Last weekend, Robert Kindman & Josh Zoffer from Durham Academy (NC) defeated Ozan Cubukcu & Michael Gwin from Hawken (OH) on a 2-1 decision to win the Public Forum Debate division at The Glenbrooks last weekend. Kindman & Zoffer, the defending NFL champions were the #6 seed after preliminary rounds and Cubukcu & Gwin were there #1 seed.
Complete results are now online.
{ 13 comments… read them below or add one }
I didn’t watch the final round but I am curious about the special expert guest judge.
How was he? Did he give a super amazing rfd?
It is interesting that it was a 2-1 decision for the CON and the one sitting out was the expert from The Stanley Foundation. I would have bet the farm that he would vote PRO and I would have been right.
Was there a coin toss for sides for the final round and did the presence of the expert on the panel influence the choice of sides?
There was a coin toss and we picked CON because we liked it better. We knew we would lose the Stanley Foundation guy but we really really liked the CON. I think it was probably a bad decision to have someone so biased be the guest though. I mean, his organization writes topic lit for one side…
You can watch the round and see his RFD at nfltv.org, if you are interested
It didn’t actually affect the cointoss as Durham won and chose Con. His RFD was pretty legitimate too–moreso than the first judge. No complaints about any of the judging on my part, though, and not just because we won Mr. Sambaiew’s vote.
I wrote my last comment before I could read Josh’s, so I’ll go ahead and agree with him that it was probably a bad idea. Mike and I also strongly preferred the Con, for what it’s worth.
I disagree about his RFD. He voted on two rhetorical devices you guys used, not on issues. The comments on impact and magnitude and bluster vs policy were never used to weigh, they were just stated, hence they should not have been voting issues.
Yo get over it. Public Forum is a joke form of debate, do something real then you can complain about RFD’s but as it is PF is a joke, no real reasons to vote either side.
“Josh Zoffer’s” post above about impact magnitude proves my point. If you want some comparative analysis go to policy otherwise have fun in your joke of a activity.
Haha ok, whatever.
Yo Mama, your a db. Good round to both sides.
Other than the line of argumentation that Saudi Arabia is the greatest threat because Osama Bin Laden is from there, I thought CON definitely won. It was a good round, though.
I sighed when I heard the above argument. Deeply.
I am REALLY disappointed the semifinal round ballots were not included in the online ballots.
I like how everyone meticulously capitalizes “PRO” and “CON”. It’s elegant, refined, yet not over the top. Touche’ messers Luke and Josh. As a side note, I indeed watched the round in question. I thought it was rather clear who won. I’ll even disclose in a manner suited for such a classy blog. “CON.”