OCR Text |
Show A. Blaine Roberts fi OR years we have had in the University an athletic coach of whom the student body is justly proud and whom the athletes love and swear by. But we, the 'Varsity debaters, wish to call your attention to another coach who is equally deserving of praise and loyalty.Mr. Roberts has been with us not quite two years, but in that space of time has established the highest standard of debating. This standard we will not sacrifice though we lose ninety per cent of our intercollegiate debates in the next few years. We are confident that the future will completely vindicate the policy maintained by the University in debating. Mr. Roberts has been handicapped during the past year by having to develop all his teams out of green material. With five 'Varsity men returning this coming year, however, the prospects are much better for 1910-11 than they were last Fall.To those interested in the development of debating in Utah, "The laborer is more than worthy of his hire." Let us hope that "Bobs" may stay with us and assist in proving that our University maintains the highest standards of intellectual endeavor.A Review of the SeasonBy Coach A. Blaine RobertsHE relative number of debating decisions won by the University of Utah during the season of 1910 may not seem over encouraging to the general student body or the public. One victory hardly balances three defeats. But a number of reasons tend to lessen the gloom.In the first place, the University has engaged in too many debates for one year. The largest universities commonly have two, more rarely three, and almost never four debates for one year's program. The University of Utah is unquestionably not strong enough to maintain successfully a schedule of four debates.Not only have we engaged in too many debates, but we have done this at a time when only one man of previous experience in intercollegiate debating remains with us from the preceding year. The situation compelled us to overwork seven men on four debates, and six of these men were new material. In spite of three adverse decisions, it should be said to the credit of these new men that in every debate they presented a better analyzed and more logical case than their opponents. Their chief weakness was less effective delivery. It should also be remembered that two of these defeats were away from home. It is unfortunately too true that a debating team is not without victory save in another state.But whether we win or lose, very little importance should be attached to the decision. In a football game the whole crowd sees the actual making of the touchdown. No later decision of the umpire reverses the certain knowledge of the spectators. In a debate neither side makes any concrete advantage, of which the audience or the debaters themselves can be positive. Everything rests upon the unchallenged opinion of three judges. This system, perhaps, (124) |