The Case Structure Checklist

Run through this list on any case before a round. If you cannot check every box, the case has a structural hole, not just a content weakness.

The checklist

• Definitions, if the resolution has a term that could be interpreted more than one way, is it defined in the case itself, not left for cross-ex to sort out?
• Value, is there one clearly stated value, in a single sentence, not implied across several paragraphs?
• Criterion, is there a specific standard for measuring the value, not just the value restated in different words?
• Contention link, does every contention explicitly connect back to the criterion, in a sentence the judge can actually hear (not just something that's true if you squint)?
• Evidence, does every major claim have a specific example, statistic, or cited source behind it, not just an assertion?
• Timing, have you read the entire case out loud with a stopwatch, and does it fit inside your speech time with room to spare for delivery pacing?
• One clear voter, could you, right now, say in one sentence why a judge should vote for your side? If it takes you more than one sentence, the case does not have a clear enough throughline yet.

What to do when a box fails

Do not try to fix everything the night before a tournament. Fix the checklist items in the order they appear above, each one depends on the ones before it: a case with no clear value cannot have contentions that link to a criterion, no matter how good those contentions sound on their own.