talks about being
necessary and everybody else recognizes as the statsus quo rather
difficult. I know we shouldnt take this out on debaters because it is
often coaches making such decisons, but not knowing what schools do
this means that not necessarily true rumors about people and teams can
continue "that kid must be one of those TOC super novs" "that team
redshirts the freshman" etc etc. My suggestion would be that as part
of the process we declare either as indiviudals or as a community who
the people are that are suspect novices.

2) to me (and i know neil is not per se making this argument) the
important part is not who won the tournament, but happened in the
debates where everybody was debating. I think most people can take
losing in a final round to team that is better them regardless of how
they got that way, but what is really tough is one team has a lot of
experience and a lot of teams and smaller division force a school to
hit that school and its novices in a bunch of debates. One random
experienced debater in the novice division is not the same as far as
effects on morale as a whole set of those debates or those debates in
your break rounds...t


On Nov 22, 2007 2:59 AM, NEIL BERCH <berchnorto at msn.com> wrote:
>
>
> In order to better understand the claims made by Chief, I just spent 2 hours
> looking up every team that has won a novice division so far this year (note:
> this doesn't include tournaments where Jon doesn't have results up yet, and
> it excludes the Frederick Douglass, which was closed out at quarters, as
> well as Pepperdine, which has no elim results posted, and Santa Rosa, which
> was quite small and closed out).  Counting a closeout at West Point (and not
> double-counting two teams that have each won two novice divisions), there
> are 12 teams to examine (including 3 from ADA tournaments).  For each of
> them, I looked them up in two ways.  I checked to see whether either team
> member debated college policy debate last year for the same school (using
> Bruschke page data), and I checked to see whether either team member was
> listed on the NFL's points page (with their high school record).  Below, I
> report my findings.  The list is of those twelve teams, referred to as teams
> A through L.  I have randomized the order and have no interest in
> identifying the teams (and some interest in not doing so).  Two
> observations:
>
> 1.  No team has won a novice division this year (with the caveats expressed
> above) without having some prior debate experience.
> 2.  I'm not whether my data serve to support Chief's proposal or not.  The
> heterogeneity of previous debate experience leave open to conjecture (and
> I'll leave it to others to do the conjecturing for now) what sort of world
> would exist post-amendment.
>
> On to the data:
> Team A:  one person with 11 rounds of college policy last year, one with no
> experience.
> Team B:  one person with 35 rounds of HS LD, 6 rounds of HS policy, and 13
> rounds of HS Public Forum; the other with no experience.
> Team C:  one person with a ton of HS Student Congress experience; one with
> no experience.
> Team D:  one person with HS IE experience and 19 rounds of college policy
> last year; one person with 25 rounds of college policy last year (but never
> cleared).
> Team E:  one person with 143 rounds of HS LD; one person with 24 rounds of
> HS LD.
> Team F:  one person with 37 rounds of HS LD and 108 rounds of HS Public
> Forum; one with no experience.
> Team G:  one person with 13 rounds of college policy last year; the other
> with no experience.
> Team H:  one person with 23 rounds of HS LD; the other with no experience.
> Team I:  one person with 11 rounds of college policy last year; the other
> with 147 rounds of HS LD.
> Team J:  one person with 23 rounds of college policy last year, 4 rounds of
> HS policy, and 120 rounds of HS LD; the other person with 46 rounds of HS
> policy.
> Team K:  one person with 163 rounds of HS LD; the other person with 116
> rounds of HS LD and 28 rounds of HS Public Forum.
> Team L:  one person with 14 rounds of college policy last year; one person
> with HS IE experience.
>
> --Neil Berch
> West Virginia University
> _______________________________________________
> eDebate mailing list
> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>



More information about the Mailman mailing list