This is an English translation of the rules from the German Championship 2004 in Bonn. They more or less form the basis of the British Parliamentary Style we use at Jacobs University.
Foreword
Most large international debating tournaments are carried out in British Parliamentary Style (BPS). No other style is comparatively suitable for tournament debating. A tradition of about 200 years guarantees the quality of the model both in theory and practice.
The fundamental idea of BPS is simple: four teams compete on two sides. Every speech has to provide new insights into the topic and rebut the arguments of the opposite side. The differences in content are always central, revealing the Pros and Cons. Those who elude this conflict lose.
BPS requires much technical finesse. This way, debates become thrilling and entertaining, but also very challenging. Just like political parties in a coalition, every team has to develop its own profile in order to beat the rivals on the same side without contradicting them.
These rules are based on the British standard; however, they have been adapted and abridged for the official German compendium. The guidelines for adjudication have undergone some particularly rigorous revision. Instead of only distinguishing matter and manner, the method has been introduced as a third criterion.
Tactics and Strategy
The decision of victory or defeat depends on the adjudicators, not anyone’s personal opinion. The main strategic goal is always to obtain more speaker points than the other teams. All tactics are subordinate to this goal.
During the debate, one should regularly ask oneself the following two questions:
1. Does my behaviour support my side?
2. Does my behaviour support my team?
“Support” means: Make one’s own case more plausible and find more convincing arguments than the opposite side. Every argument should support the basic reasoning that the first speaker on one’s side presented. Additional policies rarely make sense as they dilute the controversial issue.
In the matter, or content, one should argue unflinchingly. Both sides are justifiable in their own right. The task is to rebut the arguments of the opponents in a contextually convincing way. Therefore one must closely listen to the other side in order to present better counter-arguments.
One’s demeanour during the debate contributes to the impression with the jury at all times. Those who disturb the debate lose valuable points. Although it is also a question of type, in general it is better to be calm and considerate. One interjection that hits the nail on the head is much better than repeated, loud and incomprehensible heckling.
To put it succinctly: more adrenaline, less testosterone. Debates should be governed by thrilling content and honest devotion. This includes adherence to the rules of politeness: not barking at one’s opponent, but an amiable manner is the way to go.
Of course, sometimes a sound bite can save the situation. However, these occasions are exceptions, and the misuse of such stylistic elements often leads to loss of points.
Assessment
The assessment is tied to the following basic principles:
The content or matter is the most important aspect of a speech. The pure textual argumentation counts for 50 percent of the total score. The crucial questions are: Did the speech support the respective side? Did the speech rebut the arguments of the opposite side? Were the arguments convincing?
The other two elements of assessment, manner and method, relate to the matter of the speech. Both indicate if and how the matter has been brought to bear.
The method means the logic and order of a speech and counts 25 percent. The crucial questions are: Was the content well conveyed? Was the speech comprehensibly and adequately structured? And: did the team work together? Was there a connection between their speeches?
Finally, the manner describes the presentation of the speech, or in other words, the show. It weighs 25 percent. Again, the stylistic means must fit the matter of the speech. Boastful elocution and declamatory gestures don’t always work – sometimes one has to be gentle and sensitive in order to suit the topic.
Each speech is awarded between 50 and 100 points. Following the international norm the mean is 70 points. From experience, most speeches obtain between 60 and 80 points.
The sum of the individual speaker points yields the team valuation. The team with the most points wins the debate and obtains three team points. The other teams subsequently obtain two, one and no team point.