Judging Criteria by Format

The primary metrics by which judges evaluate debates differ fundamentally by format:

• WSDC (Content, Style, Strategy): Evaluated explicitly on a 40/40/20 rubric. Content (40%) refers to logical strength of analysis. Style (40%) refers to delivery, body language, and rhetoric (unrelated to accent/attire). Strategy (20%) refers to decision-making, time allocation, and role fulfilment. Judges assess actions by applying upward or downward pressure to these specific category scores.
• AP (UADC Persuasiveness): Judges assess the aggregate contribution of each team, including analysis, delivery, engagement, structure, and role fulfilment. No 40/40/20 category split is prescribed (UADC 2025 Handbook, section 4.2; Appendix A).
• BP (Holistic Persuasiveness): There is no 40/40/20 rubric. BP judges evaluate teams holistically on which team did the best to persuade the Ordinary Intelligent Voter through reasoned argument and effective Role Fulfilment. See Persuasiveness.