Mike Shackelford

• Factors that make a good counterplan

• Does it solve the aff better?

• Is it competitive

• Does it solve the aff or a portion of the aff AS WELL AS a DA (net benefit)

• Original

• Factors that make a good text• Generic CP• Adjustable – • The easiest way is to not have pre-written phrasing.• Can be worded to adjust to stupid plan texts.

• Write out the action of the plan• This excludes [insert mandates of the plan]

• Case Specific Counterplan• Every plank written out• Adjustable – • Changes accordingly to 1AC advantages

Factors that make a good competition claim:

None, the best counterplans are clearly competitive by the texts.

However, assuming you are reading a generic CP:

•“Avoids DA to…”•Small T Violation. Accusing your own counterplan of being untopical for doing something the aff also does – game over.

• Internal vs. External• Factors that make a good net benefit• Unique• Doesn’t matter how awesome your net benefit is if the

squo solves it• Definite Solvency• Turns the case

• Principle of Neg Strategy: Resolve the affirmative impacts

• Assuming the affirmative has done their job right, the squo will not be an easy world to defend

• To combat this, we have counterplans.

• CP solves 100% of the case”OR

• “CP solves X advantage and the net benefit turns the other”•20-30 seconds on why

• 30 seconds on the net-benefit explanation – impact calc

• Each perm needs to be addressed separately1. Theory2. Doesn’t solve3. DA to the perm

• Counterplan’s have a “status”• 3 status’• Conditional – can be kicked at any time• Dispositional – multiple interpretations• If you read any theory other than dispo bad, we can kick it• If you straight turn, we’re stuck with it

• Unconditional – have to go for it unless they go for T

• Treat as a DA

• Internal vs. External Net-Benefits

• Impact Calc on Top if not on overview

• Explain why even if the CP doesn’t solve all of the case, the net benefit outweighs what you don’t solve.

• Must have either an internal net benefit or an external. The counterplan itself is not a reason to vote negative.

• Sliding Scale Solvency Claims– we may not solve this part of the case. However, the Net Benefit outweighs.

• Kick the CP?

• 4 Categories• Theory – will be covered in theory lecture tomorrow• Perm• Solvency Deficit• DA to the CP

• DO NOT READ 5 PERMS IN A ROW AT BREAKNECK SPEED!!!• Judges need ink time

• Common Perms• Perm: Do Both• Perm: Do Plan then CP• Perm: Do CP then Plan• Perm: Do CP

• Great time trade-off – but toe the line carefully

• Factors that make a good perm:• Does it have a net benefit? • Specificity• Tricky CP Texts

• Tread the abuse line very carefully

• Factors that make a solvency deficit effective• Doesn’t solve the aff• 1AC card extension• 2AC cards• Analytics

• Doesn’t solve the net-benefit• Cards• Analytics

• Avoid reading an impact the 1AC already has• Can be an Add-on, or a DA to their mechanism• Also can impact turn the NB

• S.P.O.T.• Step One: Solvency Deficit• Every flow starts with case extension• Explain why this outweighs the NB

• Step Two: Perm• Place at different parts of the flow so they 1) might drop,

2) have to actively organize, 3) judge ink time• Almost always no more than two• Perm do both, perm do cp

• If they bust out the Consult• 5 perms, Jimmy’s got this one

• Step Three: DA to the CP (Offense)• Step Four: Theory• Status• Consult/Process/Competition