Zip a dee don't do dat

Scranton is about two hours away from Sailorville, making it a pretty easy commute for a major tournament. The town itself seemed okay, but we never got more than ten feet away from the tournament hotel on one side and the main gathering area on the university campus on the other, aside from Sunday morning when I went driving around looking for a New York Times, a mug’s game if there ever was one. Oh, well. As far as the debating space was concerned, I always like tournaments where there’s a comfortable gathering place for everyone to convene in, aided and abetted by a food court, so people don’t go wandering off. We have one at UPenn, and this was certainly one. If you’re thinking of holding your own tournament in the future, first make sure there’s lots of comfy chairs, a Starbucks and at least one guy standing at a grill turning lard into lunch to assuage the hungry savages. These things make all the difference. I wouldn’t mind faster internet also, come to think of it, but you can’t have everything.

The Panivore did well for herself, making it all the way to finals; the PC fought the good fight but went down in the eighth round, so he couldn’t make it in through to our promise of all 5-3s breaking. As it turned out, we only had one run-off round. It could have been worse. The whole 8-rounds, 7-rounds neg bias thing probably has led O’C to side equalization at Jake. I think we’re all still in the middle of figuring this out.

Because of the prefs and the small pool, we tab bozos had to judge a couple of times. Normally this entertains me a lot, as at the Newark RR where I put in a full obligation and let my little brain weave amiably around the subject of juvenile justice. I’m not quite sure why the debaters there adjusted and the debaters at NDCA didn’t. I mean, the VCA is well aware that, A) I have nothing intrinsically against speed, and B) I can’t do it myself. If you judge a couple of rounds a year, you’re not going to be able to flow lightening. This is not surprising to me, but it does seem to be surprising to debaters, despite the fact that I am famous for the line, “The faster you go, the quicker you lose.” I didn’t invoke it this weekend, assuming that if I’m a 1 for you, you know that already. Anyhow, in my single prelim, one of the debaters didn’t heed this, despite three warnings in less ironic language, and didn’t get very far, although I marginally caught a bunch of what he was saying, and feel that if I had caught all of it I still would have had the same RFD for his opponent. The break round, on the other hand, was the most tedious 45 minutes I’ve spent in a long time. I mean, you can only stare at your flow for so long, and then you start doodling and checking your email and solving kenken puzzles. I didn’t bother critiquing the round, because my RFD was about as meaningful as knickers on a mackerel, but I did participate in a unanimous decision. Go figure. As one of my colleagues explained to the debaters in the round, it is not the best strategic choice to exclude one of the judges on your panel… Oh, well. As I say, if you want to do speed and your judge and opponent are up for it, be my guest. Otherwise, proceed at your own peril. And, oh yeah, if you are going to talk fast, try not to spend half of that time stuttering and repeating yourself. Seems a little counterproductive, if you ask me.