The Instigator
Tatarize
Pro (for)
Losing
40 Points
The Contender
dvhoose
Con (against)
Winning
68 Points

It's nearly impossible to win a one round debate.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/28/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,454 times Debate No: 8452
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (9)
Votes (19)

 

Tatarize

Pro

No matter what I say in the first round, it opens up for one quick counter argument and no chances at rebuttal. There's the off chance that the opponent fails to read the topic appropriately but those are fairly rare. Largely the only person who would take such a debate is somebody who has thought of some clever way to counter the original argument. For example, this debate might be countered with various claims and accusations and I would be powerless to rebut those claims and thus lose.
dvhoose

Con

I'd like to thank my opponent for offering such an interesting (and ironic) debate, however I must stand in firm negation of the topic.

My opponent is completely correct in that the instigator of a one-round debate is more than likely going to be disappointed in the outcome, however, that's not what this debate is about. We're debating that "It's nearly impossible to win a one round debate."

This is inherently false, as debates have one winner and one loser (unless we consider ties, which I'll touch in a little bit)

For now, let's assume that ties aren't possible. Someone is going to walk away a winner and someone is going to walk away a loser. Nearly impossible to win? On the contrary! It's nearly impossible not to win (or conversely not to lose) because SOMEBODY has to lose...

Now when we throw ties into the mix, the debate becomes a little more vague. However, using empirical evidence from this very website, I've found a statistic that makes things a little more clear. Using records of "Post Voting Period" debates, I checked debates until I found 10 one round debates. These 10 debates are the ones listed below

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

*Note: I, dvhoose, am not responsible for any lost brain cells in the above 10 debates...

From the above debates, there were winners in 10 of them. 10/10 (or 100%) of one round debates have a winner.
While the above may represent only a small selection of one round debates (although I had to search through 200-some-odd debates to find 10 one round debates...) I highly doubt the percentage changes and implore you, the reader/voter to search more if you are still skeptical.

With that, I'll conclude the debate, after showing that 100% of one round debates have a winner, thus making it not "nearly impossible" to win but instead "nearly impossible" to tie.

Resolution NEGATED, please vote CON
Debate Round No. 1
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Man-is-good 6 years ago
Man-is-good
the problem, I think, is that PRO failed to determine WHO would lose. If he stated he would lose, then he would have easily won the debate.
Posted by jingzhezhang 7 years ago
jingzhezhang
pro is right.....

see he's now losing.....
Posted by infam0us 7 years ago
infam0us
gave all 7 to pro due to the semantics BS con pulled.
Posted by Rob1Billion 7 years ago
Rob1Billion
this debate was unlosable
Posted by dvhoose 8 years ago
dvhoose
Haha, Tatarize, you had 8,000 characters and wrote 4 sentences...
Posted by mongeese 8 years ago
mongeese
However, a one-round debate is just asking for semantics.
Posted by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
No. The debate is easily arguable without semantics. As if I want some BS about how it's easy for the non-instigator to win. That's exactly what the debate was concerning.
Posted by PoeJoe 8 years ago
PoeJoe
+ Hmmm... I normally frown upon and even penalize debaters who solely argue semantics, but the thing is: I suspect PRO wanted CON to use semantics, and had CON not thought that PRO wanted him to argue semantics, perhaps CON wouldn't have argued semantics. But in doing so (or rather not doing so), CON proves his argument, which proves PRO's argument in an infinite loop. This is the reason I don't follow LM's reasoning below, which, also, brings ideas outside the debate that he is not supposed to consider. Every category is tied, except for sources, which I gave to CON.
Posted by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
LOL. Gotta love semantics. I would vote CON, but PRO made it clear that he was referring to the instigator. In essence, he defined the resolution in his first round. If he hadn't done that, I would have vote CON.
19 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 3 years ago
9spaceking
TatarizedvhooseTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by GaryBacon 3 years ago
GaryBacon
TatarizedvhooseTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: The debate topics are shortened and summarized in the debate title. The contender is expected to not only read the title of the debate, but the opening argument. Con never negated Pro's argument that it is nearly impossible for the instigator to win a one round debate. For that reason, Pro made a more convincing argument. Pro also gets conduct, since Con's method of using semantics and only negating the title rather than the actual argument is something I perceive as poor conduct.
Vote Placed by sadolite 7 years ago
sadolite
TatarizedvhooseTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by cjl 7 years ago
cjl
TatarizedvhooseTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 7 years ago
Tatarize
TatarizedvhooseTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by infam0us 7 years ago
infam0us
TatarizedvhooseTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Rob1Billion 7 years ago
Rob1Billion
TatarizedvhooseTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
TatarizedvhooseTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Rumsy 8 years ago
Rumsy
TatarizedvhooseTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
TatarizedvhooseTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30