Debate Tournament: 43 and Counting
The numbers add up to yet another successful debate tournament: On Sunday, January 12, 124 debaters from four New England states competed in the 43rd Loomis Chaffee Debate Tournament, one of the longest continuously running competitions in the Debating Association of New England Schools (DANEIS).
Faculty member Curt Robison, the longstanding advisor to the Loomis Chaffee Debate Society, chose the resolution: “Resolved, that the U.S. government should develop and implement policies designed to reduce the production and consumption of meat, in part by raising the price of meat to consumers.”
Loomis has a large group of students in the Debate Society this year. “This weekend alone,” Curt said, “we had 24 different debaters competing in two different tournaments — one on Saturday and then a different crew competing at our home tournament on Sunday.”
Junior Claire Cen and sophomore Katie Pham qualified for the Connecticut state debate finals with their trophy-winning 3-1 performance on Saturday, January 11, in a tournament in Fairfield, Conn. On Sunday, LC’s top team in the advanced division — seniors Luke Han, Julius Kim, Oliver Zhang, and Artem Gagushin — compiled a 4-2 record, defeating teams from Choate, Northfield Mount Hermon, and then St. Paul’s twice. Deerfield’s advanced team won the division at the LC tournament with a 5-1 record.
At the Loomis tournament, none of the competitors knew what the resolution would be until the release of a packet of information roughly one hour before the first round began, Curt said. The 12-page packet contained background and articles to use in developing arguments for and against the resolution. The tournament was a switch-sides tournament, meaning that students debate on both sides of the resolution. Preparation is key. So, too, is the ability to get into a certain mindset quickly.
“They learned what side they were on only minutes before the first round, and then each team had to switch sides for the second round. A coin flip or mutual agreement decided the sides for the third and final round,” Curt said. “The resolution proved to be one that enabled a wide variety of arguments to enter into the debate: environmental, animal welfare, human health, and finally the struggles many face to afford food.”