下载文档原格式
英国议会制辩论比赛规则1、BP制是British Parliamentary（英国议会制）的简称，是仿照英国议会开会议事模式而设计的一系列辩论赛规则的总称，是全世界范围内使用最广泛的辩论规则，世界大学生辩论赛WUDC（The World Universities Debating Championships）及中国辩论公开赛China Open均使用此规则。
2、常见的BP制是四队议会制辩论，每场比赛分正反双方，设“正方上院”、“正方下院”、“反方上院”、“反方下院”四队，每队两人，故可概括为“两方、四队、八人”。
3、胜负评判为排序制，即根据各队表现在四队中排出1、2、3、4名，胜负不以正反方而论，即完全可以出现正方上院第一名而正方下院第四名的情况。
4、BP制的竞赛程序可简单描述为“角色扮演”+“交替演讲”，每位辩手均拥有一个议员角色，均拥有7分钟左右（不同赛事时长不一）发言时长，正反方从上到下交替发言，没有自由辩论等任何快速交替发言环节。
5、BP制有一种特殊的“质询”规则：Point of Information (“PoI”)。
PoI 允许对方辩手在“非保护时间”（每人发言时间中除开第一分钟和最后一分钟之外的所有时间）示意要求提问，经发言者允许后向发言者提问质询。
质询者提问时间计入发言者时长，故针对PoI，发言者有权决定是否接受、何时接受、如何回答等事宜。
6、BP制区别于常见华语辩论赛制的最大特点在于“角色扮演”，如下表：7、除一般的“立我方、批对方”的发言责任外，BP制中每个角色还有其独特的角色责任，对该责任的实现程度构成胜负评判的最大因素。
择其精要：8、竞赛组织：一般采取赛前15分钟公布辩题、公布各队所处“赛位”（角色）。
辩题又称“动议”Motion，一般以“本院认为···”This House···的句式给出。
9、评判方式：比赛结束后评委闭门商议产生排序结论，其后由主评当场宣布结果并解释评判理由。
第十三届辩题0.Campus Lifea. China abolish English as a compulsory subject in postgraduate entrance examinations。
b。
China make military training compulsory for all college students。
c. All major corporations operating in China should be required to offer student internships。
1。
Culturea. THW require study of the traditional style Chinese writing。
b。
TH opposes the private ownership of artifacts deemed to be national treasures.c。
THBT Shanzhai culture is bad for China。
2. Educationa. THW base teachers？ pay on their students？ performance.b. THW make community service compulsory for all college students。
c。
THBT Chinese compulsory education should be extended to 12 years3。
Economya. TH supports a new international trading currency.b. THB that China should stop buying US debt.c。
China should issue consumption vouchers to stimulate the economy。
BP英国议会制辩论资料
尊敬的议长，尊敬的各位议员们：
今天我们聚集在这里，是为了就BP英国议会制辩论资料展开讨论。
议会制辩论资料对于英国政治体系的运作至关重要，它不仅反映了议会内部的辩论和决策过程，也直接影响着政府的政策制定和执行。
因此，我们需要认真审视这一议题，以确保议会制辩论资料的公正、透明和民主化。
首先，议会制辩论资料应当确保公正和客观。
议会作为国家的最高立法机构，其辩论资料应当客观记录各方观点和立场，而不应受到政治干预或偏向。
只有在公正的辩论资料基础上，议会才能做出符合国家利益和民意的决策。
其次，议会制辩论资料应当具有透明性和公开性。
公众有权知晓议会辩论的全貌，以便监督议员们的言行和表现。
因此，议会制辩论资料应当及时公开，让公众了解议会的辩论过程和决策依据，从而增强政府的透明度和信任度。
最后，议会制辩论资料应当民主化和参与性。
除了记录议员们
的发言和意见外，辩论资料还应当包括公众的意见和建议，让更多人参与到政治决策中来。
只有通过民主化的辩论资料，议会才能更好地代表人民的利益，实现国家的长远发展目标。
综上所述，我们应当重视BP英国议会制辩论资料的重要性，确保其公正、透明和民主化，以推动英国政治体系的健康发展。
希望各位议员们能够就这一议题展开深入讨论，为议会制辩论资料的完善和改进贡献智慧和力量。
谢谢！。
英国议会辩论赛制bp定义BP(英国议会辩论赛制)是一种常见的辩论赛制，它在英国议会中广泛应用。
BP辩论赛制由四个辩论者组成两个团队，分别是政府团队和反对团队。
本文将详细介绍BP辩论赛制的定义、组织结构、辩论流程以及评判标准。
BP辩论赛制的定义是指一种四人辩论形式，其中两个团队分别代表政府和反对政府，在给定的辩题下展开辩论。
这种辩论赛制要求辩论者具备辩论技巧、逻辑思维和丰富的知识储备。
BP辩论赛制的组织结构包括政府团队和反对团队。
政府团队由一名首相和一名副首相组成，他们负责提出政府立场并进行辩论。
反对团队由一名领袖和一名副领袖组成，他们负责反驳政府立场并提出自己的论点。
此外，辩论赛中还有两名独立的评委，他们负责评判辩论的质量和表现。
BP辩论赛制的辩论流程包括开场陈述、交叉质询、自由辩论和总结陈词。
在开场陈述中，首相和领袖会依次陈述自己的立场和论点，这部分时间限制为每人七分钟。
接着是交叉质询环节，政府团队的副首相对反对团队的领袖进行质询，限时三分钟。
然后是自由辩论，辩论者可以自由发言，展开辩论，这部分时间限制为每人五分钟。
最后是总结陈词，首相和领袖分别进行总结陈词，这部分时间限制为每人四分钟。
辩论结束后，评委进行评分，根据辩论的质量和表现来决定获胜团队。
BP辩论赛制的评判标准主要包括论点的逻辑性、论证的充分性、语言的表达能力、团队的合作默契以及辩论者的形象和风度。
评委会根据这些标准来评判辩论的优劣，并决定胜负。
BP辩论赛制是一种具有挑战性的辩论形式，它要求辩论者具备良好的辩论技巧和丰富的知识储备。
在辩论过程中，辩论者需要清晰地表达自己的立场和论点，并能够进行逻辑思考和有效的反驳。
同时，团队合作和个人形象也是评判的重要因素。
通过BP辩论赛制，辩论者可以锻炼自己的辩论能力和思维能力，提升自己的表达和沟通能力。
英国议会制( B P ) 赛制介绍Introduction about British Parliamentary Style(一)辩论队每轮英国议会制辩论竞赛中有4支辩论队同场，每队2人。
支持辩题的队伍称为〞正方〞，驳斥辩题的队伍称为〞反方〞。
正、反两方别离由两支队伍组成，并别离发表开篇陈述和总结陈词。
每一支队伍都需要与另3队进展竞争，最后决出1至4名。
(二)选手发言顺序每位选手都应按以下顺序进展发言：(三)发言计时每位辩手的发言的时刻均为7分钟。
辩手提出〞质询〞的时刻应在第2到第6分钟之间。
〞质询〞是指在对方发言时，针对发言者正在申述的论点提出的本方观点。
发言计时从辩手开场说话为始；所有必要内容(包括说明、介绍等)都在计时范围内。
计时人员将在以下时刻点向选手示意：·第一分钟末响铃一次 (许诺开场提出〞质询〞)·第六分钟末响铃一次 (提出〞质询〞的时刻完毕)·第七分钟末(7’00’’) 持续响铃两次 (发言时刻完毕)·超时15’后(7’15’’) 持续响铃 (发言缓冲时刻完毕)在持续两次响铃完毕后辩手有15秒“缓冲〞时刻，在这段时刻内许诺选手总结已出具论点。
“缓冲〞时刻内不许诺出具新论据，在“缓冲〞时刻内提出的新论据能够被裁判判为无效。
在〞缓冲〞时刻后仍继续发言的辩手将被裁判团扣分。
(四)辩手角色分派每一个选手都有一个定位，每一个发言都有其特殊目的。
下面列出的辩手角色描述具有借鉴作用，并非必需完全遵循。
依照不同的辩论形式，辩手有时需要在完本钱角色需要说明的部份之外，还要表述其它方面的观点，在正方支持辩题、反方驳斥辩题的根底上，发言构造仍需知足其它论证的需要。
除辩论两边的第四辩手，其它所有辩手都需要提出自己的论点。
除〞首相〞，所有辩手都要反对对方辩友的辩论。
辩手应该总结反方的延展案例并且对整场辩论中每支辩论队的立场做出回应。
反“反方总结〞方总结不能提出新的立论点。
第1篇1. 赛制结构：BP辩论赛通常采用两两对决的形式，即正方和反方各由两名辩手组成。
每场辩论由正方一辩和反方一辩首先发言，随后双方轮流发言，每轮发言时间为6分钟。
2. 辩论流程：辩论分为上院（Upper House）和下院（Lower House）两个阶段。
上院阶段由正方和反方各进行一次发言，下院阶段则由双方继续轮流发言。
3. 辩题公布：辩题通常在比赛开始前15分钟公布，辩手有15分钟的时间进行准备。
4. 立场分配：每支队伍在比赛前需抽签决定其立场，是支持（Government Team）还是反对（Opposition Team）动议。
5. 评分标准：裁判团由5位裁判组成，根据辩手的论点清晰度、逻辑性、辩论技巧、语言表达等方面进行评分。
6. 时间限制：每场辩论的总时长通常为30分钟，包括15分钟准备时间和15分钟正式辩论时间。
7. 即兴辩论：BP辩论赛的辩题通常为即兴辩题，要求辩手在短时间内构建论点和策略。
BP辩论赛以其独特的赛制和高度挑战性，在全球范围内受到广泛欢迎，是提升辩论技能和英语能力的重要平台。
第2篇1. 参赛队伍：每队由两名选手组成，分为正方和反方。
2. 辩论赛制：分为上院和下院，每场辩论由正反双方辩手轮流发言，每位辩手发言时间为6分钟。
3. 辩题公布：每场辩论开始前15分钟，公布辩论主题和双方立场，正方支持辩题，反方反对辩题。
4. 准备时间：辩题公布后，双方各有20分钟准备时间。
5. 辩论时间：辩论时长不得少于3分钟。
6. 评分标准：采用共识评分制，由5位裁判组成裁判团进行评分。
7. 胜负判定：根据各队在上院和下院的得分，以及双方在辩论中的表现，最终确定胜负。
8. 立场选择：在比赛过程中，即兴辩题会在公布辩题的同时告知每队所处立场，分别为Government Team（提议动议）和Opposition Team（反对动议）。
9. 语言要求：BP辩论赛必须使用英文进行辩论。
英国BP辩论赛以其独特的赛制和挑战性，吸引了众多辩论爱好者参与。
BP英国议会制辩论资料
尊敬的议长、各位议员：
今天我们聚集在这里，就BP英国议会制辩论资料展开辩论。
这
一议题涉及到英国议会制度的透明度、公开性以及民主性，对于国
家政治体系的健康发展具有重要意义。
首先，我们需要认识到，英国议会制度作为国家政治决策的核
心机构，其决策过程应当是公开透明的。
然而，目前存在的问题是，议会制辩论资料并不完全对公众开放，这导致了决策的不透明性和
公众对政治决策的不信任感。
因此，我们需要对这一现状进行深入
的反思和改革。
其次，议会制辩论资料的不公开也影响了议会内部的民主性。
议员们在进行决策时，往往需要依赖于相关的资料和信息，而如果
这些资料不完全公开，就会影响到议员们的决策权和发言权。
因此，我们需要确保议会制辩论资料的公开透明，以维护议会内部的民主
原则。
最后，议会制辩论资料的公开透明也是对政府行为的一种监督
和制约。
只有当政府的决策过程得到充分的公开和监督，才能保证政府的决策是合法、公正和有效的。
因此，我们需要通过改革和完善议会制辩论资料的公开机制，来加强对政府行为的监督和制约。
综上所述，BP英国议会制辩论资料的公开透明对于国家政治体系的健康发展至关重要。
我们呼吁各位议员支持对议会制辩论资料的改革和完善，以推动英国议会制度的民主化和现代化。
谢谢！。
本届比赛采用英国议会辩论制（也称为世界大学辩论赛制式），即British Parliamentary Debating,简称BP Format 。
1. 辩论队每轮英国议会制辩论比赛中有4支辩论队同场，每队2人。
支持辩题的队伍称为“正方”，驳斥辩题的队伍称为“反方”。
正、反两方分别由两支队伍构成。
每一支队伍都需要与另3队进行竞争，最后决出1至4名的排名次序。
2. 辩论队伍及选手发言顺序注：1）一轮比赛由4支队伍参加，每队2人；正方的上院和正方下院代表政府；2）每场比赛开始前，抽签决定4支队伍的4个角色；其中2支队伍为正方、2支队伍为反方，互相为竞争关系；3）表中R 为角色，数字1-8为发言顺序；4）每人发言时间为7分钟（含接受和回答POI 质询的时间）。
正方上院（OG ） Opening Government R1: Prime Minister/Leader R3: Deputy Prime Minister 反方上院（OO ） Opening Opposition R2: Leader R4: Deputy Leader 正方下院(CG) Closing Government R5: Member R7：Whip 反方下院(CO) Closing Opposition R6：Member R8：Whip3. 发言计时1）每位辩手的发言的时间均为7分钟。
2）辩手提出“质询”（POI，Point of Information 简称）的时间应在第2到第6分钟之间。
“质询”是指在对方发言时，针对发言者正在申述的论点提出的本方观点。
3）发言计时从辩手开始说话为始；所有必要内容（包括说明、介绍等）均在计时范围内。
4）计时人员将在以下时间点向选手示意：第1分钟末响铃一次（允许开始提出“质询”）；第6分钟末响铃一次（提出“质询”的时间结束）；第7分钟末连续响铃两次（发言时间结束）；7分15秒连续响铃（发言缓冲时间结束）。
∙General rules1. IntroductionThe “FLTRP CUP” National English Debating Competition(hereafter referred to as “the Competition”) inaugurated in 1997 is the onlynational English debating event in ... ∙General rules1. IntroductionThe “FLTRP CUP” Nationa l English Debating Competition(hereafter referred to as “the Competition”) inaugurated in 1997 is the onlynational English debating event in China. The FLTRP CUP National EnglishDebating Competition is jointly hosted by the Foreign Language Teaching andResearch Press Cambridge University Press and the International Debate EducationAssociation (IDEA) coordinated by the China English Language EducationAssociation (CELEA) English Speaking Union (ESU) English Language Learningmagazine (ELL) and sponsored by CASIO (Shanghai).2. Competition FormatThe Competition shall be conducted in the BritishParliamentary Debating Style (also known as the World Universities DebatingChampionships Style) as defined in Part 2.3. Required qualificationsfor the competitionA debater must be a registeredfull-time undergraduate of Chinese nationality in a Chinese territoryeducational institution. Those who have wonoverseas awards of the past CCTV CUP English Speaking Contest or past FLTRP CUPNational English Debating Competition are excluded from participating in theFLTRP Cup.The British Parliamentary format1. The TeamsFour teams of two debaters participate in each British Parliamentarydebate round. The teams supporting themotion are referred to as the "Proposition." The teams arguingagainst the motion are known as the "Opposition" teams. Two teams represent the Proposition: theOpening Proposition and the Closing Proposition. Two teams represent the Opposition: theOpening Opposition and the Closing Opposition. Each of these teams competes against all other teams in the round andwill be ranked 1st through 4th at the conclusion of thedebate.Opening PropositionOpening OppositionClosing PropositionClosing Opposition2. Speaker OrderEach speaker will present a single speech in the order prescribedbelow. SpeakerCommon Titles for SpeakerTimeOpening Proposition Team 1st speaker"Prime Minister" or “Leader of the Proposition”7 minutesOpening Opposition Team 1st speaker"Leader of the Opposition"7 minutesOpening Proposition Team 2nd speaker"Deputy Prime Minister" or "Deputy Leader of the Proposition"7 minutesOpening Opposition Team 2nd speaker"Deputy Leader of the Opposition"7 minutesClosing Proposition Team 1st speaker"Member of the Proposition" "7 minutesClosing Opposition Team 1st speaker"Member of the Opposition"7 minutesClosing Proposition Team 2nd speaker"Proposition Whip"7 minutesClosing Opposition Team 2nd speaker"Opposition Whip"7 minutes3. Speech timingEach speech will be 7 minutes. Points of Information are allowed after the first minute and before thelast minute of all speeches.Timing of the speech begins whenthe speaker begins speaking; all material—including acknowledgementsintroductions etc.—will be timed. Atimekeeper will provide a series of signals during each speech as follows:∙ TimingSignal1:00Single ring of a bell (POIs allowed)6:00Single ring of a bell (POIs no longer allowed)7:00Double ring of a bell (Conclusion of speaking time)7:15Continuous ringing (Conclusion of ...∙ TimingSignal1:00Single ring of a bell (POIs allowed)6:00Single ring of a bell (POIs no longer allowed)7:00Double ring of a bell (Conclusion of speaking time)7:15Continuous ringing (Conclusion of grace period)Once the double ring has sounded speakers have a 15-second ‘grace period’ during which th ey should conclude their remarks. The grace period is not a time for new matter to be introduced and any new matter offered in the grace period may be discounted by the adjudicators. Speakers continuing after this ‘grace period’ may be penalized by the adjudication panel.4.Speaker RolesEach speaker has a role and each speech has a specific purpose. The descriptions of speaker roles listed below are suggestive and are not intended to be exhaustive or exclusive. For reasons that vary from debate to debate speakers may sometimes need to fulfill roles not mentioned here and speeches may be constructed to serve other purposes as long as Proposition speakers affirm the motion and Opposition speakers oppose it.All speakers except the final speakers for the Proposition and Opposition (Proposition and Opposition Whips) should introduce new material. All debaters should refute the opposing teams’ arguments except the Prime Minister.SpeakerRole and Responsibility"Prime Minister" or "Leader of the Proposition”The first speaker's responsibility is to present a case supporting the motion. The primary role of Opening Proposition team initiated in this speech is to establish the foundation for meaningful debate on the motion.“Leader of the Opposition"The Opening Opposition's primary team role is to counter the first Proposition team's case through direct or indirect refutation and/or provide substantive arguments against the motion."Deputy Prime Minister"This speaker should refute the Leader of the Opposition's speech and further develop the Opening Proposition team's case."Deputy Leader of the Opposition"This speaker supports his or her teammate answering objections from the other side and introducing additional arguments or support."Member of the Proposition"This speaker should support the position developed by the Opening Proposition team by introducing an extension. A successful extension will develop a distinct argument identity for the Closing Proposition team while supporting the Opening Proposition team. The Member of the Proposition may also refute the arguments made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition."Member of the Opposition"This speaker should support the position developed by the Opening Opposition team and must also introduce an extension. As with the Member Proposition the Member Opposition’s extension will be most successful if it establishes a unique argument identity that distinguishes the Closing from the Opening Opposition while continuing the general direction of argument initiated by the Opening Opposition. The Member Opposition may also directly or indirectly refute the arguments of the Member Proposition.∙"Proposition Whip"This speaker summarizes the Proposition’s arguments and summarizes the refutation of the Opposition side. With the exception of refuting the Member Opposition’s extension the ...∙ "Proposition Whip"This speaker summarizes the Propos ition’s arguments and summarizes the refutation of the Opposition side. With the exception of refuting the Member Opposition’s extension the speaker should not introduce positive (new) matter."Opposition Whip"This speaker summarizes opposition to the extension and makes reply to each team's position in the debate. This speaker should not introduce positive (new) matter.5.The MotionsA single motion will be announced thirty minutes prior to the beginning of the debate and will be presented to all debaters simultaneously in a general assembly. A different motion will be used for each round.Motions typically focus on current issues or timeless controversies and are phrased in a way that is intended to be specific and unambiguous.6.Focus and content of debatesBritish Parliamentary debating is a contest of ideas in which the Proposition teams are responsible for providing reasons why the motion is true and the Opposition teams are responsible for providing reasons why the motion is not true or why the Proposition has failed to prove the motion true. All teams have a responsibility to refute either directly or indirectly arguments presented by the opposing side.Motions are written in plain language. The debaters—particularly the Opening Proposition team—should respect the meaning and focus of the motion. While the Opening Proposition team may clarify the meaning of terms in the motion they should not attempt to alter the meaning of the motion. The Leader of the Proposition should provide any clarification of terms at the beginning of his or her speech.In the majority of cases the clarification provided by the Opening Proposition team will serve as an adequate foundation for the rest of the debate. Should the Opening Proposition fail to make clear the focus of the debate or if the interpretation offered by the Opening Proposition team completely inhibits meaningful debate or completely misinterprets the meaning the motion the Opening Opposition may offer clarification of the terms of the motion. No teams beyond the Opening Proposition and Opening Opposition may substantially modify the terms of the motion.7.PreparationAll debates shall commence 30 minutes after the motion has been announced. Debaters may consult any written materials during the preparation time. Except for the designated CASIO electronic dictionary no access to other electronic media or electronic storage or retrieval devices is permittedafter motions have been released. Printed and prepared materials may be accessed during a debate.Debaters may confer with their debate partner during preparation time. Debaters may also confer with one tutor from their university during the preparation time.Debaters may not confer with any other individuals (i.e.: coaches other debaters trainers adjudicators etc.) during the preparation time.The Opening Proposition shall have the right to prepare in the debating venue. All other teams must prepare in separate locations.∙ Teams must arrive at their chamber within five minutes of the time of commencement of debate. Teams failing to arrive in time will forfeit the debate at the discretion of the Chair of the panel.8 ...∙ Teams must arrive at their chamber within five minutes of the time of commencement of debate. Teams failing to arrive in time will forfeit the debate at the discretion of the Chair of the panel.8.Points of InformationDebaters may request a point of information (either verbally or by rising) at any time after the first minute and before the last minute of any speech.The debater holding the floor may accept or refuse any points of information within this time. If accepted the debater making the request has fifteen seconds to make a statement or ask a question. During the point of information the speaking time of the floor debater continues. Management of Points of Information—for both the debaters offering and answering Points of Information—will be considered in the adjudicators’ ranking of teams and assignment of individual speaker points.No other parliamentary points such as points of order or points of personal privilege are allowed.Competition Administration1.Structure of the competitionThe Competition shall be run in two main phases: phase one known as the ‘Preliminary’ rounds and phase two known as the ‘Elimination’ rounds. There shall be one mock round eight Preliminary rounds and fourElimination rounds. All teams entered in the Competition shall participate in the Preliminary rounds. Only the top 32 teams will participate in the Elimination rounds.2.The Mock RoundThe mock round will be held as part of the training for the FLTRP Cup. The pairing of the mock round will be random and the results of the mock round will not count for the Preliminary or Elimination rounds.3.Pairing the Preliminary RoundsIf the total number of teams entered in the Competition is not divisible by four or during the Competition the withdrawal of teams results in a total number of teams not divisible by four the tournament administrators shall employ “swing teams” to fill vacant slots. The swing teams shall be ranked in each round relative to the teams against whom they compete (i.e.: if a swing team is the best team in a round they should be ranked 1st) but will be ineligible to advance to the Elimination rounds.The first round of the Competition will be paired randomly.At the conclusion of each preliminary round (except for the last round) teams shall be ranked in order of their aggregate team points accumulated by the team; from highest aggregate to lowest.The teams should then be divided up into pools of teams with the same amount of aggregate team points with pools being ranked from highest aggregate to lowest.If any pool (the “Upper Pool”) consists of an amount of teams equivalent to a number that is not divisible by four then teams from the pool ranking immediately below that pool (the “Lower Pool”) may be promoted to the Upper Pool so that the Upper Pool consists of a number of teams that is divisible by four. The team selected for promotion must be selected randomly from the Lower Pool. If promotion of a team to the Upper Pool results in a number of teams in the Lower Pool not divisible by four each consecutive pool should be adjusted in the same fashion until all pools have a number of teams divisible by four.Once the pools have been adjusted the pools are paired into debates of four teams in such a way that equalizes the team positions in which each team will debate. The pairing should promote to th ...Once the pools have been adjusted the pools are paired into debates of four teams in such a way that equalizes the team positions in which each team will debate. The pairing should promote to the greatest extent possible equality of distribution of team positions over the Preliminary rounds.Preliminary rounds 1-6 shall be “open adjudication” with oral adjudications given by the adjudication panel following each debate. Preliminary rounds 7 & 8 shall be “closed” with no oral adjudication (including any disclosure of the results of the round) permitted.3.Selection of teams for the Elimination RoundsAt the conclusion of the Preliminary rounds the teams shall be ranked in order according to 1) their aggregate team points from the eight preliminary rounds; 2) their aggregate team scores as determined by combining the individual speaker scores for each team member; 3)head-to-head matches between two teams tied for a rank; and 4) preponderance of first place rankings. If after these tie-breakers are applied a tie still exists the rankings of the tied teams shall be determined by drawing lots. The top thirty-two (32) teams ranked by this method shall be selected to compete in the Elimination rounds.4.Pairing of Elimination RoundsThere shall be four elimination rounds: Octofinals Quarterfinals Semifinals and Finals. Each Elimination round shall be paired by “folding” the bracket of the top 32 teams as determined by their aggregate team points. For example the first Octofinal round would be comprised of the teams ranked 1st 16th 17th and 32nd. The second Quarterfinal round would be comprised of the teams ranked 2nd 15th 18th and 31st and so on.5.Advancement of teams through elimination roundsAt the conclusion of each Elimination round debate (with the exception of the Final round) the adjudication panel shall select two of the four teams to advance to the next Elimination round. Those teams assume the highest rankings available in their room (i.e.: for the purposes of ranking the two teams to emerge from the first Octofinal round will be ranked 1st and 16th regardless of their ranking prior to the Octofinal round).For the Final round the adjudication panel shall select one Championship team. All other teams in the Final round will be designated “Finalists.”6.Access to debatesIn preliminary rounds observers may watch a debate round with the consent of the teams participating in the round. Similarly those interested in photographing or recording video of the preliminary rounds must obtain the consent of the debaters participating in the round.Elimination rounds are open to all observers subject to the。
Introduction:This guide is aimed primarily at those of you who have little to no British Parliamentary experience. It is intended to illustrate the mechanics and basic tactics of BP. Sometimes beginners can be discouraged by BP because of various factors in the round. But BP done well can be an incredibly rewarding experience, and trying BP can improve the way you debate in other styles.This guide also includes a DVD of the Hugill 2003 Final as an example of a BP round. The Basics:In BP there are 4 teams in each round. Two teams represent the Government, and two teams represent the Opposition. The Government supports the resolution, and the Opposition opposes the resolution. The teams are also divided into the Opening and Closing halves of the debate. The teams are organized like this in the room:|Opening Government (OG) | Opening Opposition (OO)______|______|Closing Government (CG) | Closing Opposition (CO)|There are two speakers on each team. Each speaker has a title. The titles are:OG: Prime Minister OO: Leader of the OppositionDeputy Prime Minister Deputy Leader of the OppositionCG: Member of the Government CO: Member of the OppositionGovernment Whip Opposition WhipThe speaking order is as follows:1.Prime Minister First Speaker, OG2.Leader of the Opposition First Speaker, OO3.Deputy Prime Minister Second Speaker, OG4.Deputy Leader of the Opposition Second Speaker, OO5.Member of the Government First Speaker, CG6.Member of the Opposition First Speaker, COernment Whip Second Speaker, CG8.Opposition Whip Second Speaker, CODebates are presided over by a Speaker, who is often the Chair of the adjudicator panel. The Speaker keeps time and calls debaters to the floor.Each debater has 7 minutes to speak. The first and last minutes are protected time. This means that no POIs may be offered during this time. The Speaker will give a signal at the end and the beginning of protected time, at the seven-minute mark, and at the end of grace. The Speaker will probably not give time signals otherwise, so it is recommended that debaters bring a stopwatch to time themselves or their partner.There are no Points of Order, or Points of Personal Privilege.At the end of each debate, the teams will be ranked from first place to fourth place. Each ranking has a point value associated with it. The common point values used are as follows:First Place = 3 pointsSecond Place = 2 pointsThird Place = 1 pointFourth Place = 0 pointsYour points are added over the course of the tournament. The break is determined by point total, and speaker points if some teams have the same point total.Matter and MannerIn BP there are two categories that you are judged on as a speaker. Matter is the content of your speech, and manner is how you present that content. Matter and manner are weighted equally. The lists include some of the more common elements of matter and manner, but are not exhaustive.Matter Includes:•Substantive arguments for your side•Rebuttal arguments•Case Studies / Facts•POIsManner Includes:•Humor•Appropriate language•Engaging the audienceRoles of the Teams and SpeakersYou’ll hear a lot about the “roles” of teams and speakers in BP. In order for a round to be able to develop properly, the teams participating in the round must fulfill certain criteria. When they succeed they will have fulfilled their role and they will be developing the debate. If they fail then the debate will suffer in quality because of it, and this will absolutely be considered in the adjudication.Roles of the Teams (Overview)Opening Government:•Defines the terms of the debate•Opens the case for the Government•Opposes the case of the Opening Opposition when it is presented Opening Opposition:•Opposes the case of the Opening Government•Opens the case for the OppositionClosing Government:•Extends the Government case•Opposes the cases of the Opening and Closing Opposition teams•Summarizes the debateClosing Opposition:•Extends the Opposition case•Opposes the cases of the Opening and Closing Opposition teams•Summarizes the debateRoles of the Speakers (Overview)Prime Minister (Opening Government):•Defines the resolution•Introduces the Government caseLeader of the Opposition (Opening Opposition):•Rebuts what PM said•Introduces Opening Opposition case•If there’s going to be a definitional challenge, the LO must mention it in their speech, otherwise all the other teams in the round must accept theoriginal definition (See: Challenging the Definition)Deputy Prime Minister (Opening Government):•Rebuts what LO said•Continues Opening Government caseDeputy Leader of the Opposition (Opening Opposition):•Rebuts what DPM said•Continues Opening Opposition caseMember of the Government (Closing Government):•Extends the Government case•Rebuts what DLO saidMember of the Opposition (Closing Opposition):•Extends the Opposition case•Rebuts what MG saidGovernment Whip (Closing Government):•May introduce new contentions, but it’s not generally recommended•Rebuts what the MO said•Summarizes the debateOpposition Whip (Closing Government):•Absolutely no new contentions may be introduced, but new evidence in support of existing contentions may be introduced•Rebuts what the GW said•Summarizes the debateRole of the Opening GovernmentThe first goal of an OG team is to present a clear, coherent, and above all, contentious case. Remember that the OG case must be contentious enough to last for eight speeches, and 56 minutes of debate. One of the most important things OG teams should keep in mind is that bold cases are generally better to run than squirreled cases that run out of steam within the first few sp eeches. It is debate, after all. This doesn’t mean that you should propose that humans eat their young. But it does mean that you shouldn’t be afraid of proposing controversial models or cases. The major point: Propose bold, but not suicidal cases.The next thing that you must remember as OG is that your case must be within the spirit of the resolution. At most BP tournaments the resolutions are directed. This means that the resolution will hint at the topic that should be discussed. However, the wording will usually be such that the OG will have a degree of flexibility in how they frame their case. However, a degree of flexibility does not mean that the OG can ignore the resolution (like we do at most CUSID tournaments).An example of an acceptable and unacceptable interpretation of a resolution: Resolution: THW Sell its ChildrenAcceptable: THW Legalize Surrogacy for ProfitUnacceptable: THBT Developing Nations Should Prioritize Economic DevelopmentOver Environmental ProtectionThe reason why the second interpretation is abusive is because the original resolution clearly hints at a topic involving the exchange of children for some benefit. This could be a myriad of things, from surrogacy for profit, to foreign adoption limits. So the OG has a degree of flexibility in choosing a topic relating to the selling of children. With this in mind, the second interpretation clearly goes against the spirit of the resolution.The Role of the Opening OppositionThe Opening Opposition role is probably the one that debaters new to BP will have the least amount of trouble with. It’s fairly similar to the standard CP Opposition, but with different timings. However, there are some extremely important differences between the two.As the OO team, your role is twofold. You must refute what the OG team has said, but it is not enough to simply poke holes in the OG case. You must also bring in constructive arguments of your own. It is not enough to go into a BP round as an OO team and do a rebuttal-only opposition. A good OO case would make sense if the wording of the resolution were reversed, and OO became the OG. You have to bring your own constructive analysis to the round.Good OO teams will often tie in some of their rebuttal with their constructive points as well. This allows the judges to see that you’re engaging with the other team’s arguments as well as using them to build up your own. Using this style will also help you stay under the time limit, which is often a difficult thing to do i f you’re faced with a lot of rebutting and summarizing.So remember: It’s not enough to say why their ideas are stupid, you have to say why your ideas are smart.The Role of the Closing TeamsThe closing positions of the debate are where we see the most significant difference between BP and CP debating. Both closing teams are expected to offer an extension for their opening team’s case. What is an extension? An extension can take many forms:•Switching the focus of the debate from practical to philosophical arguments, or vice versa•Bringing in new practical/philosophical arguments•Focusing on a specific case study•Focusing on an already mentioned argument and expanding on it significantly This is an incredibly short list of acceptable extensions. The main goal for a closing team is to differentiate yourself from the opening team, but still support them. It is very important that you support the opening team. But at the same time it’s still important for your arguments to be better than theirs. So you have to make sure that your case has an over-arching theme that the judges can easily identify, that makes your team distinct from the opening team, and still supports the opening team.This doesn't have to be difficult. Many teams stress themselves out about the closing positions because of the extension, but being on the closing half of the debate has distinct advantages. The closing teams have the ability not only to introduce their own constructive matter and rebut what the other team has said, but also to summarize the debate in their own words.The summary is to be done by the second speaker on each closing team. This is an integral part of the role of each closing team. There are many ways to summarize the debate. Some speakers like to identify the main themes that were analyzed during the round. Some speakers like to label each team with a name describing their arguments. One of the easiest ways for debaters new to BP to go through their summary speech is to identify threequestions that need to be answered at the end of the round, and say why your side, and particularly your team, bring the best resolution to those questions. Any style you choose is fine so long as it gives a substantive summary of the arguments in the round, and why you won those arguments. As a reminder: The Opposition Whip is not allowed any new arguments in their speech, and it is highly recommended that the Government Whip focus entirely on summery, as well.Basic Tactics and Pitfalls:POIs:•Give two POIs, and take two POIs•POIs shouldn't be given for the sole purpose of destroying the other team's case. POIs should build your case up as well.•If you're in the opening half of the debate your priority in the second half should be to remain involved. Make sure your arguments aren't lost among the second half of the debate. POIs are the best way to accomplish this.•If you're in the second half of the debate then you should be extremely careful about the POIs that you give to first half teams. Sometimes your opening team may try and steal your extension if you give too much away in your POIs.•Try to remain involved in the debate by standing on POIs, but do not harass the speaker by continually standing on POIs and saying things like "On Liberty", "On the Geneva Convention", etc.•It is always better to get in one or two excellent POIs than four or five mediocre ones.One of the best ways to accomplish this is for you and your partner to put a sheet a paper between you with your best POI written down. Then, when the speaker takes either of you you're certain to have an excellent POI.•Just because everyone else is standing up on a POI doesn't mean you have to, Sometimes when a speaker says something monumentally stupid everyone on opposite benches will stand up. Usually the speaker won't take a POI at that time, but if there's someone who stood up late, they just might let them ask a question. Often, the debater giving the POI will be caught off-guard by this. So don't stand up on a POI just because everyoneelse is. But if you do, make sure you have a question.•Let people finish their question before you wave them down, but if they start to make a speech, or refuse to sit down, start waving them down immediately. If they still won't sit down then the speaker will deal with them.•Finish your thought before you accept a question. It is very easy to forget where you were if you allow someone to interrupt you.•If you want to get your question taken it is often better to stand at the end of the speaker's point. They'll be more likely to take you.•If you are in a round with teams of very disparate skills, it may at first seem like a good idea to take POIs from the weakest team. And that can work. But the judges will be more impressed if you give a good answer to a difficult POI than if you smack down a weak POI. So you might want to choose to take POIs from the better team. This will show the judges that you're willing to engage the better team in the round. Organization:•At the beginning of your speech tell the judges what you're going to be speaking about. •More advanced debaters may feel comfortable speaking without numbering their points or signposting where they're going with their speech. But the majority of beginning BP debaters will probably find it helpful to number their points and to make very clear to the judges what they're speaking about. This helps the judges keep track of your mostimportant points, and it helps you cover everything you need to.•Pay attention to your timing. If you say that you're going to introduce three constructive points and then you run out of time, that will reflect poorly on you.•Always fill your time.Speaking Style:•The most important thing is to keep the audience engaged. You don't want them drifting off and thinking you're boring.•There are many ways to keep the audience and judges engaged. These include humor, intelligent analysis, and delivery.•Not everyone can be a funny speaker, and that's ok. Most people aren't. But it will help if you can use a few funny quips, or open with a joke.•Avoid being monotonous. Vary your tone and pace of delivery.•Never insult another debater's race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion.Anything offensive will be penalized. Err on the side of caution.Analysis:•Try to introduce facts, case studies, and philosophical analysis instead of statistics. •Statistics are boring, they can be easily dismissed by the opposition, they generally fall into "specific knowledge", and they're easily falsified.•Focus on examples. Appropriate examples and case studies will make a case better for the beginning BP debater than any pretty rhetoric can.•Stay focused. Remember what you are trying to communicate to the audience, and then communicate it. Don't go off on tangents.Definitional Challenges:•Definitional challenges are exceedingly rare.•Do not object to a definition of a resolution if it is merely stupid or generally bad. •The only time you should object to the definition is if it is a truism or tautology.•The only speaker who can object to the OG definition is the LO. If the LO doesn't object, no one else can.•If the LO objects to the definition then they must substitute their own.•The remaining debaters then have to decide which definition to use.•If the remaining debaters use the LOs definition then the debate can continue on like normal.•If there is still disagreement about the definition then the closing teams must decide which definition to support, or whether to substitute their own.•This is why it is usually an exceptionally bad idea to challenge a definition that isn't a truism or tautology. It's very messy.Knifing:•Knifing is when a closing team, or even a partner on the same team, blatantly disagrees with a fundamental part of the substantive case that they're supposed to be supporting.(Effectively knifing someone in the back).•In the vast majority of situations you should not knife your opening team. It will be a negative factor for you in the adjudication as supporting your opening team is afundamental part of your role.•However, occasionally your opening team will be so shrill and off the mark that you'll have to basically ignore what they said in order to salvage your side of the round. You may have to twist what they said in order to make sense of their case. Be careful with this strategy. You probably won't take a first, but you may be able to salvage a point or two out of the round.Tactics for High Bracket Rounds:•While it is always a good thing to take a first place in a BP round, once you get into the high bracket rounds the most important thing is to avoid taking the fourth..•When you get into high rooms you'll find that the competition between the teams becomes that much closer. So it's important not to give the judges an excuse to drop you.Watch the small things as well as the big ones. Be careful with timings, signposting, and rebutting what your opponents have said.•Do not stress out about your position in the round, or whether other teams are really good. Concentrate only on staying involved in the round, and demonstrating goodanalysis and argumentation. A lack of confidence will show through.。
