Skip header content and main navigation Binghamton University, State University of New York - Patrick
Banner Brandon Evans Brittney Bleyle Trevor Reddick Phillip George Sonya Robinson Maneo Choudhury Daniel Friedman Joe Leeson-Schatz Anna Pinchuk Masakazu Kurihara Joshua Frumkin

Binghamton Speech & Debate

Brennan Young

Brennan Young
General Information
Name: Brennan Young
Affiliation: Winston Churchill High School
Join Time: April 16, 2014 at 08:31PM EST
Send Message: You must Create an Account and Log-In to message users.
Debating Statistics
Wins: 4 (0 are Byes)
Losses: 2 (0 are Forfeits)
Average Points (Out of 30): 16.1 (96.8 total)
*Opponent Wins: 15
*Opponent Points: 453.1
Judging Statistics
Total Rounds Judged: 2
Average Points Given (Out of 30): 13.6
Voted Proposition In: 50% of rounds
Voted Opposition In: 50% of rounds
Average Length of Notes (Characters): 3949 (7898 total)
Matches
Current: None
Past:

Intralinked Debate - The 5th Semesterly Evans Cup

Show

Round 1

Round 2

Binghamton University's 2nd Annual Online Debate Tournament

Show

*Does not count opponents in bye or forfeit rounds.

Other
About Me: Policy (CX) Debater from Winston Churchill H.S. in San Antonio, Texas.

Nothing much left to say...
Judge Philosophy: Do what you do well and believe what you're saying. If you believe the Marxist theory is the only way to view the world, damn great - run it. If you believe that affirmative with no plans are cheating, then damn right man, say it. But if your link to framework is some crappy argument with no real warrant, ill be pretty persuaded by the aff saying that you're full of shit.

On speed, err on the side of clarity over speed. If you think in your gut that things like theory or topicality will be options in the final rebuttals give me some time to be able to low more than just the taglines of your theory blocks.

K Debate: While I am a kritikal debater personally, I still find myself at a fault in understanding postmodern philosophy. An overview of your K and the interaction with the aff would be appreciated. If you're going to run a kritik, give me a solid permutation/link analysis. This is an increasingly important issue that Im noticing in my kritik debates. If you're going to perm, you need to start a engagement about what the world of the permutation would mean. This doesn't mean the 2AC needs to give a 1 minute analysis, but you should be able to explain your permutations in speeches and in cross-x.

Topicality: Ive won most of my negative debates on topicality so Im well versed. However, I am very fast to vote towards reasonability on bullshit T violations designed to limit our individual affs, Ive learned that I have a relatively high threshold for theory and that only becomes higher with theory with cheap shot theory violations. Winning theory debates in front of me means picking a few solid arguments. Going up for a 2AR where you go for 15 theory arguments is going to be hard to sell to me.

Counterplans: I have no problems with counterpleas, run whatever you want. However, you deserve to know that I am pre-dispositioned to think that counterplans like stealing funding, deals, and other sketchy counterplans are more suspect to theory debates. On counterplan theory, give me some time to flow.
Connect with Binghamton:
Twitter icon links to Binghamton University's Twitter page YouTube icon links to Binghamton University's YouTube page Facebook icon links to Binghamton University's Facebook page Pinterest icon links to Binghamton University's Pinterest page

Binghamton University Online Debate Platform powered by:

PHP MySQL SUIT