Asking Effective Crossfire Questions
Crossfire questions should have a purpose — exposing a weakness, locking in an admission, or setting up a later argument. You will be able to write a purposeful Crossfire question rather than a vague one.
Question Types That Work
A clarifying question ('What exactly is your source's methodology?') exposes weak evidence; a trap question sets up a contradiction ('Didn't you just say X in your case? But your evidence says Y — which is it?'); a concession question aims to get the opponent to agree to something useful for your Summary ('Would you agree that even under your plan, some job losses occur?'). Each type has a clear purpose beyond just filling the 3 minutes.
Avoiding Wasted Questions
Open-ended questions like 'Why do you think you're winning?' rarely produce useful ammunition and let the opponent re-give their entire case. Effective Crossfire questions are specific, closed enough to control the answer, and tied to a plan for how the answer will be used later.
Pro wants to set up a concession for later use in Summary.
Pro asks: 'Do you agree that if your solvency mechanism fails, your entire disadvantage story collapses?' If Con says yes, Pro can later say in Summary: 'Con already agreed in Crossfire that their whole case collapses if solvency fails — and we've shown exactly why it fails.' The question was asked with a specific later use already in mind.
1. Which Crossfire question is most likely to produce useful ammunition?
2. True or False?
"Effective Crossfire questions are usually planned with a specific later use for the answer in mind."
Answer all 2 to check.
Ask specific, closed questions with a plan for how you'll use the answer later in the round.