Finalist Interviews

Osmane Sanogo (Newark Science OS) defeated Ishan Bhatt (St. Andrew’s Episcopal IB) in finals to win the Holy Cross Tournament! Premier Debate has exclusive interviews with both these debaters!

Ishan Bhatt (St. Andrew’s Episcopal), Finalist

Question: With an undefeated record leading into finals, what positions did you rely on to get you there?
Ishan Bhatt: Honestly, it was a blur since it was a two day tournament and the schedule was pretty tight. For the Aff, I decided to not fix what wasn’t broken, and read the doctors plan every round. On the neg, I think most of my NRs either went for a punishment PIC or case turns.

Q: Obviously, this strategy worked in your favor, given your performance. Are those types of arguments your usual style?
IB: Yes, I think I might be best at reading the type of arguments I went for consistently at Holy Cross, but for the most part I’ve tried hard not to have a “style,” which has paid off in a few rounds.

Q: Any specific examples of where it’s paid off, or just in general?
IB: I think it’s more in general–I had a couple rounds before Holy Cross where the Aff overdid it on certain preempts because they thought they knew the 1NC.

Q: When you entered finals, you had already beat Osmane in prelims. If you’re okay talking about it, did anything change from prelims to finals? What do you think went different?
IB: I think the largest difference might have been the overall strategic choices I made in finals. From what I heard from the panel, the 2NR was a little too caught up in the minutia of the debate, whereas the 2AR was very broad and big picture focused. In the future, I’ll definitely keep watch to make sure I’m getting through to my judges instead of over-doing it in terms of technical focus.

Q: Thanks for discussing; these are the insights that really help. In terms of strategy on the new topic, have you found how you’ll approach it yet?
IB: I’m taking a break from debate for a bit, so I haven’t really thought about my specific strategy yet. I think that this topic might be the broadest we’ve had in a while, but has many areas that will be really fun to debate. T-Wealthy nations will be a constant headache. Lastly, there might be too much room for plans, despite how much I like them.

Q: A break?! What for, and when can we next expect to see you?
IB: The ACT and travel limitations given where I live mostly. I’ll be back at Glenbrooks though!

Q: As we finish, are there any issues in debate you feel strongly about that you’d like to bring up?
IB: I think that debate has taken large steps forward in terms of inclusion and I’m excited to see more of that. In particular, GirlsDebate is really cool, and The Voices Foundation is an organization I think everyone should look into. Debate is a great community and I’m relatively new to it, so I think it’s also cool that a lot of ideological divides aren’t that big anymore. I like pretty much everyone I’ve met so far and I hope that continues.

Osmane Sanogo (Newark Science OS), Champion

Question: You finished Holy Cross on an incredible 9-1 record. What cases did you read and what arguments did you go for?
Osmane Sanogo: I mainly just read Communitarism on the affirmative, and Liberatarianism on the negative most rounds. Occasionally, on the negative I’d read a dis-ad or two.

Q: Are those positions indicative of your style? Did you have to adapt at all for the competition (or judging) at Holy Cross?
OS: I’d probably give a huge nod to communitarianism, since I think it’s a foundation argument to learn to run other critical arguments I usually run. I wouldn’t say they are my ‘best’ arguments, but it’s the second tournament I’ve ever ran communitarianism, with Greenhill being the first. I did get lectures on it awhile back. I’d say there was some adapting for judges, but mainly adapting for the sake of learning to be more flexible with arguments as opposed to specifically hone in one specific debate argument-genre.

Q: When you entered finals, you had already faced Ishan once and lost. If you’re okay talking about it, what changed from prelims to finals? What do you think went differently to secure the win?
OS: Probably two things. The first was getting this feel of how he debates. Shout out to him by the way, he’s a great debater and I look forward to debating him again. But anyhow, I feel like when I first hit him, I wasn’t sure what type of debater I was hitting, so it was more of unknown aspect. By the second time, I had a better feel of who I was debating, which I feel like any good debater needs to do, pre-empt and visualize what your opponent will do, what arguments they will go for, what type of arguments will they go for, any unique things they do in order to win, etc.
The second thing was probably a change of attitude within myself. Knowing it was finals, I could definitely say I was more pumped as opposed to a pre-lims match. If there is a third thing, it was probably debating with a case I had gotten a feel of during the tournament. A lot of debaters prefer to debate negative, but I had no definitive stance, because I feel like if a person debating aff knows their case well enough, they can quickly and accurately respond to a multitude of arguments easier and more efficiently.

Q: That’s an insightful comment about affs–most debaters are definitely scared of affirming, but I think you have it right. Moving forward, have you looked into the new topic yet, or have any ideas about affirming on it?
OS: Any ideas personally for me to run at the moment? No. However, I do see this topic being an easy gateway for people to run non-topical affirmatives or straight-up reject the topic because of how condescending it can be from first glance from a perspective. Or on the converse an affirmative that seeks to have these wealthy nations “pay their dues.” Just off of brain storming.
On a really important note: I’d like to give a MAJOR shout-out to my coach Christian Quiroz (and Alston too of course). I love that man Chris, and he’s definitely a HUGE reason for a growth. He’s been putting me to work, and I’ve been up to it. He’s a solid if not the main reason why I got so far at Holy Cross. Also, we both are sending this message to everyone : Ore ga omae wo taosu.