Sendai (@2.1) vs Matsumoto (@3.7)
06-10-2019

Our Prediction:

Sendai will win

Sendai – Matsumoto Match Prediction | 06-10-2019 01:00

With this, we always try to provide gratis all the tools you need to bet responsibly and we hope winning! Even stats, standings, news and information on the football league Japan J League and on teams Vegalta Sendai and Matsumoto Yamaga FC.The prediction 1x2 or under/over or goal/nogoal, with odds of bookmakers comes complete with the correct score. Under you found the prediction processed by our proprietary software and reviewed manually by our editors of the football match Vegalta Sendai-Matsumoto Yamaga FC, match of the championship Japan J League.

A good AFF summary speech may present a value criterion insisting that a good policy should ignore short term jobless increase and long term merits outweighs such demerits. Which issue is more important? For example, AFF insists that their plan has some merit on international trade, but NEG pointed out that it might increase domestic jobless rate. So, such comparison should be done by debaters themselves. There is no absolute scale that can measure such value comparison. If the NEG summary cannot present a counter-criterion, a judge should decide by the AFF in favor of the AFF.

If in rare occasions, when the total number of teams including the Supplementary team changed to an odd number, the Supplementary team will continue participating until the end of the preliminary rounds and no additional teams will participate. The Supplementary team rule will not be applied when the total number of teams become an odd number (for some unexpected reason) after the preliminary rounds have started.

Also, it is not allowed to add new attacks against the Negative Constructive speech. Moreover, it is not allowed to re-counter-refute against the Affirmative Defense speech which comes directly before this speech. Such new Disadvantages, attacks, or re-counter-refutations should be ignored by the judges as New Arguments. In this speech, it is not allowed to add arguments equivalent to new Disadvantages.

Nena (Stand: Empress)

In general, there is very little room for adding plans.) The above conditions should be basically considered the same in terms of both AFF and NEG systems. in an AD/DA with evidence. However, you can argue for instance, that the AFF system will (even if the laws are the same between two systems) in effect substantially speed up the automation, immigration, etc. (The list is not comprehensive.

In that case, a judge should compare the ADs and the DAs rationally, using ones own value judgments. Which is more important? If the ADs outweigh the DAs then AFF wins, else the NEG wins. A good AFF summary may present a value criterion insisting that their plan can meet the necessary civil minimum concerning math ability, and the value of such necessary ability outweighs the vague individuality value. Recollect the latter stage speeches (summary) of the debaters. (For example, AFF insisted that each child should have enough math ability but NEG argued that childrens individuality should have priority. Try to avoid your own point of view coming in. 5.Compare the net sum of the issues:Sum up the strength of the ADs and consider if it outweighs the strength of the summed-up DAs. Such comparison should be done by the debatersthemselves. If a team has explained the value criteria for deciding whether the ADs outweigh the DAs, such debaters criteria should be used to determine the winner. If the NEG can not present a counter-criterion, a judge should decide in favor of the AFF). In some debates, neither team is able to present such value criterion effectively.

Note here that values can be sometimes flipped by the opponents good arguments. Compare the reasons supporting both claims. If you think the NEG value assessments were convincing, then the alleged AD should rather be treated as a DA. 3.Judge the value (significance) of each issue: Next consider the importance of each alleged AD and DA. Unless the value mentioned in an issue is explained well by the debaters themselves, dont weigh such issue as significant (Even if you yourself think its important). (For instance, AFF might argue that gaps are bad. However NEG might flip the issue by arguing that gaps are rather welcome. What is the value at stake? How much impact will the DA bring in terms of quantity and quality?

Affirmative team does not have a burden to prove that More than 10 million immigrants will surely come to Japan as the Definition 1) supposes. (Obviously, Affirmative team is allowed to present an Advantage that such fields suffering from worker shortage will benefit as an effect of the grant of unskilled workers visas in general.)3. It goes without saying that, the Affirmative team has the burden to prove that such education or welfare plan is effective. Affirmative team can clarify this in their speech, and use this to refute such Disadvantages arguing There will be no jobs for the immigrants in Japan. (However, such visa is effective only at the initial point of immigration. For example, granting visas to workers only in the fields of agriculture, fishery, and nursing is not allowed. However, it is not allowed to present plans that provide education or welfare only to certain immigrants with certain jobs. It is allowed to present plans on Japanese education, administration, and welfare concerning the immigrants, as stated in Definition 3). Definition 2) states that working visas to unskilled workers should be granted. Negative can still argue Disadvantages such as Immigrants bad working conditions, Unemployment of Japanese unskilled workers, or Increase of illegal residents in time of recession.)4. In such case, it is reasonable to assume that working visas are issued only when the unskilled worker already has job appointments from a certain employer at the time of entrance to Japan. However, they cannot propose a plan that will limit the immigrants to a smaller number, or argue an Advantage on the basis of such smaller number. As Definition 4) shows, for example, to limit the immigrants by the skills of Japanese language is an abusive restriction. 2. 1. It is not allowed to present a plan that restricts the Definition 2) by limiting the immigrants by their native country or business.

*A typical bad judgment is as follows, I think the Negative Attack speech was excellent. I couldnt find any big differences among the other speeches, so, the Negative wins, Such decision is a very subjective judgment comparing just the speeches.

1. adopt a social security system

If the total number of participating teams in the preliminary rounds is an odd number, because of some unexpected cancels, the Tournament Organizer will let a Supplementary team participate in the preliminary rounds. Exceptionally, the Supplementary team can be from a school which has another participating team. In the Preliminary rounds, the Supplementary team will be treated as the same as other teams, and will match against other teams regularly (except against the team from the same school) and its wins and loses will be counted when deciding the matching and the finalists.

We do not rely on guesswork and sheer luck in our football betting predictions; rather, we have a team of professional tipsters who are devoted to making deep daily research and analysis of available games and give out the most secure tips for each day. Welcome to the home of football betting tips. We provide you with a wide range of accurate predictions for several leagues you can rely on. We are very serious and passionate about what we do here because many people rely on us for their betting profit. Here you will find a huge range of daily tips, predictions, analysis, football match previews. Give us a try and see your winning history change. We give out the best tips and predictions everyday.

This is, so to say, an indirect attack, and will contribute to the final Summary speech, hence rather recommended. Moreover, such defense provides an effective comparison. It is permitted, for example, to refute like The importance of Disadvantages presented in the Constructive speech, outweighs that of the Advantages presented in the Affirmative Constructive speech, because this is not itself an attack to the importance of Advantages.

So the 3-member teams, which had been exceptionally able to enter the tournament until last year, cannot enter this year. The purpose of this rule change is to enhance fairness, to have more students participate, and to prevent 3- elite- debater teams. In this years tournament every team should have 4 members in every debate match.