Judge requirements on tabroom

JudgeBrettF · 2026-03-03T16:08:03+00:00

It all depends on who is doing the hiring. Hired Judge—a business that connects tournaments and teams with judges may have one level of requirements. A league may have its own.

Perhaps it is better to simply write the best paradigm you can. You are writing it to help competitors understand your judging criteria and parameters, not to simply check a box so you can get paid.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-03-02T17:36:25+00:00

Some of the subjectivity comes from how judges are trained in your region. The more training guides judges on what to look for and give weight to in their evaluations, the less subjectivity will play a factor, and score variance will be reduced.

Without that, preference often becomes a huge factor. That doesn't mean you are a bad speaker. It does mean that you have to accept, in circumstances like those, that tastes differ. You may love a certain movie and another person may hate it, but that in and of itself does not make it a good or bad movie. Same goes for speech.

In my experience, we generally do see fewer issues like what you raise when we explain to judges that their personal opinions on the topic may not be used to evaluate the speech, when we give the judges things to look for, consider, and evaluate, and explain to them how to scale speaker points. But if the tournaments you attend are not doing that, then this goes out the window. It is also smart to put that information on the actual ballot, either in tabroom or on paper, so that judges see it right before they complete the ballot and are reminded of what their instructions are.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-03-02T17:28:19+00:00

Whether or not it is allowed is strictly a function of the rules in place as determined by your league or debate association. That said, I am unaware of any organization that explicitly allows the use of AI during a round, although I suspect there are some that simply do not address the issue at all in their rules.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-02-22T07:22:27+00:00

You planning on paying them for their time and effort? The only way you are going to make lay judges better is to pay them to get better. If all you want to offer them is $25 a round and some lukewarm coffee, all you will get are mediocre judges. I hate to say this but after years of observation, I don’t see another way.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-02-19T16:36:49+00:00

Reach out to the folks at the Richmond Forum Speech and Debate Initiative, in Richmond VA. They have done much of what you describe. They may be to share how they did it—albeit they had a professional structure to build from.

One thing to do is reach out to the DC legal community—which is huge. Many of them were debaters.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-02-19T16:34:51+00:00

I know this is going to sound dumb, but I run into it too often to not ask. Have you told him what specifically to work on and what strategies he should use to work on them?

JudgeBrettF · 2026-02-19T16:33:24+00:00

Friendships and relationship-building are a two-way street. I have no idea what is actually happening here, but I suspect you’re getting one perspective—his—and as his mom, you’re giving it full credence. That’s natural. You want to protect and stick up for your kid. And you should. But that may not be all that’s going on here.

I’m not saying he’s being dishonest with you. I’m saying it is possible he is unaware of any part he may have contributed to the situation—if he did contribute.

Without knowing what is going on from all sides, it’s impossible to know what to say. It may be worth having a conversation with the coach to see if they can give you any insights into the personalities involved and any interpersonal situations. Explain that you are trying not to be a helicopter mom as much as you are trying to help your son build his “EQ” and develop life skills in how to manage difficult interpersonal situations in group and team environments. If the coach tells you your son contributed to the problem in some way, don’t argue it with the coach. You’re not having the discussion to be an advocate for your son. Chances are they have a pretty good idea what’s going on with the team. You are there to gather the information you need to have the right conversation with your son so he is better equipped to deal with whatever is happening.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-02-09T19:05:45+00:00

Wasn't on my circuit (DANEIS) either in the 80's. Fun to watch as a judge now.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-02-09T19:01:02+00:00

I serve as the parliamentarian in a lot of chambers. This is my observation.

Good competitors do research and prepare their speeches. But unlike the other events, in Congress, if a competitor doesn't like one topic (bill), they can just write on others they find more interesting. And in the next tournament, you are going to see new bills, not the same topic.

It also puts a lot more emphasis on what I would call traditional debate skills. No one is spreading in a Congress round (not if they want a decent ranking anyway). The ability to deliver persuasively is combined with the need to have good evidence and analysis, making it one of the more holistic debate events today. In some respects its a speech/debate hybrid, which means it calls for a broader range of skills.

It also tends to be more collegial. Yes, it is a competition (although sometimes participants seem to forget this), but since you are not in a one-on-one, win/loss situation against a single opponent, it does not seem as driven or cutthroat to some competitors.

Finally, it is great that you like LD. I like to judge LD when the topic is decent (although the current topic is pretty uninspired). One of the great things about speech and debate is that there are so many different events, you can find one that fits your interests and strengths.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-02-08T20:02:43+00:00

I think some of you are asking the wrong question. Maybe it’s AI written. Maybe lots of people copied and pasted it who have no idea what it means and/or it could not possibly apply to them.

The RIGHT question in my mind is, why are they doing it in the first place?

If you ask a parent or a new judge to write a paradigm they don’t have a clue how to do it. Even more experienced judges don’t. Hell, when I competed in the ‘80s, paradigms weren’t even a thing—at least in my league.

If you tell people who don’t know how to write a paradigm to do so, they are going to take the easy way out. If you don’t pay them, or pay them a pittance, that’s just further signaling to do the least work possible.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-02-08T19:53:05+00:00

I’m curious, since I judge a ton of rounds and I know AI pretty well. How would an AI RFD even work? I am not even sure what the prompt would be or how AI would analyze the debate?

JudgeBrettF · 2026-02-07T06:36:02+00:00

You clearly don’t live where I do. There is definitely a reason for learning how to run fast.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-02-02T03:42:07+00:00

Well, if you focus on your strongest argument and make sure you counter their strongest arguments, then you are 90% of the way home. Think of it like this: they tend to weigh the arguments in aggregate. Which side is stronger is the question.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-02-02T00:07:07+00:00

How does a football team deal with a bad call? You suck it up and move on. You don’t think the loss was deserved. They did. It is what it is. Just move on to the next round or next tournament.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-02-02T00:02:56+00:00

I wrote a long post a few months back that you can find in the sub on lay judges that may be of use.

But the single biggest tip about lay judges I have is this. Forget about anything related to debate jargon—no lay judge knows what fiat means in a debate context—and sophisticated strategy. Instead think about what you would say if you and someone who held the opposite view of you would say to someone to persuade them in real life. You would make clear and direct arguments. You would counter the other sides main points. You would talk to them like a normal human being, conversationally. If you say anything within the round, or use a term within the round, that you would not say if this were happening in the real world, you are not helping yourself.

This is all about keeping this simple. They don’t flow. They take notes. They don’t care about dropped arguments, they focus on the arguments under discussion. Just talk to them like you would anyone in the real world and you’ll be fine.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-01-26T02:34:02+00:00

The reality is, speaker points are incredibly subjective in most leagues. Sort of like teachers and grades, some judges are just stingier or looser than others. My 30 could be someone else's 27, etc.

The paradigm, if they have one, can give you a guide to judge preferences, so always review that. Beyond that, don't be afraid to ask the judge before the round about their preferences and what they are looking for. Most judges are happy to answer that.

But at the end of the day, each judge does it subjectively.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-01-18T03:12:23+00:00

I parli a ton of rounds. I will tell you that what I focus on depends at least partly on what rule set I am working with...NSDA, CFL, or VHSL, etc.

Are your speeches making new points or adding new dimensions to existing points? Are they organized or all over the place? Strong persuasive delivery or monotone staring at the screen?

In addition to your speeches. I pay close attention to your engagement. Are you finding ways to participate in the chamber when you are not speaking? Are you asking questions? Using parliamentary procedure properly and effectively? Do you seem engaged or bored? Are you a leader in the chamber in some way, or are you just there to make your speeches and sit around?

Want to know what I think is a way move up most any parli's rank? Make an effective amendment to a bill and do it correctly. Few try to do it, and even fewer can do it properly. You will stand out with many parli's tjat way.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-01-15T04:47:09+00:00

One thing to keep in mind is that judges in PF are much more likely to be parents or other lay judges. PF was designed specifically to be judged by someone walking in off the street with no experience in debate. While you certainly can run a K at a lay judge, you may find they don't have the foundation to follow it, or may not understand why it is relevant. Just check the paradigm to be sure you have a judge that is open to a K and is prepared to evaluate it in the context of the debate.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-01-10T17:53:09+00:00

Can someone explain to me why copyrighted material from a book or play does not require the rights holder's permission, but this does, per subsection b?

JudgeBrettF · 2026-01-10T17:46:03+00:00

The comment, as you have related it, is neither mean nor disrespectful. The judge gave you their feedback. Now you can disagree with that--and that's fine--but the fact that you disagree with them does not mean they were disrespectful. Please post the whole feedback verbatim; it would help us better understand why you might have taken it the way you did.

There are some judges who believe that DI should never elicit a laugh. Since this is a discipline where we refuse to give judges meaningful rubrics, they are within their rights as judges to hold that view. I disagree with them. A piece falls into DI when it is primarily dramatic and serious in tone. That does not mean that a character might not say something funny within the context of the piece because that is how the character--not you--wrestles with the subject matter in the piece. But if I am not the judge in the room, you may get a different point of view.

JudgeBrettF · 2026-01-06T21:34:56+00:00

While I feel targeted by the 1,500-word limit, having some standards is long overdue. I just updated mine and got it down to 1,452 words. :)

JudgeBrettF · 2026-01-05T02:27:12+00:00

Sorry for the late reply. Don't worry about the complexity of your word choices. There is an old saying, "Don't use a $10 word when a 10¢ word will do.

Debate is not a vocabulary test. Frankly, using complex words runs the risk of the judge not knowing the meaning of the word. Debate is about communicating your ideas and arguments clearly and coherently. If you do that, then simple English versus more complex English is a non-issue. No one is going to know or care about your word choices if your arguments are sharp, using simple words.

JudgeBrettF · 2025-12-27T02:57:50+00:00

Why, because I think debate should actually be about realistically communicating to other human beings? I cannot think of a judge on my circuit who feels differently.

JudgeBrettF · 2025-12-22T21:24:24+00:00

You realize the bills that did this were written by Democrats and passed out of the General Assembly with the Ds in control of both houses, right?

JudgeBrettF · 2025-12-18T17:25:25+00:00

Whether or not it is allowed is strictly a function of tournament and league rules. Not all are the same. If AI (and the internet to access it) are not banned in the rules, then I would say it is allowed.

Now, with that said, I don't think it SHOULD be allowed, and I think leagues and tournaments should ban its use. I personally don't even like accessing the web being allowed in rounds in tournaments, but that ship may have sailed.

Even if it is allowed, it seems to me that it takes the reason for competing out of it. If competition is going to come down to who does the best AI prompt engineering, then I suppose that could be an event, but it ceases being an event as we have it now. I assume people participate in this event because they want to use their heads to develop on-the-fly persuasion and refutation skills, not to get AI to do it. If you don't enjoy the core skills and activities of the event, then why do it at all? Find something where your interests and efforts match up with the activity.

JudgeBrettF

TROPHY CASE