Coach Mark Roose
In this short blog, I am going to show you how to solve all your 1AC structuring problems. We’ll start with what you need, move to your mindset, and then lay out some ground rules that will enable you to perfect your 1AC. If you apply the tools provided in this post, your affirmative win rate will increase by 25%, judges will love you, and negative teams will be left speechless.
Let’s begin. What does every 1AC need? There are four major needs when it comes to an aff case. These are things that need to be included in every 1AC. The first and most important is a MASSIVE PROBLEM! If you don’t have a humongous problem, then don’t run the case. The second thing you’ll need is a PRACTICAL EASY TO UNDERSTAND EXPLANATION. This is one of the hardest needs, but it is absolutely necessary. If the judge isn’t able to visualize your problem, then it doesn't matter how big it is; you’ll never win. Next you will need some kind of STATISTIC OR NUMBERS. If you don’t have numbers, then your problem isn’t big enough, and you probably won’t be able to show it to a judge. Stats and numbers are a must for a 1AC but I would recommend against putting them directly in your tags. The final necessity is REAL WORLD EXAMPLE. Some cases can survive without them but few succeed. If its never happened before, then it’ll be very hard to find good numbers, it’ll be hard to explain because no one has ever seen it, and that should make you question if it's really that big of a problem. Fill these needs and you’ll already be ahead of 50% of affirmatives.
Now if I asked you what the affirmative mindset should be, you would say something dumb like, ‘Win the round’ or ‘defend a case’ or ‘create a better world.’ Wrong; these are all wrong. The affirmative objective is to write a 1AC that serves as a negative speech against the status quo. What is easier than buying new dishes? Cleaning the ones you have. We don’t need to create a better world; we need to fix the one we have. The easiest thing to crush is the status quo, the current state of the world. And guess what? The negative team is forced to defend it!!! Most negs will claim they don’t have to, so just ask, “do you like the current state of our world?” They’ll say ‘no,’ and viola, you’ve won the round. You hate the status quo, the judge definitely doesn’t like it, and now the negative team says they wish things were different! The only natural step to take is to vote for the aff case. All of a sudden, every negative team is struggling to find out what happened while you walk away with way too many aff wins.
I know you all are still young and don’t like getting told what not to do, but I’m going to tell you anyway. Like seriously if you are doing any of these things, you need to immediately STOP. There are four major DON’TS when it comes to 1AC structures. DON’T ever use an observation in your 1AC. I don’t want to hear it as a replacement for backgrounds or as a setup for your definitions. I’ve seen cases where teams will say, “Observation 1. Definitions. Observation 2. The plan. Observations 3. The advantages. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT!!! All it does is confuse judges and waste your time. DON’T use stock issues in tags. No one wants to hear you say ‘Topicality, the definitions' and they also don’t want you calling your background points ‘inherencies.’ Not only is there a problem with the word inherent having contradictory definitions depending on context but it doesn’t help clarify anything. If it's a problem, call it a harm. If it's information that everyone agrees upon, call it a background. DON’T ever call your background a ‘Fact.’ Please just don’t do this; there is no need. It doesn’t help you at all, and it makes you look really dumb when the negative starts arguing against your ‘fact.’ If anyone, for any reason, could disagree, then for the purpose of debate, just let it be background. DON’T use openers that are dumb! This is a personal pet peeve of mine and is also the greatest reason for affirmative losses. If you open with Patrick Henry saying “Give me liberty or give me death,” I can promise death for your affirmative case. No corny quotes or quotes of any kind from anyone except a recent expert in the field. If you feel like an author, then you can write an emotional story for an opener. It has to be realistic and it better have something to do with your case. One round I was in,the aff started with a whole 45-second story of some random thing completely unrelated to the policy. Please DON’T do that.
These rules are simple, but if you choose to fill the needs, change your mindset, and follow the don'ts, you will quickly become a master at preparing affirmative cases. Good luck to you all and see you at the next one.
HEY! This is awkward. You’re not signed up for NILE DEBATE. Start the year off right, get good at debate, be prepared for your tournaments, join the organization that is changing the way Stoa debates; join NILE DEBATE. https://www.niledebate.com/store