How to Win Debate Competitions (FAQ)

1. How Do You Win Debate Competitions?

Debate is fundamentally about persuading the judge that your interpretation of the resolution is more valid than your opponent’s. Judges strive to remain tabula rasa (blank slate), so both sides have an equal chance of winning. To excel, you must out-argue your opponents, anticipate unspoken objections from the judge, and adapt to the evolving dynamics of the round—much like a strategic game of chess.

• Clearly define key terms and the scope of the topic. Ensure your argument directly addresses the resolution’s central question.
• Anticipate possible arguments your opponent might make. Gather evidence and craft counterarguments in advance to stay ahead.
• Establish a compelling opening position that is difficult for opponents to refute. Build logical, cohesive arguments that flow from one point to the next.
• Monitor the debate’s direction and modify your approach as needed. Identify which arguments resonate most with the judge and prioritize them in later speeches.
• Use confident delivery, clear language, and credible sources to enhance persuasiveness. Balance emotional appeal with logical rigor to make your case compelling.
• In the final moments, distill the debate into the key reasons why you prevail. Compare it to checkmate—preserve the crucial “pieces” of your argument to clinch victory.

ModernBrain offers training in all major forms of debate.

2. What Is Lincoln-Douglas Debate?

Lincoln-Douglas (LD) Debate is a one-on-one format typically centered around philosophical or ethical issues. Each debate lasts about 45 minutes, and a single topic is debated for roughly two months. While traditional LD emphasizes abstract philosophy (e.g., Kantian ethics vs. Utilitarianism), progressive LD may incorporate fast-paced argumentation, policy proposals, and debate theory. Success depends on deep research, judge adaptation, and preparing “blocks” (pre-written responses) to common arguments.

In traditional LD, you use primary value (main principle) and a value criterion (the measure for adherence to that principle). Some judges prefer traditional style, focusing on clarity and deep philosophical structure. Other judges embrace faster delivery, heavy evidence, and creative argumentation techniques.

ModernBrain has a proven track record in Lincoln-Douglas Debate. Recently, a former and a current ModernBrain student claimed 1st and 2nd place at the Middle School Tournament of Champions—demonstrating our commitment to rigorous research, skillful strategy, and personalized mentorship.

3. What Is Parliamentary Debate?

Parliamentary Debate—often shortened to “Parli”—is a two-on-two, spontaneous debate format. Competitors have 20 minutes of preparation time to craft their arguments, and the overall round usually lasts about an hour. The debate unfolds across six speeches: the first two speeches outline each side’s cases, the next two speeches focus on refutations, and the last two speeches conclude and crystallize the arguments.

• Types of Resolutions
  Policy Topics: One side proposes a plan; the other defends the status quo or presents a counterplan. Fact Topics: Debating whether something is “more likely than not” to be true. Value Topics: Arguing why prioritizing one concept over another is more beneficial.
• Speech Structure
  First Two Speeches: Constructive arguments (cases) are presented. Second Two Speeches: Refutations, counterarguments, and clash occur. Final Two Speeches: Conclusions and crystallization of the debate.
• Evidence & Style
  Generally less evidence-heavy than other debate formats, emphasizing logic and rhetoric. Requires adaptability and strong teamwork to handle a range of potential resolutions.
• Organizations & Competitions
  The National Parliamentary Debate League (NPDL) hosts tournaments, but Parliamentary Debate is not a standard national championship event in MS/HS. Popular in some regions and at the college level for its spontaneity and range of topics.

ModernBrain’s students have excelled in Parliamentary Debate, showcasing quick thinking and collaboration. Watch these former ModernBrain coaches’ students in a national elimination round: ModernBrain Parli Debate.

4. What Is Policy Debate?

Policy Debate is a two-on-two format widely regarded as the oldest and often the most research-intensive form of scholastic debate. A single topic (or “resolution”) is debated for an entire year, and rounds typically last over 90 minutes. Because of its technical depth, Policy Debate frequently involves rapid speaking, complex argumentation, and extensive evidence files.

Given the complexity, many judges have extensive experience processing fast-paced, highly technical debates. Lay judges do exist, but the majority of Policy Debate is geared toward judges fluent in “policy speak.”

ModernBrain’s Policy Debate program has made history by winning the NSDA National Championship and the Middle School Tournament of Champions in back-to-back years. Watch one of our championship-winning Policy Debate rounds here: ModernBrain Policy Debate Champion.

5. What Is Public Forum Debate?

Public Forum (PF) Debate is a two-on-two format where teams argue a resolution that changes every month or two. While it shares similarities with Policy Debate in terms of research and strategy, PF tends to be less fast-paced and more accessible to a wider range of audiences, including lay judges. Teams must thoroughly understand the topic—from background context to potential impacts—and present a clear narrative about how the world changes if the resolution is true (or false).

ModernBrain has cultivated many nationally ranked PF debaters through intensive topic exploration and adaptable delivery strategies.

Watch these former students of ModernBrain coaches secure a semifinal victory in a national competition: ModernBrain PF Semifinals.

6. What Is the Ronald Reagan Great Communicator Debate Series?

The Ronald Reagan Great Communicator Debate Series is an annual tournament hosted by the Ronald Reagan Foundation. In contrast to the fast-paced, highly technical style of Policy Debate, this format prioritizes accessibility, delivery, and clarity—focusing on everyday language rather than niche jargon. Competitors debate a fact-based resolution (whether something is “more true than not”) in a one-on-one format, incorporating humor and strong speaking skills to connect with both judges and lay audiences.

ModernBrain has consistently excelled in this format, with students reaching the top 16 nationally every year.

• Watch a ModernBrain 1st–2nd place closeout at the Western Region Qualifier: RRGC Western Region Qualifier

• See one of our coaches, who took 2nd place nationally: ModernBrain Coach’s National Final.

7. What Is Student Congress?

Student Congress (also called Congressional Debate) simulates a legislative assembly where debaters propose and debate bills and resolutions. Participants speak in turns, 3 minutes each, either affirming or negating the legislation. After these speeches, they field questions from their peers. At the end, competitors are ranked based on the quality of their contributions, including research, refutation, engagement, and delivery.

• Docket of Bills & Resolutions
  Topics are distributed beforehand (typically two to six weeks in advance), allowing participants to prepare arguments. Debaters aim to support or oppose each bill with substantive evidence.
• Engaged Debate & Spontaneity
  Merely reading a pre-written speech falls flat. The best Congress participants adapt in real time—responding directly to opponents’ points and weighing impacts.
• Legislative Simulation
  Speakers persuade the chamber—like real legislators—to vote on each bill. Success lies in guiding the assembly toward your perspective through logic, evidence, and rhetorical skill.

ModernBrain has coached middle and high school level state and national champions in Student Congress. Watch the 2022 California State Final Round Winner’s Speech here: ModernBrain Student Congress Champion.

Check out the 2022 Middle School National Champion’s Speech, also coached by ModernBrain: ModernBrain Student Congress Champion (Middle School, 2022).

8. What Is World Schools Debate?

World Schools Debate is an internationally popular format that blends both prepared (topics released in advance) and impromptu (topics given just one hour before the round) debates. Teams typically have 3–5 members, but only three speak in any given round. This style shares similarities with Parliamentary Debate, particularly in its open engagement format—teams can interject with Points of Information (POIs) during opponents’ speeches rather than having a formal cross-examination period.

• Scoring & Criteria
  Judges score speeches on Content, Style, and Strategy. Winners are determined by overall points rather than strict win/loss records on arguments alone.
• Global Popularity
  Recognized worldwide, with national and international championships. Emphasizes critical thinking, persuasive delivery, and adaptability.

ModernBrain provided consultation to the back-to-back NSDA World Schools Debate Champions from West Los Angeles, offering strategic insights that helped them secure decisive wins in 2022 (10-3 decision) and 2023 (12-1 decision).

Watch the 2022 NSDA World Schools Debate Final: 2022 Final Round

Watch the 2023 NSDA World Schools Debate Final: 2023 Final Round

9. What Is the Difference Between Lay/Traditional and Tech/Progressive Debate?

Debate styles often fall under two broad categories—Lay/Traditional and Tech/Progressive. Each approach has its own pace, content focus, and set of priorities when it comes to evaluating arguments and performance.

• Rate of Speaking
  Lay/Traditional: Debaters speak slowly and clearly to ensure the audience can easily follow.
  Tech/Progressive: Rapid delivery to fit as many arguments as possible into limited time (often called “spreading”).
• Content & Focus
  Lay/Traditional: Centered on whether the resolution itself is true or false, with straightforward reasoning.
  Tech/Progressive: May delve into meta-debate (debating the rules or theory of debate), advanced policy proposals, and complex argument structures (disadvantages, counterplans, kritiks, etc.).
• Evaluation & Style
  Lay/Traditional: Judges prioritize clarity, persuasion, rhetoric, and logical organization—akin to a public speaking competition.
  Tech/Progressive: Emphasizes extensive research, critical thinking, and the ability to compare arguments at a high level (impact calculus, theory, etc.).

ModernBrain coaches have created several video tutorials to demystify debate terminology and help students prepare for both Traditional and Progressive styles:

• How to Construct Debate Cases
• How to Cut Cards (Format Gathered Evidence)
• How to Write Disadvantages
• How to Create Counterplans
• How to Do Impact Calculus
• How to Answer Topicality
• How to Address the Kritik

Whether you prefer a lay/traditional approach or a tech/progressive style, understanding both can make you a versatile debater who can adapt to any judge and format.

10. What Is Spreading in Debate?

“Spreading” is a speed-reading technique employed in technical/progressive debate formats. Debaters speak at a rapid pace so they can present more arguments and include additional details within time limits. Because lay or traditional judges typically value clarity over quantity, spreading is usually inappropriate in front of non-technical audiences. In many tournaments, judges will also receive a digital copy of the debaters’ cases to follow along if the speed becomes overwhelming.

• Purpose
  Allow debaters to fit a larger number of arguments into limited speech time. Present extensive evidence and nuanced reasoning for each contention.
• Context & Audience
  Common in tech/progressive debate settings (e.g., Policy or some LD circuits). Avoided in lay/traditional formats where judges expect slower, clearer communication.
• Practical Support
  Judges often receive digital “speech docs” to track arguments as they’re read. Spreading can be challenging to process solely by ear.
• Considerations
  Rapid delivery must remain intelligible; if judges can’t follow, the arguments won’t count. Clear enunciation and strong organization are vital to avoid losing impact.

For a deeper look at spreading, check out WIRED’s investigative video: WIRED on Spreading.

11. What Is Flowing in Debate?

Flowing refers to the note-taking system debaters use to keep track of both their own arguments and those of their opponents during a round. By writing in shorthand and organizing points in a structured layout, debaters can quickly reference key ideas, spot weaknesses, and formulate responses. Proper flow technique is crucial for success in more technical forms of debate, where multiple arguments and subpoints must be followed accurately.

• Purpose
  Capture every major claim, piece of evidence, and rebuttal in a way that’s easy to revisit. Provide a quick visual overview of the debate’s structure, from initial constructive arguments to final refutations.
• Organization
  Typically involves multiple “columns” representing each speech or argument segment. Shorthand is used to save time and maintain clarity.
• Responsiveness
  Flowing allows debaters to see where specific points have or haven’t been addressed. Helps ensure you don’t drop (ignore) critical arguments from the other side.

Want to learn more? Check out this video for an in-depth explanation of flowing techniques and examples of “good flow” vs. “bad flow”: Flowing in Debate