My Problem with TOC

November 1, 2006

Finally, I have a chance to get some things off my chest that have been bugging me for a while. I would like to thank Debatechamps.com for giving me this opportunity to express myself. Although I could write about a plethora of topics, this first article will center around the TOC. Yes, the infamous Tournament of Champions will be my dart board. I will try as hard as I can to stay on topic as this subject strikes a nerve so I may go on a tangent at any moment. In order to focus, I will center my article around two main points which illustrate my disliking for the TOC.

To begin with, it gives debaters a false sense of security. By debaters traveling around the country trying to gain their bids, it really only shows that the more money one has, the more opportunities one gets. But are these really the best debaters the country has to offer – I think not. I was really upset when the TOC and the California State tournament were on the same weekend and my top debater as well as others in the state chose to go to TOC with the opinion that that is where the best debaters go. The reasoning is that supposedly the TOC has the most experience judges while the State tournament has the most inexperience judges. I’ve seen both, and I like my chances with inexperience judges who have nothing to gain by giving a win or a loss than my chances with TOC judges, who although are experience, have their own agenda they need to address – mainly favoring their debate camp or the TOC ideology. Judging is subjective regardless of where you go, and the TOC in no different. A National Champion, in my opinion, is just as good if not better than a TOC Champion because they have to go through the entire country to earn that award. One cannot simply buy his way into a spot. Since only one chance is available, the debaters have to do their best to try and sway the vote their way. The false sense of security stems from the fact that TOC debaters can’t handle losing if the judging is perceived as inadequate.

Finally, the philosophy that guides TOC debates is flawed. Lincoln-Douglas Debate is not about spreading your opponents out, as some would have you believe. It’s a mixture of philosophy and facts with philosophy prevailing. What this means is that an entire case can be knocked out with one prevailing philosophy and no amount of facts or reason can save it. This is why at Nationals, a spreader can lose to the normal speaker because the normal speaker makes sense while the spreader is simply spreading. Don’t get me wrong; I dislike dropping arguments but not when there are 4-5 arguments for one sub point. When that happens, it’s no longer a debate but a contest of the faster speaker. Because of this technique, TOC debaters are losing the art of turning arguments. Rather, they spend more time explaining what was dropped than explaining what was actually argued. I dislike judging varsity for that very reason. I want to see an actual debate which happens more in the Junior Varsity division than happens in the Varsity division. That should explain why I love competing in the JV division and dislike when my students finally have to go varsity because even they become brainwashed into believing they now need to spread their opponents out. This strategy leads to narrow minded thinking where very few TOC debaters can think outside the box. Or at least the ones I have judged have demonstrated this over and over. I could give examples if I had more space – perhaps in another article. But it needs to be known that when I judge, I have no agenda to push except making sure debaters don’t lose sight of what LD debate is all about. A spreader that spends more time turning arguments can easily win a round when I am judging. Just don’t get upset when I give a loss for the simple fact that too much time was spent on dropped arguments and not enough on the one that was addressed – turn it!

I wish I could say more on this topic, but I think these are my major problems with TOC right now. Last year I noticed that at tournaments where bids can be earned, spreading was very prevalent. It’s funny how at Nationals, depending on the judges, spreading is sometimes necessary to get to the finals. Once there, one has to speak normally so the judges can actually understand what is being said. That alone should speak volumes.