PublicFormula

The Final Focus
By: Christian Chessman

One of the best Public Forum Teams I have ever met recently placed third at a local tournament. I personally read their cases. Strong, powerful, nearly flawless. Despite this, they lost two of their rounds. Why?

Contrary to what many people would think, a debate round is not about being right or wrong. Naturally, when the Framers at the National Forensic League come up with the topic, it must be debatable. There is no clear right or wrong answer. After all, they wouldn’t want each team to lose their negative round because the topic was so overwhelmingly true, or vice-versa.

What this means is that the round comes down to one person. Not your opponent; it doesn’t matter if they believe you. Not yourself; believing your argument often gives you passion, but in the end, it does not decide. No, the person who you must convince is the judge.

Many debaters tend to forget that Public Forum Debate is aimed at non-debate judges. The Official NFL Rule Packet says, “A central tenet of the debate is that the clash of ideas must be communicated in a manner persuasive to the non-specialist or “citizen judge.”

It is important to address these “Lay” judges, as they are often labeled, in a way to which they are open. I seriously doubt that many citizens (or even debaters) know of the philosophical precepts of deontology, and tacit consent in a Lockean Social Contract.

The Final Focus gives debaters a powerful opportunity to appeal to a judge.

I have found the best way to do it is in a simple way, the boils the round down to a very clear level. If you have stronger arguments, or you deliver them well, the clarity should be very beneficial.

Explain what the round is really all about. These are often called “voting issues.” What should the judge consider when voting on the ballot.

While the structure of your Final Focus is very important, it also gives you a critical time period to display speaking skills.

The nature of the Final Focus is one that gives debaters the opportunity to make eye contact with the judge. The Final Focus is almost never prewritten, because it usually addresses opponent’s arguments, so the debater must think on their feet. Since the debater is speaking from their mind, and not their paper, they have the opportunity to exhibit eye contact. Eye contact often gives the judge the impression that you know what you’re talking about, and that your argument is valid.

Another part of the Final Focus is the aspect of thinking critically, quickly. If you can maintain a smooth flow of ideas, even for this difficult, impromptu speech, you gain a large amount of credibility in the judge’s eyes. This credibility may be the issue that makes or breaks the round.

What my friends at the local tournament did not do is make their judge believe them. Despite their arguments, the judge did not give credence to their arguments. The Final Focus is a tool to make the judge believe your position. It is critical to the round, because it can put the round in a perspective that favors your position. It allows you exhibit your skills at speaking and recognizing key issues.

As a debater, it is your job to use this powerful tool well.