Debating Techniques, styles and such.

Exposing my ignorance I ask, what's a trick case?

In my day (slightly after the discovery of fire), high schools nationwide debated a single topic for the year, such as Resolved: There should be a national police agency. Affirmative teams argue for the resolution, Negative teams argue against it. In addition, the Affirmative team must present a plan by which the resolution might be implemented, and the Negative team argues against that as well. A trick case is one which fits under the resolution but was not anticipated or intended by the national organization.

One year, the topic was (to the best of my recollection, though the wording is probably not quite right) Resolved: The United States should mandate universal service for its youth. The intent of the resolution was a debate about a military draft coupled with some form of alternate social work for consciensous objectors.

Our case made the form of universal service the completion of High School. Lots of good evidence for the benefit to the individual, as well as little or no sacrifice on behalf of the same. Of course there are arguments against it, but the net effect is to render 99% of the evidence the Negative team has gathered against the "real" topic pointless, and very few American High School debaters are taught to prevail without card boxes full of quotes and statistics.

Thanks alot Greyfan. Its a little different in Ontario, we have a different resolution each debate, and some debates they might just spring a totally different resolution on you just to keep the blood flowing. Ive researched Cross-Examination techniques lately because i have a cross-x debate coming up. It should go ok, im quite good at asking questions to screw over the other side.

Cross-Examination was introduced as an experiment in one debate tournament I was involved in back in my day. It scared us to death, since it involved actual thought over research. I don't believe it ever caught on, although I am quite out of touch.

Another time, after a tournament, the sponsering college (I think it was Wayne State in Detroit) presented a debate between American and English collegiate teams, each debating in their own style, the Americans relying on the usual fileboxes of evidence and the English on wit and reason. The rather biased audience of American High School debaters thought the American team won handily, but I was more impressed with the style and method of the English team. It sounds like the Canadian approach is more interesting than our way as well.

It is interesting, if facts, facts and more facts is all you have got, your argument is considered a little lack lustre.