Online Debating Tutorial - Three on Three Debating

Three on Three Debating

by Ray D'Cruz

Three on three debating is the format of debate most people will be used to. It is the format used in the DAV Schools and Adults Competition, the Easter IV, the Australasian IV (except that also has replies), internal competitions at Monash, and in most public debates.

First Speakers

AFFIRMATIVE

Team line.
This is a short phrase or sentence which focusses the arguments of your team. It should be a uniting point that can be repeated, not word for word, but the gist of it. This should underline the approach your team is taking to the debate.

Definition.
You should explain what the key terms mean, this may require you to set the debate if the definition has more than one meaning or is not clear. Be careful not to define trusitically which is where you leave the other team arguing the unarguable ­ like hunger is good. Your definition must be reasonable which means it should not be obscure; it could relate to issues in the media at the time.

Team summary (split).
Where you allocate the arguments between you and your second speaker; it is important so that you can develop your case without being repetitive and so the audience can see where your going

Case.
Now is the time to develop your argument. Divide this area into a couple of points and carefully signpost your matter. Argue by issue, not example and at the end, briefly recap and state how the next speaker will build.


NEGATIVE

Team line.
State the alternate approach or view of the issue that your team holds.

Definitional issues.
State whether you accept of reject your opponents definition. If you accept then move onto rebuttal. You may reject the affirmative's definition if it is truistic (self-proving; irrebuttable). Remember that if you accuse a team of a truism, you must not be able to rebut them. You may also reject if you believe your definition is more reasonable you must state the difference, why yours is better and why your opponents is not as good. If your opponent gives a perfectly reasonable definition that you did not anticipate then try not to challenge as it is messy.

Rebut.
Critique you opponent's arguments. Do it in a structured way maybe dividing it into two or three main themes and carefully signposting your way. Be careful not to rebut the examples but the issues.

Team summary (split).
Same as for the affirmative.

Case.
Develop like affirmative.

Second Speakers

AFFIRMATIVE

Summarise.
Briefly summarise what has happened in the debate and how your speech will build on the first speaker's speech in order to prove the team line. This should be very brief.

Rebut.
Rebut the main arguments of your opponents. Good rebuttal should not come in the form of a list where the longest list wins. Rather, good rebuttal should simplify your oppnent's case into a few central issues which you can then attack. When rebutting, you should first deal with any defintional issues that may have arisen. Also remember to use examples to support your counter arguments.

Case.
Once you have rebutted, you should then spend your time putting forward the substantive arguments of your team, as this is your main role. These arguments should be signposted and they should, in turn, be discussed in depth. The concept of discussing in depth is not as daunting as it seems; it can be likened to writing essays where you write in paragraphs, not sentences. So too in debating, your matter should be 'in paragraphs' where you state your premise, explain the premise and then support that premise with examples. After that, a good essay writer and debater will summarise.

Summarise.
Recap what you have said to make it clear that both you and your first speaker have been building a case.

NEGATIVE

Summarise.
As stated before, make sure that you contrast the developments of each case and briefly state how you plan to continue that development.

Rebut.
This should follow the structure of the second affirmative. However, remember that since there have have been two preceding affirmative speeches, you will have considerably more to rebut and thus rebuttal will need to be more comprehensSummarise. Summarise your speech and the case of your team, trying to put the speech into an overall context by looking also at the approach of your opponents. However this contrast need only be brief as you will have dealt with the main isues of your opponent in rebuttal.ive.

Case.
Now you must put forward your substantive material. Again, do all the good matter and method things: keep relevant, structure logically (in paragraph form as mentioned just to the left), carefully signpost all of your arguments and support all of your arguments with examples, or at least whenever you can.

Summarise.
Summarise your speech and the case of your team, trying to put the speech into an overall context by looking also at the approach of your opponents. However this contrast need only be brief as you will have dealt with the main isues of your opponent in rebuttal.

Third Speakers

AFFIRMATIVE

Summarise.
Highlight the main themes of each side and show the contrast. Number these main themes so you can substantively rebut your opponent next. Rebut.
You should spend 80-90 percent of your speech doing this. You should pick a few main themes to rebut - your opponents may have already set these up in their own split and allocation. This allows you to rebut thematically rather than move from one inconclusive example to another. Just as you put forward your arguments in paragraphs not sentences, do the same for your rebuttal. Keep signposting! You should not really have time to worry about new material.

Summarise and conclude.
Recap the main themes of the debate, after your substantial rebuttal, you should be able to contrast team lines confidently highlighting how your case is superior.

NEGATIVE

Summarise.
Highlight the main themes of each side and show the contrast. Number these main themes so you can substantively rebut your opponent next.

Rebut.
You should spend 80-90 percent of your time rebutting. Again, like mentioned for 3rd aff., you should highlight and rebut main themes as opposed to multiple examples - remember that when the issue underlying the example falls, so does the example but not necessarily vice-versa. Under no circumstances can a third negative speaker introduce new material but if it is a new example to clarify a previously put theory or rebuttal of material then this will NOT be considered new material.

Summarise and conclude.
Again, go over the main themes, comparing and contrasting. Though you have last say, you need not yell to be convincing. Be clear and concise and identify the important issues.

Reply Speeches

Reply speeches are required in the Monash Internal Competition as well as the Australasian IV. Reply speeches are not nearly as daunting as they seem, and it is probably fair to say that most debates are decided by the time you get to replies. However, in close debates, they count. If you are doing a reply, you should spend you time (you get half the time of a normal speech / consequently half the marks) highlighting the main issues of the debate. If you find two or three critical issues, concentrate on these and why your team is correct and why your opponents have not dealt with these issues as well. Try not to get bogged down with individual examples or peripheral issues. Hit the main issues and leave on that note with a good quick summary.

 

 

© 1999-2002 Monash Association of Debaters. Contact Us.
The information contained on these pages is intended as a guide only. No responsibility taken for errors or omissions.