And the Winner Is. . .
Call it what you want, but I'm calling it an epic battle of Moot Court proportions. The team of Rachel Appelman and Alex Bell (aka Team Appelbell) faced off against Julie and Richard Howell in the Moot Court finals and the winner is . . .
AppelBell
While they were a combined 6'4" shorter than their opponents they had heart, grit, and the entirety of LARC III supporting their every word.
AppelBell
While they were a combined 6'4" shorter than their opponents they had heart, grit, and the entirety of LARC III supporting their every word.
Congratulations.
And the Top 10 Speakers:
10) Boline
10) Goines
10) Goines
10) Hild
9) Schram
7) Masten
7) Ybarro
5) Scott
5) Cox
3) Howell
3) Debye
2) Keesee
1) Bell
9) Schram
7) Masten
7) Ybarro
5) Scott
5) Cox
3) Howell
3) Debye
2) Keesee
1) Bell
posted by Jon Swanburg @ 4:21 PM
4 comments
4 Comments:
Referencing the comments made to the earlier post on this subject:
I agree that the Top Ten list includes certain people that are questionable; especially when considering all of the stellar speakers that did not make the list (TJ/BC/Appelman). However, the same could be said for the teams that made the break. Let's be honest, the first four rounds hurt some great teams (Korbet/Shaw) while helping some crap teams; it was more of a roulette game than a true competition.
That being said, I only want to say three (more) things/pieces of advice:
1. Inconsistencies are inherent in any competition where multiple judges are judging different teams. There is no way to truly objectify the process. Sure, there are improvements, but each improvement comes with drawbacks (more rounds, more time). Thus, although it may suck, this is the best it can be for an intra-school competition.
2. With all of this in mind, for those teams/people that did get recognized, please understand that it does not cement your reputation as an outstanding advocate; or in other words, don't rub it in everyone's face. So you're a barrister . . . so what. So you're a top ten speaker . . . big deal. Success is 50% luck and in this competition it might have been even more. Just acknowledge the recognition, thank the organizers for their hard work, and let it go. And especially - don't talk about all the things you're going to do "when you're a barrister." At least not in class.
3. And for those who didn't make it, be a good competitor. Congratulate those who made it, give them a pat on the back, and move on. As much as it may "satisfy" your anger to sneer their success, don't. Put yourself in their shoes. They worked hard. They tried their best. They deserve it.
I agree with the above. I was pretty upset with the overall results, but that's life. I didn't get to see many of the speakers, but a few of the choices were questionable, to say the least. Oh well. No sense in dwelling. Congrats to those who have joined the Order, and better luck next time to those who did not.
The tourney isnt about winning or losing. It's about becoming a better speaker. We are at Baylor, so I think a lot of us hope to eventually make my livelihood off this sort of thing one day. The experience and knowledge gained from just participating in the tournament is far more valuable than any speaker points or awards.
forest, trees, ect.
go becky hild!
Post a Comment
<< Home