Candice Merritt -- Pace Academy

Use the back button on your browser to return to the pref entry page or tournament entry list. The judge philosophy appears in a different format at the bottom of the page.

Judging philosophy:



I am a very fair judge, and I try to be objective as possible. I will listen to about any and everything as long as it is impacted and explained well. Here are some thoughts on some of my caveats of debate:


Speed: I am all about quality over quantity. I need all individuals to be clear, even at the expense of not reading all the cards you want. If I cannot understand you, then my flow will reflect the lack that I heard. I will yell clear once and after that I expect you to put in more effort. If you can’t/won’t it will hurt you in both the round and your speaker points.

Kritiks: I like to listen to them, but I do not like ambiguity or any argument that is unclear. If you want me to vote on them, you must win your framework. You must also EXPLAIN the whole argument. This means I want you to articulate the link(s), implications, and alternatives. I want you to be persuasive. Specificity is critical. For example, I enjoy when Negs utilize the 1AC and cross-x to get the aff to link harder. I do not enjoy floating PICs or when it is finally clear what the kritik is by rebuttals. By that point, I am more interested in other issues in the round (DAs, case turns, etc).

Theory: I admit that I am not the biggest fan, but I know theory has its place. You can win on it, but you need to spend time on the issue. I hate rounds where both teams just read their blocks and leave it at that. If you are going to go for it…then put in the time and energy to hash it out.

Counterplans: If you are running PICs, I hope the Net Benefit is clear and significant because I am not very privy to these. I will listen to them and if Affs mishandle or concede, then you are more likely to succeed. If Affs call you out on them, impact, and explain the issue, then you better get to RANT-ing.

Although, some bias exists, this does not mean you should not run what you want. Run that Kritik that you were planning to kick out of in the 2NR or the conditional PIC. Debate is full of contention and possibility. Just remember to impact, explain, and be persuasive. If you do this well, you will get the win from me.

Seasonal voting record:

TourneyDivRdAFF    NEG    Decision

Judge Philosophy Alternate Format: