Banking Crossfire Answers for Later Speeches
Crossfire is worthless if its content is forgotten by Summary — you must actively bring answers back into later speeches. You will be able to write a Summary or Final Focus line that cites a specific Crossfire exchange.
Flowing Crossfire
Debaters should take brief notes during Crossfire (even though it's not a 'speech' being flowed in the traditional sense) so they can accurately reference what was said later — misquoting a Crossfire exchange can be called out and damages credibility. A simple shorthand, like writing 'Con conceded solvency fails w/o funding' next to the relevant contention, is enough.
Citing Crossfire in Summary and Final Focus
The strongest use of Crossfire content sounds like: 'Remember in Crossfire, Con admitted X — that concession alone resolves this entire contention in our favor.' This shows the judge that Crossfire wasn't just noise; it produced concrete ground that matters for the ballot.
In Crossfire, Con admitted their solvency mechanism depends on state-level funding that isn't guaranteed.
In Summary, Pro says: 'In Crossfire, Con admitted their entire plan depends on state funding they can't guarantee happens. That single concession means their disadvantage never gets triggered, because the policy they're afraid of never actually goes into effect without that funding.' This directly banks the Crossfire exchange into a Summary argument.
1. Why should debaters take brief notes during Crossfire?
Answer all 1 to check.
Take notes and cite specific Crossfire exchanges later — an unused concession is a wasted advantage.