We do not believe in implementing club protection for large tournaments, as it undermines fairness and competitive integrity. If a club has several highly experienced teams, they should be prepared to debate against one another based on their records. Shielding top-performing teams from the same club until the later rounds creates an unfair advantage and disadvantages smaller debate clubs. Our priority is to ensure that all participants, regardless of club size, compete on an equal playing field.
From the Stoa Tab manual:
"Squad Mates (teams from same club) – Also known as “Club Protect”
I. II. Absolute - prevents teams from the same club debating one another
Preferred - allows teams from same club to debate, but only if necessary
III. Ignore - ignores club affiliation allowing teams from same club to debate
ii. IV. This choice depends on the tournament’s philosophy of whether or not to
allow teams from the same club to debate one another. There is no right or
wrong answer to these choices, just different preferences. There are valid
arguments to be made for both options. The impact of this choice is much
more significant in power matched rounds as will be discussed in that
section of this manual.
a. The main argument for offering Club Protect is to require students
to debate teams from other clubs and not to debate their own
teammates against whom they may practice on a regular basis.
There are also issues of club spirit and camaraderie.
b. The main argument against offering Club Protect is that any form
of protection alters the true random nature of the debate round by
increasing the probability that teams from larger clubs will not
debate one another. This advantages larger clubs and
disadvantages smaller clubs.