Site hosted by Build your free website today!


Topicality will be a major force this year since almost every case I have heard of is non-topical. Hopefully judges won’t be burn out on it so that we can still use it. This is just your basic topicality. I will avoid advance topicality theory partly because you could find it elsewhere and that I try to stick with just the basics since that is all you really need to know.

An example of a bad topicality violation can be seen HERE.Below is the normal topicality violation structure.

A. Interpretation – This is your view based on the definition you have of the resolution. Both sides give there interpretation though as always its up to the judge to decide which is the best. So just read whatever bizarre definition you found that the affirmative’s case does not meet. Make sure you use full citation(ex. 1996 Webster International English Dictionary).

B. Violation - Its how the Affirmative team does not meet the definition.

C. Standards - Why your definition is the best in the round.

  1. Limits - Why the definition limits better stopping the mean affirmative team from abusing you.
  2. Brightline - How the definition sets a line between topical and non-topical cases. It helps to give examples of cases that would work to show that if the affirmative wanted too they could have been topical. If you do that I like to name 3 or so really bad sounding cases that are non-topical and includes the affirmative’s case. It helps prove your point.

D. Voter - Why the judge should vote on topicality. There are a couple common voting issue.