the 1n is the position in the debate that gets the least respect, people assume that the 1nc

is easy because you put it together at the beginning of the debate, people assume 1nr is easy because a lot of prep people give you less credit for doing your job, any other speaker can do their j ob and get rewarded, and the 1n has to be excellent in order to be noticed Things the 1n can do to maximize cred+attention and make sure you are crucial to the neg: Prepping(b4 debate): dividing responsibilities to construct the 1nc (each person should have a role i n putting together the 1nc) partners should have a standard to putting together the case (1nc shells and oth er case) each person needs to be something distinct, if they dont disclose during the 1ac one of you needs to be pulling cards and making args while the other flows and listens to evidence, the first negative should be list ening to the evidence because you have more prep, the 1n should be focusing on listening to the 1ac, one of you must be doing this. you should practice the 1nc shells that you will be reading as part of your regular speaking drill routine ( you should always practice even if right before the tournament), leave time to practice the 1nc before the debate starts, it makes a world of difference to give the speech once before the 1nc (1nc time is super precious, so dont waste it), i f you can practice the 1nc more than once that is even better it makes it so that you are really prepared against, it is i mpossible to overestimate how much credit the 1ac gets because it is practiced a lot, while the 1nc is a reactive speech i t is can be prepped a lot beforehand, you can prepare stuff against advantages in advanced, keep track how long it tak es to get through of each shell, you should always consult with your partner between cx of 1ac and your speech ask is there anything I need to add (any prep taken will be well spent) THE 1NC: Most of these are form or stylistic Packaging is one of the most are your arguments presented in a way that shows their weaknesses always start slowly and ramp speed up if you jump into the beginning of the 1nc trying to go at top speed the first couple of args will be missed by the judge because the beginning of the speech will be like the alarm going off because the judge will be startled (odds are the first couple of things you say in the debat e will be important), you will be able to go a lot faster if you ramp up (easier to find sweet spot from below than abo ve, organization is crucial for the 1nc because the structure of the 1nc is the way the organization of the rest of the speech will be, the 1ac and the 1nc build the structure of the debate and determine the chunks of the debate, the more org anized the 1nc the hard it is for the 2ac to respond, 1nc time is precious but 2ac time is the most important because the 1ar cannot fix the position (2ac time> 1nc time), try to take 2ac time by making arguments that take more time to answer th an to make, when you are sign posting just say the number of off case arguments (dont specify) and the order on the ca se (general when talking about offcase and specific when talking about the case), give each offcase argument a name whe n you get to it, if you dont name your

arg then the 2ac will rename them (the 2ac will name the for you "disad with no link" or "disad we are impact turning" call you da something clever, if you call your boudriallard k "the matrix" then they can control F so much, when you say the last word of the shell you should pause for a beat so that the judge can fin ish what they are writing and go to the next page (this is important to all speakers), odds are if the judge doesnt get what you said down they prob wont remember it at the end of the debate, you should number your case arguments- the reason n umbers are important is because the 1nc structure guides the way the block extends arguments on the case it allows for y ou to refer to the arguments as 1nc 1 or 1nc 2 etc, if you can use the numbering structure consistenly then it is the bes t way to point out the stuff the 2ac drops (we made 6 they had 4 answered so you can hold them accountable for 2 answers), if you have numbered your arguments carefully then it much more diffucult for the negative, if the flow is a mess th en it helps the affirmative because 1ar can make new args and then 2ar can story tell CrossEXing the 2ac: first if you have to get anything from the 2ac do that during prep time not duri ng crossx time (if you are filling flow) because judge may miss it, if you are reading a card and you chose to mark the c ard then you need to mark it, make sure to hold them accountable for not marking the cards, clarify the perms that the a ffirmative has read in the perm (esp if the perm is vague) ask them what that means or what does that look like in pract ice, quiz them about their evidence (if they mention one of their 1ac authors more than twice, like extend them, ask them about that author in the cx) as much as them 2ac uses extending evidence as getting time back the 1ar will do th at more, you need to consult with your partner after the crossx because you have to split the block but at the very lea st you need to consult with your partner for what you need to say after the 2ac The 1nr: a. generally do not take prep for the 1nr 2exceptions 1. consult with the 2nc after the 2nc is done 2.when something has happened in the 2nc that you have to fix (the 2nc has more cards that you need to read) you may need to take some prep to see what the 2nc needs you to say (make it quick and m ake it clear that it is their fault to make it clear that it is their decision that you are using prep) b. the single most important thing the 1nr can do is: read the opponents cards ( you are the only one who has time) you should read every card your opponent has read on the EXTs or the DAs- you ar e in a position to know that evidence better than anyone else in the debate whatever it is you are going for it will a lways be better if you have read their cards c. stand up for yourself but play your role the 2n is the captain of the negative ship because they decide what they are goi ng to decide what they go for in the 2nr

the 1n is there to help and to be a good 1st mate but the 2n does call the shots ; however, the 2n cannot reduce the 1n to a tool or an instrument you are not a hammer to be used by the 2n however the y please because that damages your cred and reduces the strength of your arguments and it hurts your points and all of t hose things are essential for the negative strategy, you gotta get good points because if you clear that is how you get see ded in the speaker rounds and if the 2nr ever expects to go for 1nr then the 2nr has to treat the 1nr with respect, you h ave to have a working relationship and you dont have to like each other (you have to resolve everything outside of the deba te, we are going to lose debates if you dont take me seriously then the judge wont either)

foot note for CrossEXing the 2ac: the better approach in cx is get them to hang themselves (dont coerce them) hav e them give a bad answer themselve dont force it or the judge wont hold them accountable for that answer, foot notes for generally: 1) sometimes the 1nr has to do cleanup work, generally this requires some kickin g (let the 1nr do the kicking at the beginning), put args they fucked up at the bottom of the 1nr to freak them the f uck out 2) a.the 1nr is a rebuttal which means that techinically you cannot make new arg s but because the 1nr is next to the 2nc you have more leeway (bad idea to read new counter plan but you can read a new impac t to a point in the 1nc or 2nc) b.off case args the whole point of the 1nr is to set up the 2nr, set up the impact calculus comp arisons that the 2nr will use in order to make it harder for the 1ar to keep up so the more work you do in the 1nr the eas ier the 2nr will be, in particular why your impact turns the case you want to be as specific as possible because the 1a r will not be able to match the specificity the level of detail is where the 1nr will always be ahead, the 1nr should set up the argument for you to win the debate sometimes you are extending args that could be part of the 2nr strategy (shadow extending= extend an argument that 2nr will not go for) you want to make it hard for the 1ar to extend 2ac arguments, i t is easier to use args that were explained in the 1nr if you give it a tag c. debating case extend 1nc 14 our li evidence does this, first summarize and explain the arg and apply the warrant, answer whatever their answer was, you read a new card if you want, you can get through the case in an incredibly efficient way, wall of ink means if you get a lot of your points written on judges flow then there is a wal l of ink, as the 1nr you have to make sure that you address the evidence that the aff will try to cross apply, account for and tie to your offense when you are debating the case in the 1nr you know what the offcase are and debating the case in terms of cap, the more cross applicat ion work you do in the 1nr the harder it is for the 1ar to do the cross applicat ion and the easier it is for the 2nr to do the big picture debating,