I used to be successful at competitive parliamentary debate, winning the Dartmouth debate camp (parliamentary), and going undefeated at the New Haven Urban Debate league. I faced a lot of losses as well, and don’t feel naturally charismatic.
Here’s a couple of things that I did that helped me improve:
- Read ‘How to Win Friends and Influence People.’ I noticed that listening was imperative to being a successful debater. Knowing your opponent allows you to be a lot more effective at picking the right engagements. A lot of winning debates is figuring out what you can concede to your opponents, how to seem reasonable, while also pushing the important issues to win.
- Attend every tournament you can can, and simulate as many full rounds as possible. The more comfortable and in element you are, the easier it is to win. When it feels like going through the motions, it is a lot easier to focus on the specific nuances, rather than re-learning the format.
- Know your strategy for direct engagement. When being questioned, remain composed, take time to think of a good answer. For parliamentary debate, make sure to finish your point before taking a POI. For extemp policy, generally, I’d avoid filibustering. Instead, answer the questions succinctly, and write down questions, in case they come up later. If these aren’t brought up in a later constructive speech, feel free to forget about them, because they don’t need to be addressed on the flow.
- When asking questions, it’s helpful to consider what you’re trying to do. In parliamentary, I’d recommend POIs be concise, funny, that they put your opponent on the defensive, and that they take some time to answer. If someone accepts a POI, and doesn’t answer the question, it looks bad. Generally, I’d refer back to the POI in your next constructive speech to cement your point, as you’ll likely get the last word on the topic area. For cross-examination, you don’t need to refute your opponent on the stand. You also don’t want them to filibuster. First, ask them questions about their arguments to make sure you understand them, if they appear argumentative about you trying to understand, this is good for your optics. Next, ask them arguments that get to the fundamental reasoning. You don’t need to beat every part of an argument to beat an argument. Use CX to target the part that seems the most vulnerable.
- Take advantage of your opponent’s tactical weaknesses, and format weaknesses. Here’s a couple things you can play against your opponents.
- If one speaker is a lot stronger than their partner, direct the hard questions at the weaker partner. Targeting the less strategic of the two puts your opponents in a bind if they say something that can go against their credibility later.
- Most opponents aren’t amazingly organized. If you have multiple arguments contained in each contention, you can hit your opponents for failing to address independent reasons why something is true and important. This is very helpful because you can address anything your opponent forgets in the rebuttals and it buys you a lot of credibility.
- A lot of opponents approach debate in a very formulaic manner. Doing something a little out of the ordinary, like counter-plans or framing the terms of the debate in a way that’s slightly favorable to you can pay dividends later in the round, as they aren’t sure how to respond.
- If you know your opponents really like to look victorious, and like to take low-hanging fruit, arguments that have a very obvious flaw in them that you invest very little time in talking about can sideline them. Sometimes, opponents spend minutes focusing on this small detail, and miss the forest for the trees.
- Try to be likeable. Showing that you’re relaxed and engaged can do a lot to creating a vibe that the judges prefer. Many are parents after all.
Overall, if you treat debate strategically, you’ll do well.
Isadore Johnson's Website 