THE TEMPTATION OF THE UNIQUE: PART 2
In the first post in this two-part series, we discussed the temptation to pick a case simply because it is unique. As I mentioned in the end of the article, there is the flip side of being tempted to run a case simply because it is run by many teams. Giving into that temptation is almost as foolish. In this article, we’ll dive deeper into how to choose a case.
How should we pick cases?
Fundamentally, you should base your case decision on research and reasoning, not popularity. While sometimes pre-season reading and researching can be time consuming, it will benefit you remarkably. Here are several tips to ensure you give every case idea a fair shot.
Ignore the Caselist while picking a case
When you are just starting out on researching affirmative cases, do your best to ignore any caselist that is up. Whether it’s a regional caselist or a national one, don’t worry about who is running what. We are always begging our judges to come in with an unbiased and clean slate because it helps them to make better decisions. The same is true for us. If we evaluate cases without knowing who is running them, we can more objectively (and thus, more effectively) assess the strengths and weaknesses of the case.
If you have a sourcebook, read all of it
This tip may seem obvious, but I find myself often tempted to not follow through on it. When you are reading through the sourcebook, read the entirety of the case. Try to understand the perspective of the case and the arguments that it is presenting. After reading the 1AC, go through and read the affirmative backup. Finally, read the negative brief. When you read the entirety of the case, aff and neg, you force yourself to see both sides of the argument and to analyze the cases’ strengths and weaknesses. This is the opposite of judging a book by its cover. Now, you are in a much better position to make an informed decision on which case to run.
Research the cases
After you have read the sourcebook materials on each case, do some preliminary research on the top five or six cases that you think are better than the rest. This doesn’t have to be hundreds of hours of research, just some groundwork research into the key parts of the case. Look into the significance of the harms, the plan, the advocacy, and the possible negative arguments. After doing this, you are now in a better place to make a good decision
Compare and Choose
At the end of all your reading and preliminary research, compare the top sourcebook cases and any original case ideas that you have had, and choose which one you find to be the best. When coaching my students on choosing affirmative cases, I encourage them to look for three key qualities in the case ideas: Simplicity, significance, and reasonable advocacy.
The case should be simple enough for you to explain to a judge and debate in an hour and a half debate round. Passing a ten mandate plan may be a little much for a debate round. Further, running a case that you don’t understand is a grave mistake. Next, the case should have significance to you and to your judge. In other words, it should matter to you. You should be able to show why the judge should care about it. Finally, the case should have reasonable professional advocacy. There should be some experts defending the general idea of your plan. To have no advocacy is really to have no case.
When comparing all the cases, determine which ones meet those three criteria the best. If a case sufficiently meets all three, the chances are that it is a decent case. If you follow through on these steps, you can more effectively avoid the pitfalls of choosing a case based on its status.
To consider any case “novice” or “elite” based on its originality and uniqueness is simply flawed and detrimental thinking. If when choosing your case, you take advantage of the previous steps and work hard to make sure you are making an objective decision, you will reap the benefits of picking a strong affirmative.