Sendai (@2.1) vs Matsumoto (@3.7)
06-10-2019

Our Prediction:

Sendai will win

Sendai – Matsumoto Match Prediction | 06-10-2019 01:00

Now, exceptionally for humane reasons, some local autonomies provide livelihood assistance to alien denizens living in poverty. The BI provides income basically only to the Japanese nation. Such assistance should be assumed as being continued. The affirmative side can define whether the minors should receive the same amount as the adults, but other restrictions toward the payments should not be argued (such as, BI should not be provided to the rich).

He is named after Iggy Pop. He is a haughty and rude dog and sees humans as monsters for how badly they treated him. Over the course of the story, he begins to make friends with the crew, and resolves to take down DIO with the gang. A Boston terrier granted some degree of sentience following the acquisition of his stand.

Dont add any advantages/disadvantages yourself! Ignore them if they are presented. Make decisions only by the debaters arguments that are properly presented within the debate format: Debate judges should judge the debaters arguments (and their counter-arguments). (2) Only the issues that are extended (not forgotten in the summary speech) counts: Even if a team sounded better than the other in the early stage of debate, that shouldnt be taken into your decision if they screwed up in the latter stages. Three warnings for novice judges: (1) Dont add your own issues. However, in your advices after the round, teaching the students about such hidden issues would be very helpful. Presenting new arguments (new merits/demerits) in the attacks, defense, summary speech are forbidden by the rules. (3) Distinguish reason for decision and advices: As mentioned above, dont add your own issues in your decision. As you will soon see, in most of the debates, earlier stages are just recitation of some prepared scripts. If the students cant properly defend and summarize their own issues, those issues should be taken lightly in your decision.

4.1 Supervising the debate round speeches

If both teams have had equal number of past Affirmative side debates, then the student leaders of both teams will do a Janken (Rock, Scissor, Paper) in front of the officials at the designated room. The team with less Affirmative side debates will be the next Affirmative. The winner team of the Janken will debate on the Affirmative side. In the finals, the Affirmative and Negative side will be decided as follows: Both teams will count how many times they have debated on the Affirmative side so far (including both the Finals and the prelims).

Only when there is some apparent accident in time measurement, such as when the Time Keepers timer broke down or the Time Keeper mishandled the timer, the main judge may refer to the debaters timer. The duration of each speech will be kept track of by each rooms official Time Keepers timer, not the timers of the debaters.

4.Dont judge the winner by comparing the speeches: A bad reason for decision typically goes like this: Ill vote NEG, as I think the NEG Q/As and Attacks were wonderful. I thought the other speeches were even. (Judges should compare the finally defended ADs/DAs.

In that case, a judge should compare the ADs and the DAs rationally, using ones own value judgments. Which is more important? If the ADs outweigh the DAs then AFF wins, else the NEG wins. A good AFF summary may present a value criterion insisting that their plan can meet the necessary civil minimum concerning math ability, and the value of such necessary ability outweighs the vague individuality value. Recollect the latter stage speeches (summary) of the debaters. (For example, AFF insisted that each child should have enough math ability but NEG argued that childrens individuality should have priority. Try to avoid your own point of view coming in. 5.Compare the net sum of the issues:Sum up the strength of the ADs and consider if it outweighs the strength of the summed-up DAs. Such comparison should be done by the debatersthemselves. If a team has explained the value criteria for deciding whether the ADs outweigh the DAs, such debaters criteria should be used to determine the winner. If the NEG can not present a counter-criterion, a judge should decide in favor of the AFF). In some debates, neither team is able to present such value criterion effectively.

Bluray/DVD/VHS Database Search Options

New attacks using evidence on the opponents Advantage or Disadvantage are also treated as New Arguments. Apparent New Arguments are new plans, new Advantages, new Disadvantages or their equivalents, which are first to appear in the Defense or Summary speeches. Especially for instance, the judge should absolutely ignore New Arguments in the Summary speeches, which the opponents have unfairly limited opportunity to refute.

The 2nd criterion: For each team, the total number of votes of the opponent teams will be totaled. If in case the team or its opponent has received a bye round, the total number will be modified according to the teams average vote rate. Among the teams with the same number of votes, the team with the higher total opponent votes will be in the upper ranking.

The Negative team should not, for example, attack that the majority of universities will not shift the beginning of their academic year to September. The debate, for the sake of arguments, should take for granted (as a hypothetical premise) that such situation can be achieved. They do not have to prove that such situation will surely be achieved. This assumption should not be challenged. Also they do not have to argue on how it will be achieved. The Affirmative teams should defend the hypothetical situation where most of the universities start their academic year around September.

Further comments are provided after the asterisks (*). However, wed like the students, their coaches and judges to look through relevant rules before attending the tournament. Some of the rules here are for tournament management purposes, so it is not necessary to read through all of the statutes in this rulebook. Topics of importance are framed so please pay extra attention to them.