For intercollegiate and interscholastic debates it is wise to have some sort of instructions for the judges, which should be agreed on beforehand.  These instructions must make clear that the decision is to turn not on the merits of the question, as in real life, but on the merits of the debaters.  Among those merits the substance should count much more than the form.  Of the points that count in judging the substance of the debate the instructions may note keenness of analysis, power of exposition, thoroughness of preparation, judgment in the selection of evidence, readiness and effectiveness in rebuttal, and grasp of the subject as a whole.  For form the instructions may mention bearing, ease and appropriateness of gesture, quality and expressiveness of voice, enunciation and pronunciation, and general effectiveness of delivery.  Sometimes these points are drawn up with percentages to suggest their proportionate weight; but it is doubtful whether so exact a calculation can ever be of practical value.  In most cases the judges will decide from a much less articulate sense of which side has the advantage.[66]

63.  Preparations for Debating.  Since the chief value of debating, as distinguished from written arguments, is in cultivating readiness and flexibility of wit, the speaking should be as far as possible extemporaneous.  This does not imply that the speaking should be without preparation:  on the contrary, the preparation for good debating is more arduous than for a written argument, for when you are on your feet on the platform you cannot run to your books or to your notes to refresh your memory or to find new material.  The ideal debater is the man who so carries the whole subject in his mind that the facts flow to his mind as he talks, and fit into the plan of his argument without a break.  To the rare men who remember everything they read, such readiness is natural, but to far the largest number of speakers it comes only through hard study of the material.  Daniel Webster declared that the material for his famous Reply to Hayne had been in his desk for months.  In so far as debating consists in the recitation of set speeches written out and committed to memory beforehand, it throws away most of what makes debating valuable, and tends to become elocution.  We shall consider here, therefore, ways in which speakers can make themselves so familiar with the subject to be debated that they can confidently cut loose from their notes.

In the first place, each debater on a team should prepare himself on the whole subject, not only on the whole of his own side, but also on the whole of the other side.  It is usual to divide up the chief points that a team is to make among its different members; but in the sudden turns to which every debate is liable such assignment may easily become impossible.  If the other side presents new material or makes a point in such a way as manifestly to impress the audience, the next speaker may have to throw over the point