What is the Goal of the Second Half of the Debate?

Both the Case and Rebuttal draw from pre-prepared material and bring in new information to build your case. The Second Half, however, requires strategy and synthesis. The shorter speech times, need for comparisons, and imminent voting mean these speeches greatly differ from the first two. Both the Summary and Final Focus must pack a more persuasive punch than the Case and Rebuttal. For successful Second Half debating you should be guided by the clear goals.

My two philosophies of the Second Half capture the goals of strategy and synthesis:
1. Narrow the round down, don’t make it bigger.
2. Differentiate the Pro from the Con

1. Narrow the round down, don’t make it bigger.

Let’s look back to the inverted triangle model of the round.

The greatest content reduction of the round occurs in the Summary and Final Focus. Some reduction may occur in Rebuttal as you refute arguments, but Summary and Final Focus actively focus on some arguments and set aside others. Shorter speeches require you to narrow the round. For Summary, you have two minutes to discuss over twenty minutes of debating. Final Focus must distill thirty minutes of debating into voting issues. First, this means reducing the number of arguments you discuss. The selection of arguments should be centered on what have been the most important issues of the round, what arguments are most important under the Framework you are advocating, and what arguments you are winning. Second, you reduce the ways of organizing the round. Framework and models will structure these speeches and advocate a specific way of voting. While your Framework may have provided different routes for arguing, you must choose and stick to one in the last two speeches.

Strategy for each speech is discussed in the following chapters. For now, the most important realization is that you must narrow the round in the Second Half.

2. Differentiate the Pro from the Con.

The Second Half should not continue on the path of the Case and Rebuttal, which mainly discuss the Pro and the Con as two opposing yet separate entities in the debate. The Summary and Final Focus, through organization and Impact Calculus, should compare the two sides in a significant way and explain the difference between the two cases. These comparisons should foreground and emphasize your arguments while mentioning your opponents’ arguments. Ultimately, these speeches are about why you are winning the debate. Case and Rebuttal present ideas. Summary and Final Focus illustrate the win. Explaining the difference between Pro and Con will clarify the two distinct choices offered by both teams. This serves the judge and makes narrowing the round simpler.