September 1, 2007
If you are planning to have a successful year, first you need to figure out what type of debater you are and then you can have a realistic view of how the year should pan out. All three types that I plan to mention can have a good year provided they are structured and organized but sometimes that’s not enough to get you to the finals. See if you fall into one of these categories. There is the Parrot, the Natural, and the Researcher.
First there is the Parrot. This type of debater does what he is told. He gets a team case and reads it word for word and has all of his blocks and rebuttals planned out ahead of time. This is usually a novice or jv debater but there are a few varsity debaters that fall into this pattern as well. If he is a good speaker, he can do really well – especially if he is fully prepared for all of the possible arguments that can be thrown at him. However, the problem is that once he gets something he’s not prepared for he falls apart. This is why this type of debater does well in prelims but falls apart in the elimination rounds. Other teams are already prepared for him and unless he’s prepped by his coach or a varsity member from his team, he’s out of luck. But if you need to be prepped at that point, your odds of winning are already dwindling. These type of debaters usually go down during the CX because that’s when their weaknesses are exploited. Once you exploit a Parrot, go for the kill and don’t let up. These type of debaters can win if the round is close so once you find a weakness take advantage of it. The sad thing is these type of debaters can beat a Researcher more easily than they can beat a Natural.
This leads to my favorite type of debater, the Natural. Although this is not exactly the best type of debater, these are the most dynamic to judge. This type of debater is like the Parrot except he makes the case his own. It’s obvious it’s a team case but it has wrinkles in it that the basic case didn’t. And unlike the Parrot, this debater can get himself out of trouble rather easily. This would be your everyday car dealer that’s gets the employee of the year award for all of his sales. This debater can sell the case and make it look like a gold mine. I love these debaters because I can give them a case and they can take it to another level which means they can defend it a lot better than a Parrot. The problem is most of the time they are full of BS. However, only the Researcher or another Natural has the ability to beat this type of debater. They are confident and have an air of arrogance which usually intimidates the Parrot and even the Researcher. They can win their fair share of rounds but it’s really hard to make it to finals simply because they rely too much on instincts and not enough on research. Basically these are your apathetically brilliant students.
Finally, we have the Researcher. This should be the best type of debater that has the best chance of winning tournaments at a high percentage rate. He has an advantage because he actually researches the topic beyond the briefs and writes his own case. He also researches every author he plans to use in his case. Sometimes, unlike the Natural, he isn’t as articulate and this is his downfall. His advantage is his case doesn’t have many weaknesses and he can exploit all of his opponent’s weaknesses simply because he knows more than they do. The Natural can’t BS a Researcher. So imagine a debater that is both a Natural and a Researcher. As long as you had legitimate judges, that combination would be hard to beat.
Regardless of your debating style, all debaters fall under one of these categories. Which one are you?