2019 Berkeley PF Round 2: Westlake AD vs Futures RA
Videos
Shared
Debate
Practice vs AI
Research
settings
Videos
Shared
Debate
Practice vs AI
Research
settings
Videos
Shared
Debate
Practice vs AI
Research
settings

Videos

  • All Videos

  • Lectures

  • NDT

    College Team Debate

  • CX

    HS Team Debate

  • LD

    HS Individual Debate

  • PF

    HS Public Forum

  • Greatest of All-Time

  • My Favorites

  • Watch History

Research

  • Research Workspace
  • Card Search
  • Team Research
  • Practice vs AI
  • Prep Workspace

Coaching

  • Tournaments
  • Team Rankings
  • Coach Workspace
  • News & Forums

Insights

  • Debater Level
  • Topics & Video Statistics
  • Prediction Markets
  • Rules & Glossary
  • Laptop-less Debating
  • All Features

Docs

  • All Videos

  • College Team Debate

    College Team Debate

  • HS Team Debate

    HS Team Debate

  • HS Public Forum

    HS Public Forum

  • HS Individual Debate

    HS Individual Debate

  • Lectures

    Lectures

  • Watch History

  • Greatest of All-Time

    Greatest of All-Time

  • My Favorites

    My Favorites

Research

Coaching

Insights

DocsGitHubGithubSupportAboutPrivacyRedditReddit
Video library
'19
R2PF

2019 Berkeley PF Round 2: Westlake AD vs Futures RA

2019 Berkeley Round 2 Harvard-Westlake AD (Aff) vs Futures RA (Neg)

Feb 23, 20193.7k

This is a preliminary debate (round 2) from the 2019 Cal Invitational UC Berkeley Lincoln-Douglas Debate Tournament. The topic for this debate is resolved: The United States ought not provide military aid to authoritarian regimes. Result: The decision was for the affirmative. ——————— Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/debatedrills Join our newsletter: http://www.debatedrills.com

Comments

Loading comments…

Pro Constructive

Affirmative

Play to where each speech begins and press Mark start, or let Detect speeches find them all — the timeline, the playing marker and each speech's captions follow.

Judges

What else could the Pro Constructive have done? Claude drafts 3 alternative responses and predicts how a flow judge would vote after each, next to the speech as it was given.

  • Flow judge: A technical, experienced circuit judge who votes on the flow: dropped arguments are true, extensions need warrants, and weighing decides close rounds.

Simulated responses and ballots are Claude's predictions from a rough transcript, not real results. Each run is a new AI request.

Related videos

DoublesUC Berkeley·Outreach Debate

Emerald AG debates 1st on the Negative, while Nueva DY debates 2nd on the Affirmative. Before opening the description and viewing the results, we recommend flowing the round yourself and coming up with your own decision. 1NC: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y4cLvMko-GqwCkqxunEQgrsTlVXe4US9/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=115947557445308211282&rtpof=true&sd=true 2NC: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kV2vFhm-N9peF7-BvMCKOdjxzWbBJEJQ/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=115947557445308211282&rtpof=true&sd=true Emerald AG (CON) wins on a 3-0 decision. If you have any recordings you'd like to have uploaded, please email us at outreachdebate@gmail.com. The topic being debated in this round is: Resolved: The Federal Trade Commission should establish a federal regulatory framework for sports betting.

Jul 25, 20260.5k
FinalBerkeley·LASA Debate
Feb 23, 20244.5k

Queue

Nothing queued. Add a related video with itsbutton and it lines up here, to play when this one ends.