NHSDLC冠军稿件分享 | 年度冠军赛PF双冠获得者：化繁为简才是王道！

在打PF辩论时

许多选手在第一步就被绊住了脚：

一篇优秀的case究竟长什么样？

华丽的辞藻？刁钻的观点？海量的证据？

它要多么完美才能被胸有成竹地使用？

它要经历几番润色才配登上战场？

… …

有时，写一辩稿（case）这一步都会难倒

许多想要尝试PF辩论的小白们

别担心！

今天，我们不空谈理论

而是通过独家分享一篇

在今年暑期冠军赛中脱颖而出的PF公开组&初中组冠军选手的一辩正方稿件

并结合作者团队亲述的思路与心得

为大家揭示优秀PF稿件的内核

「公共论坛式辩论优秀稿件展示」系列通过分享在NHSDLC公共论坛式辩论赛事中脱颖而出的选手组合的一辩稿件（部分）、选手的心得体会及撰稿建议，为大家提供撰稿思路参考。

胡秋逸 Rachel（右）

2025

NHSDLC

年度冠军赛PF MS组冠军——搭档Elos

年度冠军赛PF Open组冠军——搭档Elos

全国线上邀请赛PF Open组亚军——搭档Elos

2024

NHSDLC

春季国榜第一

春季线上ⅠMS 冠军+最佳辩手

春季线上Ⅱ MS 4强+优秀辩手

春季线上Ⅲ MS 冠军

春季杭州赛MS 亚军

春季线上Ⅵ MS 冠军

秋季上海赛 MS亚军

李怿轩 Elos（左）

2025

NHSDLC

年度冠军赛PF MS组冠军

年度冠军赛PF Open组冠军+辩手第4名——搭档Rachel

全国线上邀请赛PF Open组亚军+辩手第3名——搭档Rachel

2024

NHSDLC

全国线上邀请赛，PF Open组冠军+辩手第3名

冬季邀请赛，PF Open组亚军

秋季广州线下赛，PF MS组冠军+辩手第2名

Our case was collaboratively written bybothpartners.

We initiallymade a listof some of the contentions we were interested in reading. For the Brexit topic this summer, this list included arguments such ashealth, labor, econ, sovereignty, air pollution, tobacco, etc.

During our case writing there werevarious challenges– including sometimes it hadtoo many words, sometimesan argument wasn’t explained clearly, or sometimes the second we finished writing one of our argumentsour coach found an irreversible rebuttal to it.

I think one of the reasons our case stood out was because it was simple.No fancy or squirrelly arguments, just plain stock arguments that everyone knew.

For Brexit, these arguments included trade, labor, health, air pollution and AI.We used these arguments because we didn’t like the idea of defending more complex arguments – its quite easy to find a loophole, especially regarding magnified impacts.

But furthermore, because we only used stock arguments, our case didn’t take that long. Instead,we invested most of our time & energy writing frontlines defending our arguments.

1. Don’t go for complex arguments with huge impacts if you not know how to defend them.For the Brexit topic, you can of course find weird policies in UK and EU and just argue those policy misalignment will lead to tremendous impacts. But these arguments are too narrow that a lot of teams failed to defend eventually. Even if you decide to use such arguments, ensure that you are familiar with your argument.
2. BOTH PARTNERS should actively be participating in case writing.Yes, even the rebuttal speaker needs to. Why?To foster a better understanding of the topic as a whole.Me (Elos), as the rebuttal speaker, wrote the AI, Labour, and Health arguments in our case, and in the case writing process, I learnt a lot about the context of Brexit.
3. If you use a stock argument such as econ, still remember to FULLY UNDERSTAND the fundamental logic behind it.For instance, on the Brexit topic econ argument, some teams argued that because Brexit lost UK GDP 4% a year, its economy would be non-existent after 25 years. That is NOT how econ works. Understand your arguments.
4. DO NOT make your case TOO LONG.Judges WILL NOT understand if you speak to quickly. Some teams during nationals went over 200 wpm in constructive, which almost immediately lost them the round.
5. Remember to invest time in writing frontlines after finalizing your case.Defence is KEY to winning any debate round. If you cannot defend you arguments, YOU WILL LOSE.

（节选自选手一辩正方稿件）

C1 air pollution

UK pollution policies bad

The UK risks sliding into worsening air pollution and looser environmental standards after Brexit, potentially becoming a haven for “dirty” industries and a dumping ground for products failing to meet EU regulations, a United Nations Special Rapporteur has warned.

UK revoked National Emissions Ceiling Regulations, a nationwide plan to meet legally binding air pollutant limits.

Times 24 argues how

The air quality grant scheme has awarded more than £90m to councils since 1997 but has been dropped this year. 6 million pounds aimed at tackling air pollution has been quietly withdrawn by the government, with ministers now casting doubt on the entire future of a scheme for cleaner air.

However, EU policy is good

The good news is that if EU countries, regions and cities implemented all European clean air measures, the number of premature deaths due to air pollution would fall by 70% by 2030. Thus, we can achieve the respective zero pollution target with current policies.

On the other hand, the results suggest that current clean air measures are not enough to meet the air pollution target for ecosystems.

With implementing all of them, we could reduce the area of EU ecosystems under threat from air pollution by 20% by 2030.

Thus, EU policy solve. As of 2024, EU cut emission by 45%

In fact, EU policy Saves lives

Air pollution exposure kills more than 350,000 people in Europe every year.Do the simple math and that equates to 8.75 million people by 2050.despite attributable deaths from toxic particles falling by nearly half since 2005, the European Environment Agency warned in a briefing published Tuesday. In a second briefing, the agency reported that the majority of European agricultural land has pollution levels above the legal limit set by EU law. The publications — which come on the day the revised Ambient Air Quality Directive to align European Union standards more closely with stricter World Health Organization (WHO) levels comes into force — shows that pollution levels are still detrimental to human and animal health and put the continent’s food system at risk, but that strict air quality laws can help.

（篇幅原因，仅节选稿件的air pollution部分）

作者简单直接地选取

贸易、劳工、健康、空气污染等

大众熟知的基础论点

避开复杂花哨的论点以减少漏洞

又将大部分时间和精力投入到

为论点辩护的核心工作中

最终成功赢下这场比赛！

看了这篇干货满满的稿件分享

你是否有所收获呢？