Ryan R says:
Maybe I'm not understanding your math, but 6 cases per side means that worst case scenario (with your two debaters on opposite sides in round 7) you'd only have to disclose 8 of your 12 cases in prelims. Depending on whether one or both of them break, and depending on how flips work out, your remaining 4 should be able to run all-new cases at least through octas, possibly though finals. Seems pretty equitable to me, at least by the standard you set in your post.
I'll leave aside my quibbles about the diminishing strategic returns for new cases, but think of it this way: pre-disclosure, BigTeamsVille had to write 10 (or whatever) cases in order to be able to run a new case every round, and post-disclosure they have to write 60. Isn't that a comparative advantage to Hen Hud?
But if we're disclosing, then the math doesn't matter. If we're not disclosing, or we're disclosing everything, my 2 people have to absorb 60 cases and their 10 people and multiple coaches have to absorb 6. In the fifteen minutes before the round. Where perhaps none of those cases will be run. It's the 6 cases per person, multiplied by the number of people. Advantage BigTeamsVille.
But I'm more interested in the whole Alice in Wonderland situation of disclosure meaning you never have to disclose.
No comments:
Post a Comment