Skip to content
October 1, 2016 / compassioninpolitics

Should I pursue depth or breadth

The implicit assumption of this question seems to be that new arguments win.


The best way to get better is to pick a couple areas and go deeper.


Pick a winning counterplan or two.


Pick a winning critique or two.


Build your strategies around those arguments.

It makes being negative soooo much better.


In terms of your time and resources, depth beats breadth.


When you can do this….you can be even more unconventional.  Or you can be conventional.  Either way–it provides you with flexibility.


The line toward depth of argument develops you skills builds you as a person.  The chasing the latest new argument to surprise the other team is something that yields diminishing returns.


This isn’t to say that research and new arguments isn’t important, it just that going deeper pays dividends, particularly with quality judging.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: