Sendai (@2.1) vs Matsumoto (@3.7)

Our Prediction:

Sendai will win

Sendai – Matsumoto Match Prediction | 06-10-2019 01:00

In general, there is very little room for adding plans.) The above conditions should be basically considered the same in terms of both AFF and NEG systems. in an AD/DA with evidence. However, you can argue for instance, that the AFF system will (even if the laws are the same between two systems) in effect substantially speed up the automation, immigration, etc. (The list is not comprehensive.

The 2nd criterion: For each team, the total number of votes of the opponent teams will be totaled. If in case the team or its opponent has received a bye round, the total number will be modified according to the teams average vote rate. Among the teams with the same number of votes, the team with the higher total opponent votes will be in the upper ranking.

Matsumoto Yamaga vs Vegalta Sendai Prediction & Betting Tips

Dont add any ADs/DAs or attacks yourself! New arguments are prohibited: All the ADs and DAs should be presented in the Constructive Speech. Usage of evidence is to be encouraged not discouraged. Last minute surprise attacks especially in the summary speeches should never be counted. 7.Distinguish decision making and advices: When deciding the winners, a judge shouldnt add/attack the issues themselves, nor should they weigh English fluency too much. However, advices on these points are precious. 3. Never decide winners using subjective speech points. Even if the Q/As were superb, the team can be terribly unconvincing at the end!) 5.This is not a Parliamentary Debate tournament: point of information is prohibited. Apart from the decision making, advices on the unmentioned fallacies or on English skills would be more than welcome. 2.Issues that are extended (not forgotten in the latter part of the round) should count: Constructive speeches are just written down speeches. Rational contentions should count more than just superficial eloquence. To Avoid Common Misunderstandings1.Dont add your own issues, attacks Leave the job to the debaters. You shouldnt weigh the issues too much, unless they are defended and summarized effectively afterwards. 6.This is not a Recitation contest: Dont decide the winners by English fluency, accents, intonation, eye-contacts, etc. 6. I thought the other speeches were even. (Judges should compare the finally defended ADs/DAs. 4.Dont judge the winner by comparing the speeches: A bad reason for decision typically goes like this: Ill vote NEG, as I think the NEG Q/As and Attacks were wonderful.

If you thinks each of the suggested debatetopic is appropriate then answer Yes.( This is called Approvalvote system You can even agree to all of them or none of them. The HEnDA judging committee has narrowed down your suggestions to 5possible debate topics. Please answer the below questionnaire askingwhich topics are appropriate. Thank you for suggesting wonderful debate topic ideas. Deletethe Yess if you think the topic is not suitable, vice versa.

Interrupt the speeches, if you think the speeches are too fast. (2) This is not a Recitation contest (Even if some of the rounds may appear to be so!) Dont decide the winners just by eye-contacts, accents, intonation, etc. Please tell the students how to improve their English delivery. just to make the opponents upset). c) The usage of evidence is to be encouraged, not to be discouraged as in some Parliamentary debate contests. However, you should comment on them. Some Notes for the Experienced Judges: (1) This is not a Parliamentary Debate (British impromptu style) tournament: a) Interruption of speeches by the opponents, so called POINT(s) OF INFORMATION is not allowed b) Decide the winners by the outcome of the argument contents (see Section 2), not by cumulative speech points. (3) This is not exactly an American Policy Debate (NDT/CEDA style) tournament a) NEVER encourage fast delivery. Of course those are important for English communication, but as long as the speeches are intelligible, please dont overweigh such speech delivery aspects when deciding the winners. b) Ignore cheap debate tactics (such as phony Topicality, Counterplans etc. 6.

1. adopt a social security system

Needless to say, the Negative team cannot challenge the Affirmative by supporting other months, for example, arguing that October is better than September. On the other hand, the Negative team should defend the present situation where most of the schools academic year starts around April. For example, even if quite a lot of universities decided that they will start their academic year in September, the Negative position is to defend the April situation. Even if the present situation changed dramatically before the National tournament in December, this Negative position should not change.

1.Affirmative team does not have a burden to prove that More than 10 million immigrants will surely come toJapan as the Definition 1) supposes. However, they cannot propose a plan that will limit the immigrants to a smaller number, or argue an Advantage on the basis of such smaller number.As Definition 4) shows, for example, to limit the immigrants by the skills of Japanese language is an abusive restriction.

5.It is allowed to present plans on Japanese education, administration, and welfare concerning the immigrants, as stated in Definition 3). It goes without saying that, the Affirmative team has the burden to prove that such education or welfare plan is effective. However, it is not allowed to present plans that provide education or welfare only to certain immigrants with certain jobs.

Matsumoto Yamaga vs Vegalta Sendai Prediction

Note here that values can be sometimes flipped by the opponents good arguments. Compare the reasons supporting both claims. If you think the NEG value assessments were convincing, then the alleged AD should rather be treated as a DA. 3.Judge the value (significance) of each issue: Next consider the importance of each alleged AD and DA. Unless the value mentioned in an issue is explained well by the debaters themselves, dont weigh such issue as significant (Even if you yourself think its important). (For instance, AFF might argue that gaps are bad. However NEG might flip the issue by arguing that gaps are rather welcome. What is the value at stake? How much impact will the DA bring in terms of quantity and quality?

New attacks using evidence on the opponents Advantage or Disadvantage are also treated as New Arguments. Apparent New Arguments are new plans, new Advantages, new Disadvantages or their equivalents, which are first to appear in the Defense or Summary speeches. Especially for instance, the judge should absolutely ignore New Arguments in the Summary speeches, which the opponents have unfairly limited opportunity to refute.

If a team has explained the criteria for deciding whether the merit outweighs the demerits, such criteria should be used to determine the winner. Try to avoid being subjective in the first place. Being fair in weighing the issues might not be easy. (Of course, if the mentioned criteria are irrelevant or not supported by any reason, you dont have to follow them Honestly speaking, in most high school debates, neither side will present such criterion effectively. In those cases you should decide using your own usual value judgments). Recollect the latter stage speeches (summary) of the debaters.