Edit 1 (13/4 3.45pm): General corrections. Plus, a call for supporters at the end!
Edit 2 (17/4 10.36pm): It was Si Min who spotted the newspaper article.
Another much shorter version of my recount is available at NYConneXions here
After a week long hell
, the big day for any debate society has finally arrived today. (We will still be getting another week of hell next week to prepare for the two impromptu rounds next Saturday. Wonder what would happen to my Chem, Maths and GP tests? )
The entire debate team (except Sarita)
From front left, Kah Chee, Si Min, myself and Benjamin
From back, Hon Ding and Matthew.
Just to recap, the motion in which we had one week to prepare for was "This House believes that sports and politics are a toxic combination". We were against Tampines JC for the first round at Tampines JC. The speaker's line up in this case was I being the first speaker, Hon Ding the second and Ben firmly staying in the third. I was the reply speaker in both debates.
We were like what!!! Fight a JC at their home ground??? But we still debated with them lah. For those who think I will regurgitate the entire debate here, no, you are wrong. I'm so sick of this motion and too tired to recall everything. Besides, the fact that we lost after many late nights of preparation is hard to accept.
I felt that the 1st prop speech in which I had no choice but to recite word for word imposed severe constraints on me. I was very nervous all the way. My reply was not so bad. I was able to do much more confidently in it without much reference to my hand-held notes.
What we do know is that the primary reason we lost this debate is the lack of teamwork. Most of the time, we kept to ourselves instead of helping each other with points and rebuttals.
Since we staked our entire morale on this. We were very upset when we lost but we still had to complete the day.
12 Apr 08, 21:35jAson
: Heyhey!! today's TODAY newspaper have an article named "sports and Politics" at the sports section also. so qiao...you might want to read it too..=)
was referring to this article below.
Grabbed from todayonline's
I have just completed reading it. But I first heard of this in the afternoon. Why?
Because Ben cut this article out and used it in the debate.
Because Si Min spotted this article and gave it to Ben to use. He waved this at the adjudicator and the audience as he made his points. Innovative huh? But that was not why he got Best Speaker for this debate, he was already very good with his style thats why.
We proposed the next impromptu debate against Temasek Polytechnic over the motion "This House would ban television advertisements targeted at children". As this was an impromptu debate, we only had one hour to prepare before we engage in the verbal warfare.
The team line-up in this case was Matthew being the first speaker, I the second and Ben holding third again.
This is the first time I have debated against a poly team and the first win we ever accomplished against an external team. ( We lost both debates last year
). I would say our win was really lucky. The debate was really messy for both sides especially ours since we did not set it up properly as with the duty of the proposition. We were thus surprised that we still attained the win. And even more shocking was that I got the BEST SPEAKER
for this debate.
Its luck I suppose. I dunno why Ben did not get this award as usual. What we are guessing is that the adjudicator was placing more emphasis on content rather then style. Ben usually excels in style with a minimalist of content required. I am more of a content person.
In this debate, this was further amplified when I had to cover the points of the first speaker as well. I was like "chionging" through all his points, the rebuttals and finally my points, I'm not even mentioning the Points of Information. I was so tense and that I just blabbered all the way. I guessed I spoke the first 3.5 minutes out of the total of 8 on the first speaker's points without any reference to the notes.
Since I spent so much time already, I could hardly have time for my points. I could only say half of what I had to. Which was a good thing! Cos I only completed preparation for the first half of my points. I wanted to crap out my last point of cost-benefit analysis on the spot. Thankfully, I did not get the chance to try my (very lousy) crapping skills.
Though we won in the end, it was not a good win. Neither was my Best Speaker award. But who cares now? There are still two more impromptu debates next Saturday. And that will be another two more rounds of warfare! At least I think this was the best performance in NY Debate Society's history. Won one of two debates and got two best speakers!
(Honestly, I would prefer trading my award for another win. Or traded both best speakers awards for a confirmed win in at least 2-3 debates.)
Although the J1s were still not at the required competitive standard, they have tried their best whether they spoke or not. And that was the admirable part. Keep it up!
Lastly, I would like to thank Ben Low for coming down to give his support. And of course, Aquila, our coach, and the two teachers-in-charge of Debate and Journalism, Mdm Ainon and Mdm Shasila.Who wanna come support us next Saturday? Its open to everyone. I'm not sure can "pon" college day anot. I can try getting my teachers to excuse you. Please tell me ASAP if u wanna come!
I saw this somewhere still Tampinies on the bus 72 on the way back home from TPJC. Any idea what this is?
This place seems to be owned by the Public Utilities Board (PUB) according to the signs outside. A very unique structure. I'm guessing its a water tower built to dispense water in times of emergency. (The gravity probably enables the system to produce water pressure without additional power)
See Day 2 here
We are doing an interclass debate on theis motion, This House believes that sports and politics are a toxic combination, too.
We are the prop team, and would like to ask you for points, can you please be so kind to email me some points,
Your kindness is appreciated.