Cross-Examination
Cross-examination/crossfire is the only opportunity for you to directly interact with your opponent and challenge their arguments in real-time, making it a crucial part of debate.
What does it do? Whether you do Lincoln-Douglas, Public Forum, or Policy debate, cross-examination (CX) or crossfire (CF) allows debaters to clarify points, expose contradictions, and control the narrative of the round.
Why should I care? Many flow judges tell you they don’t listen to cross. By that, they don’t mean they tune out entirely, they’re just not flowing it unless someone brings it up in a speech. cross is important in flow rounds to expose faulty link chains and to point out bad evidence. Lay/traditional judges also love cross. fFr them, that’s where the real debate happens - thinking on the spot, being able to defend ur case, and being able to poke holes in their logic.
What to do: Asking specific, targeted questions to find weaknesses in your opponent’s case.
What not to do: Fooling around, making random jokes that waste time, asking unnecessary questions (“did you read this one card?”), or just being mean in general.
What do I do before cross?
1. Identify Key Weaknesses Beforehand: Look for contradictions between their contentions, framework, and evidence and pinpoint vague or poorly warranted arguments.
2. Use Leading Questions to Box Them In: Structure questions so they only require a “yes” or “no” answer. Example: Instead of “Can you explain your evidence?” ask, “Your evidence assumes X, correct?” “If so, what does it mean by [poor warrant]?”
3. Force Concessions: If their response contradicts an earlier argument, call it out. Example: “You said X in your first speech, but now you’re saying Y. Which is it?” If they hedge, ask, “So are you conceding that X is false?”
4. Set Up Your Own Case for Later: Ask questions that let you reference their responses in later speeches. Example: “Would you agree that rights violations should be minimized?” (If they say yes, use it to support your framework later.)
