The Anaheim Ducks will win the 2015 Stanley Cup
Debate Rounds (3)
will-Expressing inevitable events
inevitable-certain to happen; unavoidable
certain-known for sure; established beyond doubt
I do not believe it is inevitable that they will win. It is not yet established beyond doubt. They have a chance at winning, but it is not certain. If I had to choose a team to root for, I'd have to root for the Lightnings ONLY because they are my home team. While you said they have a strong chance at winning, that means it is probable, NOT inevitable.
If I had to choose the one that I believe will win I still think the Lightning have a chance to win, but since they are facing the Red Wings at this very moment I am typing, I will have to wait to see who I will root for. If The Lightnings win, then them. If the Red Wings win, then I will root for them since they were able to win.
dchri43 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by tejretics 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Con because of the forfeiture. Pro frequently made bare assertions and provided inductive arguments, rather non-sufficient to *prove* the Anaheim Ducks will, without any doubt, win the Stanley Cup. As Con pointed out, their victory is *POSSIBLE* or even probable, but not *definite*. Pro failed to fulfil their huge BoP, thus arguments go to Con. Con also used the only sources in the debate. 6 points to Con. As always, happy to clarify this (rather short, I may add) RFD.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.