top of page

There are several myths surrounding third speeches. Most of them go along the lines of "third speakers just reiterating what's already been said" and them "not needing to prep". Oftentimes these kind of views of third speeches can be the very thing constraining the debater from developing and in the meantime, they also often cause the debates to be stagnant and low-quality, leading to lower probability of your team winning.

 

Since there are several things to consider about every speech (and since every single speech will need a different emphasis and different specifics) I will aim to give you a brief, chronological and a fairly general overview of what I think are some of the things you ought to look out for as a third speaker.

 

One major thing to consider - and I can't stress this enough, is that you should always aim to make the most relevant arguments in the 3rd speech. The last constructive speech of your side is a perfect opportunity to shave off all the red herrings, "wash points" and obviously lost arguments and convince the judge that 

  • you're winning some of the clashes;

  • the clashes you're winning are the most important.

 

Third speeches are not a shopping list of rebuttal to everything the opposing side has said, neither are they a restatement of all the arguments your 1st and 2nd speaker already made.

Closing Constructives
Third Speeches

PROJECT VIDEO: David Moskovici from Romania speaks about Third Speeches (With Attitude) at     WSDA 2013

Tip 1

Preparation Time

 

As a 3rd speaker you are not in the prep room to look up facts for your first two speakers, neither are you there to rest, have a smoke, cup of coffee or anything of the sort. You are a part of the team, regardless of the fact that you won't be making constructive arguments. This being said, there are at least 2 very specific things that you should be doing during the prep time.

 

A) BE AN ACTIVE PART OF 

THE CASE-BUILDING PROCESS

 

It's not just about the 1st and 2nd speaker being happy with the arguments that they'll be making. An important thing to keep in 

B) TRY TO THINK HOW THE DEBATE WILL EVOLVE AND WHERE IT WILL BE WON 

 

This is NOT to say that you should spend your 1hour (or 6 months) coming up with opponent's arguments and then providing generic rebuttal. A better thing to do is thinking what the strong points of your whole case are. It is conceivable that the opposing side will come up with a few very strong arguments that don't have a straightforward rebuttal. Think about strategic decisions that you can do in that case - namely, how to rebut them and how to show that despite opposing side being good you are better. This is much easier to do when you try to understand where the clash will lie in advance, since you can prepare your arguments to feel stronger afterwards.  There is also no shame in predicting a major clash and developing a bulk of analysis prior to the debate. A lot of motions have a clear social context and it is often clear where the debate will be won. One of your 3 points or a part of all 3 points can thus be prepared in advance. Just remember to still be flexible if the debate goes into a direction you didn't expect it to.

Tip 2

Define Key Terms

 

I will not spend too much time on this section as I believe that everyone will find their own technique of note taking. There are a few things to note, though.

 

1.) Listen to what the specifics of the arguments being made are. That goes for both sides, don't just assert that the opposing side has made a version of a certain argument you happen to know. Listen to how they have said it. It might have some "prebuttal" integrated in it that you want to deal with. On the other hand, don't just assert that your teammates have done a good job at explaining what you've agreed on. Maybe they made a bit of a different argument or have left out important pieces of analysis. These are absolutely crucial things you need to pick up on.

 

2.) Try to briefly summarize every point being made onto a piece of paper. As the debate develops, try to see how these points interplay and how they connect. Oftentimes 

Your Speech 

 

A) STRATEGY AND STRUCTURE

 

You usually want to pick anywhere from 2 to 4 broad themes that you will analyze in your speech. It is usually quite helpful to firstly take a minute or so to clarify and refute things that do not necessarily fall under the main headings. This might be obvious, but never skip an important point, just because it doesn't fall under your main headings. 

Jure Hederih
Za in proti

mind is that the 3rd speaker will be the one defending those arguments. So, honestly, you should be fairly worried about their quality and nuances. Prep time is your chance to discuss them with your team mates and make sure they aren't obviously flawed and that you will not be in an awkward position when defending them. Furthermore, it's probably good to predict where the weak points of that argument are. Your teammates will probably spend 3minutes max. on one argument, making it far from flawless. If you identify the possible opponent's attacks, then it's much easier for you to defend your own arguments. What often worked for me was actually writing out all the arguments that 1st and 2nd speaker were going to make independently of them. That way you almost have a "backup" form of the same argument that is likely to answer a lot of opponent's attacks. Think of it as a customized, rebuttal-proof form of the argument that doesn't focus that much on making a specific point but rather showing that the point being made is true.

you'll be able to connect different points into a greater whole that can constitute a bulk of you analysis in the 3rd speech.

 

3.) Find a good balance between writing and listening. Do not try to jot down everything you hear. Try to listen and think intensively during the speeches and write only as much as really necessary. You'll usually find that you use less than some 30% of your notes anyway. It's more important to understand the ideas you have than it is to elaborate them on paper.

In terms of specific themes you want to pick, there isn't really much to say. You want to pick things that will win you the debate and make them relevant and strong. At the same time you need to recognize what the opponent's strongest material is and either refute it or identify why it's less relevant than the comparative that you're bringing. 

 

It is often useful to construct your points in an "even if" structure to provide multiple levels of reasons as to why you are right. 3rd speeches are a perfect moment to do that as you can show that even after acknowledging everything opposing side has said, your points still stand. Never ignore the material that the opposing side has brought. 

Oftentimes the opposing side's case will have a hierarchical structure (e.g. principles > practical concerns > particular premises > examples > example details). Keep in mind that focusing on the more fundamental areas of their case is more beneficial to you side, i.e. refuting an example doesn't take down a lot of their case whereas, e.g. showing why your principle is the one we should uphold in a particular case is much stronger (and oftentimes also drags the examples to your side).

 

B) OTHER

 

A few miscellaneous points might be emphasized at this instance. 

  • It's good to take at least one POI. Maybe even more so in the 3rd speech as you're the last one speaking who can constructively and directly answer the opposing side.

  • Try to coordinate the points with your reply speaker. Often reply speeches are very similar to 3rd speeches which is a waste of a reply speech.

  • Try to gather good ideas from your teammates and acknowledge their concerns, but ultimately go with your gut when making the call as to what should be brought into the debate.

bottom of page