diff --git a/docs/operations.md b/docs/operations.md index 602790f1..27cf810a 100644 --- a/docs/operations.md +++ b/docs/operations.md @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ The landing page and the free tools also exist in Hungarian and Spanish, each at [`scripts/check-links.mjs`](../scripts/check-links.mjs) runs after it and fails the build when a sitemap page other than `/terms`, `/privacy` and `/expocit/sources` has fewer than 3 inbound links from other sitemap pages, or when the home page links to fewer than 15 distinct sitemap pages. `node scripts/check-links.mjs --report` prints every count after a build. The home page reaches the guides and tools through [`GuideHub.tsx`](../src/components/landing/GuideHub.tsx). -The guide pages in `public//index.html` are generated, not hand-edited: run `python3 scripts/generate_seo_content.py` and commit its output. Short pages live in its `PAGES` list; pages with long-form copy, their own highlight-card descriptions, and their own FAQs (which also feed the page's FAQPage JSON-LD) live in [`scripts/seo_guides.py`](../scripts/seo_guides.py). Each page's "Related" block shows up to six pages from its own topic cluster and one from each of two other clusters, picked from `CLUSTERS`; every page in `PAGES` must sit in exactly one cluster, and the generator stops when one does not. Paragraphs also get up to three in-body links from `LINK_PHRASES`, specific phrases first; `python3 scripts/generate_seo_content.py --links` lists the links each page got. A guide entry can set a later `modified` date for that page alone; no page is dated earlier than `CONTENT_DATE`, which covers the copy every guide shares, including the related and in-body links, so move it when `CLUSTERS` or `LINK_PHRASES` change. Sections hold paragraphs and `h3`, `steps`, `list`, `table` and `example` blocks, plus a `speech_times` block that builds the speech-times table from the free timer's formats in [`src/lib/free-tools/formats.ts`](../src/lib/free-tools/formats.ts), so the guide and the timer cannot disagree; a guide's `definition` (question, term, text) renders a definition list under the short answer and a `DefinedTerm` in its JSON-LD; paragraphs, list items and table cells can hold Markdown-style links to a site path or, for a primary source, an `https://` URL. Every guide needs FAQs of its own in `seo_guides.py`; the generator refuses a page without them, so no two pages share boilerplate questions. [`src/test/seo/guide-content.test.ts`](../src/test/seo/guide-content.test.ts) fails when a guide has fewer than 700 words outside its related and About blocks, or when a sentence longer than 60 characters appears on more than three guides. +The guide pages in `public//index.html` are generated, not hand-edited: run `python3 scripts/generate_seo_content.py` and commit its output. The same command writes the seven comparison and prep pages from [`scripts/seo_comparison_pages.py`](../scripts/seo_comparison_pages.py), each with its own layout, and lists them in `llms.txt`. Those pages link to `/best-ai-for-debate` while that page is still a separate draft; [`scripts/check-site.mjs`](../scripts/check-site.mjs) allows that one missing path until its file exists. Short pages live in its `PAGES` list; pages with long-form copy, their own highlight-card descriptions, and their own FAQs (which also feed the page's FAQPage JSON-LD) live in [`scripts/seo_guides.py`](../scripts/seo_guides.py). Each page's "Related" block shows up to six pages from its own topic cluster and one from each of two other clusters, picked from `CLUSTERS`; every page in `PAGES` must sit in exactly one cluster, and the generator stops when one does not. Paragraphs also get up to three in-body links from `LINK_PHRASES`, specific phrases first; `python3 scripts/generate_seo_content.py --links` lists the links each page got. A guide entry can set a later `modified` date for that page alone; no page is dated earlier than `CONTENT_DATE`, which covers the copy every guide shares, including the related and in-body links, so move it when `CLUSTERS` or `LINK_PHRASES` change. Sections hold paragraphs and `h3`, `steps`, `list`, `table` and `example` blocks, plus a `speech_times` block that builds the speech-times table from the free timer's formats in [`src/lib/free-tools/formats.ts`](../src/lib/free-tools/formats.ts), so the guide and the timer cannot disagree; a guide's `definition` (question, term, text) renders a definition list under the short answer and a `DefinedTerm` in its JSON-LD; paragraphs, list items and table cells can hold Markdown-style links to a site path or, for a primary source, an `https://` URL. Every guide needs FAQs of its own in `seo_guides.py`; the generator refuses a page without them, so no two pages share boilerplate questions. [`src/test/seo/guide-content.test.ts`](../src/test/seo/guide-content.test.ts) fails when a guide has fewer than 700 words outside its related and About blocks, or when a sentence longer than 60 characters appears on more than three guides. Every guide opens with the reader's main question as its first H2 and an answer of at most 100 words, kept in [`scripts/seo_answers.py`](../scripts/seo_answers.py); the generator refuses a page without one or with a longer answer. Each guide shows visible "Published" and "Updated" dates (`PUBLISHED_DATE` or a `published` key, and the `modified` date) that match its Article JSON-LD. Prices and plan facts are stated "as of" the month in `factsCheckedOn` in `src/config/site.json`; move that date when you recheck them, and the pricing page's About block, `llms.txt` and the landing page follow. Every other guide has a one-line About that links to the landing page and pricing instead of repeating the plan facts. Copy in `seo_guides.py` and `seo_answers.py` that names the month itself (prices and competitor facts) needs the same edit: search those files for "As of". The generator also writes `public/llms.txt`, the plain summary for AI agents. `public/robots.txt` allows AI crawlers by name in their own group, which repeats the private-route rules because a crawler that matches a named group ignores `*`. diff --git a/public/ai-debate-tools-for-teachers/index.html b/public/ai-debate-tools-for-teachers/index.html new file mode 100644 index 00000000..86548e33 --- /dev/null +++ b/public/ai-debate-tools-for-teachers/index.html @@ -0,0 +1,110 @@ + + + + + + AI Debate Tools for Teachers: 5 Classroom Scenarios | DebateOwl + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

DebateOwl

+

AI debate tools for teachers

+

By the DebateOwl team · Published October 29, 2026 · Last updated October 29, 2026

+

DebateOwl makes one of the tools on this page. Facts about other products come from their own websites, checked on October 29, 2026. Check them before you pay.

+ +

Last updated: October 29, 2026

+

What should I use to run debates in class?

Start with DebateOwl when the debate is tomorrow and you do not want student accounts: the free timer, motion generator and printable flow sheet work in any browser and on a projector. For a club preparing a round, the DebateOwl app writes a case students can read out, with replies and timed practice, at $5/month after the trial. For every student debating an AI at once, Symbai and SchoolAI let teachers set up and monitor AI activities. For a class tournament judged by AI, ArguFight offers free private classroom tournaments. For a graded written discussion, Kialo Edu is free.

+ +
+

The pick for a class with no sign-ups

+

If the lesson is tomorrow, DebateOwl's free tools are the pick: nothing to install, no student accounts, and a timer you can put on the projector. The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account. For the wider map, see the short answer. Topic ideas live on debate topics for students, and flowing is covered in how to flow in debate. A club that needs cases and rounds should read how to prepare for a debate with AI.

+
  • Timer, motions and flow sheet, no account
  • A case students can read out
  • Replies to the other side
  • Timed rounds, then $5/month
+

Open the free classroom timer

+
+
+

Scenario 1

+

I want to run a debate tomorrow with no sign-ups

+

Use DebateOwl's free tools. The timer knows seven formats (Public Forum, Lincoln-Douglas, Policy, British Parliamentary, World Schools, Asian Parliamentary and School 4-6-6-3), shows protected time, and has points-of-information knocks and prep banks. You can build a custom format, share it as a link, and embed the timer. The motion generator has 300 original motions and a 3-motion veto drill. The flow sheet prints on A4 or Letter. The timer saves the round in the browser, not on a server. Spanish and Hungarian versions exist at /es/tools and /hu/tools.

+

That is the clearest fit when you refuse to spend the lesson on accounts. Open the tools, the motion generator and the flow sheet from any laptop on the projector.

+
+
+

Scenario 2

+

I want every student to debate an AI at once

+

Symbai, when each student needs a workspace

+

Symbai is best for a teacher who wants each student in their own debate workspace. Teachers create a debate and send each student a workspace, with settings such as difficulty and access to the AI tutor. There is a visual debate tree. Classroom controls let you disable the AI tutor for assessments, restrict copy-paste and lock after deadlines. The pricing page lists a dashboard with student analytics, and the homepage says progress is trackable over time. Teacher plans run from NZ$9.99 a month (up to 7 students) to NZ$79.99 a month (up to 100), and those buttons say "Try 2 Months For Free". P12 P14

+

SchoolAI, when you already use a classroom AI

+

SchoolAI is best for a school that already wants a general AI classroom platform, not a debate-only product. Its pages we opened do not use the word debate. Teachers design and manage AI Spaces. Mission Control shows what every student is doing in real time while a Space is active. Its listed compliance is FERPA, COPPA, SOC 2 Type 2 and 1EdTech certified. There is a Free Trial with 5 Space launches per year, plus Pro and Scale plans for schools. The homepage says teachers can try SchoolAI free. Dollar prices for Pro and Scale were not on the pricing page we opened. P15 P16

+
+
+

Scenario 3

+

I want a class tournament with a judge

+

ArguFight for Schools is best for a private class tournament judged by AI, at no charge. It offers private, invite-only tournaments in bracket, championship and king-of-the-hill formats. Every match is judged 0–100 with written reasoning. Students get an Elo, a history and per-round feedback. It lists 26 languages, and getting started is free for classrooms. The schools page describes the tournaments and the written reasoning. The main site also lets you dictate an argument with speech-to-text in Chrome, Edge and the mobile app, so the product is not only typed. P5 P4

+
+
+

Scenario 4

+

I want a written discussion I can grade

+

Kialo Edu is best for a graded written discussion, and it is free. Students write pros and cons under each other's points as an interactive map. There is an anonymous mode. Discussions are saved, so you can grade them later. It works with Google Classroom, Microsoft, Moodle, Blackboard, Clever and D2L. The site says it is free and always will be. P13

+
+
+

Scenario 5

+

My debate club is preparing for a competition

+

This is where the DebateOwl app is the pick. Students get a case they can read out, with "If they say… we answer…" replies, Crossfire drills and timed Sparring in School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas or Public Forum, in English, Spanish or Hungarian. There is no teacher dashboard. It is built for the students who are preparing, not for a screen that shows every student at once. The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account.

+

If you also want roles, timing and judges' score sheets for a live in-class debate, with an AI analysis from uploaded audio, Camelot for Debate does that in Italian and English. P17

+
+
+

Before you use any AI tool with students

+
    +
  1. Read the age requirements.
    2. +
  2. Read where the data goes.
    3. +
  3. See whether students need accounts.
    4. +
  4. Look for teacher controls, if the lesson needs them.
    5. +
  5. Read what the tool itself says about student data.
    6. +
+

DebateOwl's free tools need no account, and the timer saves the round in the browser, not on a server. The app, once a student signs in, keeps cases and rounds behind that account.

+
+

Questions from teachers

What should I use if I want a free tool for class tomorrow?

DebateOwl's free tools, if you want no student accounts: the timer, the motion generator and the flow sheet. For a written discussion you can grade, Kialo Edu. For AI-judged class tournaments, ArguFight for Schools is free for classrooms.

Can students debate an AI in class?

Yes. Symbai gives each student their own AI opponent in a workspace the teacher sets up, and SchoolAI lets teachers build AI activities and watch them live. SchoolAI's pages we opened do not call it a debate product. It is a general classroom platform where you can build a debate activity as a Space.

Do students need accounts for DebateOwl's tools?

No. The tools at /tools run in the browser with no account. The timer saves the round in the browser, not on a server.

Is the DebateOwl app free for schools?

The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account.

Can I project the debate timer?

Yes. It has a fullscreen mode, and it can be embedded on a class site.

+

Sources checked for this classroom guide

  1. https://symbai.ai/pricing/. Teacher prices in NZ dollars, the trial, and the read-only workspace. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  2. https://symbai.ai/. Per-student workspaces, the debate tree, and classroom controls. The same controls are listed at https://symbai.ai/features/. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  3. https://schoolai.com/pricing. Free Trial with 5 Space launches a year, Pro, Scale, Mission Control, and the compliance list. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  4. https://schoolai.com/. Teachers can try SchoolAI free. The pages we opened do not use the word debate. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  5. https://www.argufight.com/for-schools. Free private classroom tournaments. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  6. https://www.argufight.com/. Speech-to-text, and free for base debating. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  7. https://www.kialo-edu.com/. Free written discussions and the integrations. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  8. https://www.camelot.vote/en/debate. Roles, timing, judge sheets, and AI analysis from uploaded audio, in Italian and English. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
+ + +
+ + diff --git a/public/best-ai-debate-tools/index.html b/public/best-ai-debate-tools/index.html index 2c1b524c..edce44f6 100644 --- a/public/best-ai-debate-tools/index.html +++ b/public/best-ai-debate-tools/index.html @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ DebateOwl vs WinDebate DebateOwl Pricing and Plans AI Debate Practice for Stronger Cases, Rebuttals, and Speeches -Public Forum Debate Prep with AI +Public Forum Debate Prep with AIFree vs paid AI debate tools: what you actually getChatGPT vs Claude for debate prepAI debate tools for teachersBest AI for Public Forum debate diff --git a/public/best-ai-for-public-forum/index.html b/public/best-ai-for-public-forum/index.html new file mode 100644 index 00000000..cfb7cb0e --- /dev/null +++ b/public/best-ai-for-public-forum/index.html @@ -0,0 +1,98 @@ + + + + + + Best AI for Public Forum Debate (2026): Tools by Speech | DebateOwl + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

DebateOwl

+

Best AI for Public Forum debate

+

By the DebateOwl team · Published October 29, 2026 · Last updated October 29, 2026

+

DebateOwl makes one of the tools on this page. Facts about other products come from their own websites, checked on October 29, 2026. Check them before you pay.

+ +

Last updated: October 29, 2026

+

What should I use for Public Forum debate?

For Public Forum, start with DebateOwl when you want a case you can read out, "If they say… we answer…" replies, crossfire drills, and Sparring at the 4-4-3-2 speech times, for $5/month after a 3-day free trial. PublicForumAI is built only for PF and has free practice rounds. Cardinal focuses on finding and cutting evidence. Prilo covers PF, Lincoln-Douglas and Policy with a cross-examination simulator.

+ +
+

The pick for a Public Forum case and a timed round

+

DebateOwl is the first name in the speech table because it covers the case you read, the replies, the crossfire drill and the timed speeches together. The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account. The rules of the format, without the tool comparison, are on Public Forum debate. Question drills are in how to cross-examine, and weighing is in how to weigh. The wider list is the short answer. Prices are on free vs paid.

+
  • A PF case you can read out
  • "If they say… we answer…" replies
  • Crossfire as its own drill
  • Sparring at 4-4-3-2, then $5/month
+

Sparring runs the PF speeches at those times and ends with a judged verdict. It does not insert the three crossfire periods. Practise those in Crossfire. The free timer does run the crossfires and the prep banks, and the flow sheet prints the columns. Clash is where you decide which argument the summary should keep.

+

Spar a full PF round at 4-4-3-2 times

+
+
+

Speech by speech

+
+ + + +
NSDA times, as the Public Forum guide on this site states them. DebateOwl is named first wherever it does the job.
PF speechWhat you needTools that help
Constructive (4 min)A clear two-argument case with evidenceDebateOwl case generator. PublicForumAI's case writer. Cardinal's card cutter.
Crossfire (3 min, three times)Fast questions and answersDebateOwl Crossfire drills. Prilo's 3-minute cross-examination simulator. PublicForumAI says it doesn't yet have a crossfire feature, "it's in the works".
Rebuttal (4 min)Answers to their caseDebateOwl "If they say… we answer…" replies, plus Attack. Prilo's AI rebuttal drafts.
Summary (3 min) and final focus (2 min)Collapse onto the points that decide the roundDebateOwl's Sparring verdict and Ask coach. PublicForumAI's full rounds, with a judge ballot and tech or lay feedback.
EvidenceReal sources you can openCardinal searches the web and opencaselist and cuts cards. PublicForumAI Premium adds real sourced evidence with working links. DebateOwl Factoids names sources you still have to check.
FlowingA record of every argumentPublicForumAI's AI Flow, with speech recognition. Prilo's flowing practice. DebateOwl's free printable flow sheet.
+
+
+

DebateOwl for Public Forum

+

Best for students who want case writing, replies, crossfire and full speech rounds in one place at a low price. The case is an opening, two to four arguments with evidence and why each matters, the replies, a closing line and the sources. For PF, the first constructive carries the arguments, and the rebuttal is where you answer theirs without pretending a new argument belongs there. The app is in English, Spanish and Hungarian. The free timer has prep banks. The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account.

+

PublicForumAI, the PF-only practice round

+

Best for PF debaters who want a free, PF-only practice round. It was started in 2024 by students on a high school debate team in New York City. The free plan has 3 rounds a month and 5 cases a month. Premium is $9.99 a month or $79 a year. A round takes about 35 minutes including prep, without crossfire. There are middle school and high school difficulty levels. Its tools are for practice, not for live rounds. P3 P18

+

Cardinal, for the cards

+

Best for evidence work. Five tools are marked free, and the site calls the core tools free forever. Pro is $10 a month or $75 a season. Card search runs over the web and opencaselist. P7

+

Prilo, for circuit drills

+

Best for NSDA-circuit debaters who want cross-examination and flowing drills. It is $15 a month or $60 a year, and it covers Lincoln-Douglas, Public Forum and Policy, with a 3-minute cross-examination simulator and speech analytics. P8

+
+
+

A tiny PF reply block

+

This is an example resolution, not a claim about the current NSDA topic: "Resolved: Public schools should give students one homework-free weekend a month."

+

One argument, on the proposition. A weekend with no homework gives students time to sleep and to show up on Monday able to listen. The reason is ordinary: homework that fills both days crowds out the rest a student needs before a week of class. Why it matters: a tired first speech, in class or in a round, is a worse speech.

+
    +
  1. If they say "Students will fall behind", we answer: one weekend a month is not the end of practice, and the other weekends still carry the load.
    2. +
  2. If they say "Homework is how you learn", we answer: learning also needs a break, and a single protected weekend does not delete the assignments on the other days.
    3. +
  3. If they say "Families will fill the time with more activities", we answer: that is the family's choice, and the school's job is not to occupy every hour so the choice never comes up.
    4. +
+
+

Public Forum questions

What should I use for Public Forum?

Start with DebateOwl if you want the case, the replies, crossfire drills and timed speeches in one place. PublicForumAI is the free, PF-only practice round. Cardinal is the evidence tool. Prilo is the circuit tool with a cross-examination simulator and flowing drills.

Is there a free AI for PF practice?

Yes. PublicForumAI's free plan has 3 full practice rounds a month, and Cardinal lists five free tools, described as free forever.

Can AI do crossfire practice?

Yes. DebateOwl has timed Crossfire drills, and Prilo has a 3-minute cross-examination simulator. PublicForumAI says it doesn't yet have a crossfire feature, "it's in the works".

Can I use AI during a PF round?

PublicForumAI itself says its tools are for practice, not for live rounds. Check your league's rules.

How much does DebateOwl cost for PF?

The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account.

+

Sources for the PF tools

  1. https://publicforumai.com/. PF only, started in 2024 by NYC high school debaters, no crossfire feature yet, about 35 minutes, tech or lay judge, not for live rounds. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  2. https://publicforumai.com/pricing. Free plan and Premium at $9.99/mo or $79/yr. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  3. https://cardinaldebate.org/. Card search, five free tools, Pro at $10/month or $75 a season. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  4. https://www.prilo.ai/nsda. PF, LD and Policy, the 3-minute simulator, $15/month or $60/year. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
+ + +
+ + diff --git a/public/chatgpt-vs-claude-for-debate/index.html b/public/chatgpt-vs-claude-for-debate/index.html new file mode 100644 index 00000000..ba3bd861 --- /dev/null +++ b/public/chatgpt-vs-claude-for-debate/index.html @@ -0,0 +1,117 @@ + + + + + + ChatGPT vs Claude for Debate: And When a Debate Tool Is Better | DebateOwl + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

DebateOwl

+

ChatGPT vs Claude for debate prep

+

By the DebateOwl team · Published October 29, 2026 · Last updated October 29, 2026

+

DebateOwl makes one of the tools on this page. Facts about other products come from their own websites, checked on October 29, 2026. Check them before you pay.

+ +

Last updated: October 29, 2026

+

Is ChatGPT or Claude better for debate?

DebateOwl is the pick when you want the motion kept for you: a case you can read out, "If they say… we answer…" replies, and timed Sparring rounds that end in a verdict. ChatGPT and Claude both work well for debate prep, and neither is clearly better for everyone. Debaters often use ChatGPT for fast brainstorming and Claude for a longer critique of a case they paste in. What neither does by default is keep your motion, side and speech times.

+ +
+

The pick when you want the round set up

+

Open a chatbot for background. Come back to DebateOwl for the motion itself. That is the part DebateOwl is built for: a case you can read out loud, "If they say X, we answer Y" replies, and timed practice rounds, with the separate tools at /tools free and the app at $5/month after a 3-day trial. The short answer compares more tools. Prices for these plans are on free vs paid AI debate tools, and the full prep sequence is how to prepare for a debate with AI.

+
  • One Current Debate per motion
  • A case with replies, ready to read
  • Sparring at real speech times
  • $5/month after a 3-day trial
+

Skip the prompt setup: get a case with replies ready

+
+
+

Where a debate tool does the setup for you

+
+ + + + + + + + +
DebateOwl is the first column. Chatbots can imitate parts of this if you prompt them every time.
DebateOwlChatGPTClaude
Remembers your motion, side and roleBuilt in: one Current Debate per motionOnly if you set it up (Projects or memory)Only if you set it up (Projects or memory)
Case structureOpening, 2–4 arguments, "If they say… we answer…", closing, sourcesWhatever you promptWhatever you prompt
Timed rounds with a verdictSparring: School 4-6-6-3, LD, PFNo built-in debate timerNo built-in debate timer
Free optionNo free app plan: 3-day free trial, then $5/month; /tools freeFree versionFree plan
+

The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account. Pair that with the DebateOwl vs ChatGPT page if you already live in one chatbot, and with rebuttal practice and cross-examination when you want the drills.

+
+
+

What general chatbots are good at in debate

+

Debate Ladder's guide to ChatGPT lists jobs a general chatbot does well: brainstorming both sides, steel-manning the other side, rebuttal drills, and questions you might be asked in cross-examination. Those are real uses. Treat the output as a draft, and verify every citation before it goes into a speech. S2

+
+
+

Where Debate Ladder's guide says they struggle

+

The same guide says that in long timed rounds a general chatbot drifts or softens, the difficulty is not calibrated, scoring is inconsistent, and there is no progress record. That is Debate Ladder's description of ChatGPT, not a claim we measured ourselves. A long round is easier in a tool that already knows the speech times. S2

+
+
+
+

ChatGPT for a fast first pass

+

The free version is available to everyone. Paid plans on the pricing page include Go, Plus and Pro, and the FAQ also names Business and Enterprise. Dollar prices were not shown on the page we opened. Study mode and voice are available on the free plan, with limits on voice. It is best for quick idea generation and for practising out loud with voice, once you have told it the motion again. P1

+
+
+

Claude for a long case you paste in

+

The free plan is $0. Pro is $20 a month billed monthly, or $17 a month billed annually. Max starts at $100 a month. The free plan includes web search, memory and voice mode. The context window is up to 1 million tokens, varying by model, which is useful when you paste a full case and the evidence behind it. It is best for critique of long cases. This page does not cite a benchmark. P2

+
+
+
+

Prompt pack: make any chatbot argue back

+

These five prompts are plain-language instructions you can paste into ChatGPT or Claude. They do not replace a saved case.

+

1. Hold the other side

Take the other side of this motion and do not concede unless my answer beats your point. Stay on that side for the whole exchange.

2. Five things they will say

List the 5 things the other side will say about this motion. Give each one a one-line answer I could say aloud.

3. One question at a time

Cross-examine me with one question at a time. Wait for my answer before you ask the next question.

4. The weakest reason

Read this argument and find the weakest reason in it. Say what a judge would still be unsure about.

5. The second speech

Write a second speech: no new arguments, about 2 minutes backing up our arguments, then "If they say X, we answer Y" for each of their points.
+

DebateOwl's case generator writes this shape for you, including prompt 5's second speech, and you can regenerate one weak section without rewriting the rest.

+
+
+

A week that uses all three

+

Monday is for the chatbot. Paste the motion into ChatGPT and ask for the five arguments each side might run, then ask Claude to steel-man the side you understand less. Keep that list. Do not paste it into a speech yet. The job of Monday is to see the field, not to memorise a paragraph.

+

Tuesday is DebateOwl. Start a Current Debate with the motion and your side. Generate the case and read it aloud once, slowly, before you edit anything. Mark the argument you would be unhappy to say in front of a judge. Regenerate that section only. The replies at the bottom are the start of Tuesday night: pick the two you think the other side will actually run, and say the answer out loud in one breath.

+

Wednesday is evidence. Take one factual sentence from the case, ask Factoids for a lead, and open the source. If the source does not say what the case said, cut the sentence. A chatbot can suggest search terms for the same claim. It should not be the thing you quote.

+

Thursday is Crossfire. Ten minutes of one question at a time is enough. Write down the question that made you pause. That pause is the line to fix in the case, not a reason to add a sixth argument.

+

Friday is the timed round. Sparring in the format you actually debate, typed or spoken. Read the verdict for the reason it names, then change one thing. The free timer is there if you are drilling a format Sparring does not simulate, such as British Parliamentary or World Schools. Saturday is a human, if you have one. Sunday is off. The $5 month is for the weeks that look like this, not for a subscription you forget about in June.

+
+
+

Using a chatbot and DebateOwl together

+

Use the chatbot for background reading and for a first list of ideas. Use DebateOwl once the motion is chosen: generate the case, read the replies, run Crossfire, then spar at the real times. The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account.

+
+

Questions about chatbots and debate

Is ChatGPT or Claude better for debate?

Neither is clearly better for everyone. ChatGPT is a fast way to brainstorm, and Claude is a strong place to paste a long case and ask for a critique. DebateOwl is the pick when you also want the case shape, the replies and a timed round without rebuilding that setup.

Can ChatGPT run a debate round with me?

It can role-play an opponent if you set it up. It has no built-in speech timer or verdict for debate formats, so long rounds work better in a tool built for them.

Is Claude free?

Yes. Claude has a free plan. Pro is $20/month billed monthly, or $17/month billed annually.

Will AI make up sources?

It can, so open every source and confirm the exact claim before it goes on a card.

What does DebateOwl add over a chatbot?

A saved workspace per motion, a case with "If they say… we answer…" replies, Crossfire drills and timed Sparring rounds with a verdict. The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account.

+

Notes on the chatbot pages

  1. https://debateladder.com/blog/chatgpt-for-debate-practice. What that guide says ChatGPT is good and bad at. We rewrote its examples into plain words. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  2. https://chatgpt.com/pricing. Free version, Go, Plus and Pro, study mode and voice. No dollar prices on the page we opened. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  3. https://claude.com/pricing. Free, Pro, Max, and the free plan's web search, memory and voice. Context window up to 1M. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
+ + +
+ + diff --git a/public/debateowl-vs-chatgpt/index.html b/public/debateowl-vs-chatgpt/index.html index e0fb6b8a..6fb8f183 100644 --- a/public/debateowl-vs-chatgpt/index.html +++ b/public/debateowl-vs-chatgpt/index.html @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@

Which is better for debate prep, DebateOwl or ChatGPT?

It depends on the task. ChatGPT is better for learning a new topic, open brainstorming and general writing help, and it works for any subject. DebateOwl is better when you are preparing a specific motion: it keeps your cases, sources and practice rounds together, drafts answers to what the other side will say, times your speeches and gives a verdict on practice rounds. Many debaters use both, ChatGPT for background and DebateOwl for motion prep and practice. Neither replaces checking original sources.

A general assistant

ChatGPT can brainstorm, explain, draft and revise on any subject, including debate.

A debate workspace

DebateOwl organises prep around one motion at a time, with structured cases, an AI opponent, a timer and judged practice rounds.

Using both

Where each tool fits in a week of debate preparation, and how to move work between them.

-

The short answer

ChatGPT is a general-purpose AI assistant. DebateOwl is a debate practice workspace. Both use large language models, but they are designed for different jobs. If you want to explore an idea, learn background on a topic or tighten a paragraph, a general assistant is flexible and fast. If you want to prepare a specific motion, practise against an opponent at real speech times and get a verdict on your round, a tool built around debate structure saves the setup you would otherwise do by hand in every conversation.

Many debaters use both. This page explains where each is stronger so you can decide what fits your preparation.

DebateOwl vs ChatGPT for debate prep (as of October 2026)
FeatureDebateOwlChatGPT
Structured case outputEvery case has an opening, arguments with explanation, evidence and why it matters, "If they say… we answer…" replies, a closing line and sourcesWhatever structure you ask for, in each conversation
Saved sources (Library)Sources you add to a debate's Library are given to its prep toolsYou paste the motion and your sources into each new conversation
Web research with a source listGenerate researches the motion on the web and lists the sources it found; Ask can answer with citationsNot tied to one debate; nothing is saved to a Library
Timed practice round with a verdictSparring runs School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas and Public Forum rounds, times each speech and ends with a verdictNo built-in round, timing or verdict; you role-play and keep time yourself
Cross-examination drillCrossfire drills cross-examination in either directionRole-play on request
Debate timerA free debate timer for seven formats, plus a speech timer in the appNone built in
FormatsCase generation, Attack, Ask and Crossfire work for any motion; Sparring has three formatsAny format you describe
LanguagesEnglish, Spanish and HungarianNot compared here
Price3-day free trial, then $5/month + taxFree tier and paid plans; prices not compared here

What ChatGPT does well for debaters

  • Background learning: explaining an unfamiliar topic, the main positions in a policy area or a philosophical idea behind a value resolution.
  • Open brainstorming: generating many possible angles quickly, including unusual ones.
  • Writing help: tightening a sentence, simplifying a paragraph for a lay judge or suggesting a clearer tag line.
  • Flexibility: it handles any request, so you can use it for tasks no debate tool was built for.

Those are real strengths. The limits come from the same flexibility: a general chat does not know which motion you are preparing, which side you are on, what format you debate or what sources you trust, unless you tell it again, and it has no concept of a round to practise in.

What a debate workspace adds

One motion, one place

In DebateOwl, everything belongs to a Current Debate: the motion, the Library sources you have added, generated cases, Attack analyses, practice rounds and debriefs. The prep tools read that context, so you never paste the motion and your research into a new conversation.

Structured output

Generated cases always have the same parts: an opening, arguments with explanation, evidence and why each matters, "If they say… we answer…" replies to the other side, a closing line and a source list. Attack always returns ranked weaknesses that quote the attacked words, with a response to say in round, cross-examination questions and a weighing analysis. Fixed structure makes the output easier to check and to turn into speeches.

Timed practice rounds

Sparring runs full rounds against an AI opponent in School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas and Public Forum, with each speech timed, and ends with a verdict that names the reason for the decision. Crossfire drills cross-examination in either direction. A speech timer covers Standard, Lincoln-Douglas, Public Forum and Policy speech orders.

Sources you control

Sources you add to the Library and mark active are given to the prep tools for that debate, which use the ones that fit each request. Ask can answer with citations, and Factoids researches a single claim. Evidence still needs checking against the original, as with any AI tool.

Worked example: the same task in both tools

Task: prepare to answer the opposition on This house would make voting compulsory

In a general chat: You describe the motion, your side and your format, then ask for the opposition's arguments. You get a useful list. To get responses, you ask again; to check one argument in depth, you paste it back; to practise, you would need to role-play a round and keep track of time yourself.

In DebateOwl: You start a Current Debate with the motion, generate your proposition case and read its "If they say…" answers to the opposition. You paste the strongest opposition argument into Attack, which returns its weakest link, a response to say and a cross-ex question. You import the questions into Crossfire to practise them, then run a timed Sparring round and read the verdict.

The difference: Individual sentences can be similar in quality. What changes is how much setup you repeat, and whether you end up practising a round or only reading text.

Which should you use?

  • Learning about a topic from scratch: a general assistant is a good start.
  • Writing a case for a specific motion: a debate workspace gives a consistent structure and answers to what the other side will say.
  • Finding the weak point in an opposing argument: a tool that returns structured weaknesses and responses is faster to use in prep.
  • Practising speeches and rounds: you need timing, an opponent and a verdict, which a general chat does not provide.
  • Polishing wording: either works; use the one you are already in.

A practical split is to use a general assistant for open-ended learning and DebateOwl for motion-specific preparation and practice.

Things that are true of both

Both can state things confidently that are not true, so neither replaces reading original sources before you quote them. Neither should be used during a round where your league forbids electronic help, which is most leagues. And neither replaces a coach or teammates who have watched you debate.

+

The short answer

ChatGPT is a general-purpose AI assistant. DebateOwl is a debate practice workspace. Both use large language models, but they are designed for different jobs. If you want to explore an idea, learn background on a topic or tighten a paragraph, a general assistant is flexible and fast. If you want to prepare a specific motion, practise against an opponent at real speech times and get a verdict on your round, a tool built around debate structure saves the setup you would otherwise do by hand in every conversation.

Many debaters use both. This page explains where each is stronger so you can decide what fits your preparation.

DebateOwl vs ChatGPT for debate prep (as of October 2026)
FeatureDebateOwlChatGPT
Structured case outputEvery case has an opening, arguments with explanation, evidence and why it matters, "If they say… we answer…" replies, a closing line and sourcesWhatever structure you ask for, in each conversation
Saved sources (Library)Sources you add to a debate's Library are given to its prep toolsYou paste the motion and your sources into each new conversation
Web research with a source listGenerate researches the motion on the web and lists the sources it found; Ask can answer with citationsNot tied to one debate; nothing is saved to a Library
Timed practice round with a verdictSparring runs School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas and Public Forum rounds, times each speech and ends with a verdictNo built-in round, timing or verdict; you role-play and keep time yourself
Cross-examination drillCrossfire drills cross-examination in either directionRole-play on request
Debate timerA free debate timer for seven formats, plus a speech timer in the appNone built in
FormatsCase generation, Attack, Ask and Crossfire work for any motion; Sparring has three formatsAny format you describe
LanguagesEnglish, Spanish and HungarianNot compared here
Price3-day free trial, then $5/month + taxFree tier and paid plans; prices not compared here

What ChatGPT does well for debaters

  • Background learning: explaining an unfamiliar topic, the main positions in a policy area or a philosophical idea behind a value resolution.
  • Open brainstorming: generating many possible angles quickly, including unusual ones.
  • Writing help: tightening a sentence, simplifying a paragraph for a lay judge or suggesting a clearer tag line.
  • Flexibility: it handles any request, so you can use it for tasks no debate tool was built for.

Those are real strengths. The limits come from the same flexibility: a general chat does not know which motion you are preparing, which side you are on, what format you debate or what sources you trust, unless you tell it again, and it has no concept of a round to practise in.

What a debate workspace adds

One motion, one place

In DebateOwl, everything belongs to a Current Debate: the motion, the Library sources you have added, generated cases, Attack analyses, practice rounds and debriefs. The prep tools read that context, so you never paste the motion and your research into a new conversation.

Structured output

Generated cases always have the same parts: an opening, arguments with explanation, evidence and why each matters, "If they say… we answer…" replies to the other side, a closing line and a source list. Attack always returns ranked weaknesses that quote the attacked words, with a response to say in round, cross-examination questions and a weighing analysis. Fixed structure makes the output easier to check and to turn into speeches.

Timed practice rounds

Sparring runs full rounds against an AI opponent in School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas and Public Forum, with each speech timed, and ends with a verdict that names the reason for the decision. Crossfire drills cross-examination in either direction. A speech timer covers Standard, Lincoln-Douglas, Public Forum and Policy speech orders.

Sources you control

Sources you add to the Library and mark active are given to the prep tools for that debate, which use the ones that fit each request. Ask can answer with citations, and Factoids researches a single claim. Evidence still needs checking against the original, as with any AI tool.

Worked example: the same task in both tools

Task: prepare to answer the opposition on This house would make voting compulsory

In a general chat: You describe the motion, your side and your format, then ask for the opposition's arguments. You get a useful list. To get responses, you ask again; to check one argument in depth, you paste it back; to practise, you would need to role-play a round and keep track of time yourself.

In DebateOwl: You start a Current Debate with the motion, generate your proposition case and read its "If they say…" answers to the opposition. You paste the strongest opposition argument into Attack, which returns its weakest link, a response to say and a cross-ex question. You import the questions into Crossfire to practise them, then run a timed Sparring round and read the verdict.

The difference: Individual sentences can be similar in quality. What changes is how much setup you repeat, and whether you end up practising a round or only reading text.

Which should you use?

  • Learning about a topic from scratch: a general assistant is a good start.
  • Writing a case for a specific motion: a debate workspace gives a consistent structure and answers to what the other side will say.
  • Finding the weak point in an opposing argument: a tool that returns structured weaknesses and responses is faster to use in prep.
  • Practising speeches and rounds: you need timing, an opponent and a verdict, which a general chat does not provide.
  • Polishing wording: either works; use the one you are already in.

A practical split is to use a general assistant for open-ended learning and DebateOwl for motion-specific preparation and practice. ChatGPT vs Claude for debate is the page for where each general chatbot fits, and when a debate tool saves the setup.

Things that are true of both

Both can state things confidently that are not true, so neither replaces reading original sources before you quote them. Neither should be used during a round where your league forbids electronic help, which is most leagues. And neither replaces a coach or teammates who have watched you debate.

Frequently asked questions

Is DebateOwl better than ChatGPT for debate?

For motion-specific preparation and practice rounds, a dedicated workspace saves setup and adds timing, an AI opponent and verdicts. For open-ended learning and general writing, ChatGPT is more flexible. Many debaters use both.

Can I practise a debate round with ChatGPT?

You can ask it to role-play an opponent, but you have to manage the format, the speech order and the timing yourself, and there is no built-in verdict. DebateOwl's Sparring runs the round structure for you.

Does DebateOwl keep my debate prep organised?

Yes. Cases, sources, analyses and practice rounds are saved inside the Current Debate they belong to, behind sign-in.

Do I still need to check evidence from either tool?

Yes. Any AI tool can produce errors or misread sources. Open the original and confirm the exact claim before you use it in a round.

Which formats does DebateOwl support?

Case generation, Attack, Ask and Crossfire work for any motion. Sparring runs School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas and Public Forum rounds, and the timer adds a Policy preset.

diff --git a/public/debateowl-vs-debate-ladder/index.html b/public/debateowl-vs-debate-ladder/index.html new file mode 100644 index 00000000..a6a4c650 --- /dev/null +++ b/public/debateowl-vs-debate-ladder/index.html @@ -0,0 +1,110 @@ + + + + + + DebateOwl vs Debate Ladder: Case Prep or Ranked Voice Rounds? | DebateOwl + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

DebateOwl

+

DebateOwl vs Debate Ladder

+

By the DebateOwl team · Published October 29, 2026 · Last updated October 29, 2026

+

DebateOwl makes one of the tools on this page. Facts about other products come from their own websites, checked on October 29, 2026. Check them before you pay.

+ +

Last updated: October 29, 2026

+

DebateOwl or Debate Ladder: which should I use?

Pick DebateOwl if you have a real school or tournament debate coming up and need a case you can read out, "If they say… we answer…" replies to the other side, and timed practice rounds in School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas or Public Forum. Pick Debate Ladder if you want to argue out loud against an AI and climb a ranked Elo ladder. Many debaters could use both, one for prep and one for speaking reps.

+ +

Start here when the round is real. DebateOwl writes the case you will actually read, including the replies, then times the practice.

+
+

The pick for a dated round

+

If your motion and your date are already set, DebateOwl is the pick. That is the part DebateOwl is built for: a case you can read out loud, "If they say X, we answer Y" replies, and timed practice rounds, with the separate tools at /tools free and the app at $5/month after a 3-day trial. The short answer across more tools is a separate page. Debate Ladder stays the right extra when you want frequent out-loud reps and a ranking, including if you are not in a tournament at all.

+
  • A case you can read out loud
  • "If they say X, we answer Y" replies
  • Timed rounds in three formats
  • Free timer, motions and flow sheet
  • $5/month after a 3-day trial
+

Build your case for the next round, then spar it

+
+
+

The 7-question checklist

+

Tick the lines that are true this week. This is not a score. The side with more ticks is the closer fit, and two strong reasons for Debate Ladder are on the page on purpose. Many people tick some of both: prep in one, speaking reps in the other.

+
+
+ DebateOwl + +
+
+ Debate Ladder + +
+
+
+
+

What DebateOwl does well

+

A DebateOwl case is a speech you can read out: an opening, two to four arguments, each with an explanation, evidence that names its source and year, and why it matters, then "If they say… we answer…" replies, a closing line, and the sources it used. You can regenerate one weak section without touching the rest.

+

Speaker roles follow a school round. The introductor gets the opening and the headline arguments. The first refutation speaker gets the full arguments. The second speaker brings no new arguments: about two minutes backing up the team's arguments, then about four minutes on "If they say X, we answer Y" replies, usually five or six blocks. The closing speaker brings no new arguments either: two or three reasons your side won, then the closing line.

+

Around that case, Attack looks for the weak link in the other side, Factoids researches a claim and names sources you still have to open, Crossfire drills questions, and Sparring runs a timed round in School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas or Public Forum and ends with a judged verdict. World Schools, British Parliamentary, Policy and Congress use the prep tools, not a full simulated round. The app is in English, Spanish and Hungarian. Pro adds expanded AI prep access, all 10 models (including Claude Opus and Sonnet, GPT-6.1 Sol and Gemini), Active Grounding research and priority support. Evidence leads still need checking against the original source. The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account.

+

The free debate timer is separate from the app: seven formats, protected time, points-of-information knocks and prep banks, and it saves the round in the browser. See also the case generator, practice rounds, rebuttal practice and pricing.

+
+
+

What Debate Ladder does well

+

Debate Ladder is best for people who want frequent out-loud reps and a ranking, on any topic, including non-competitors. Its homepage describes a voice-first debate game. You are assigned PRO or CON, then speak an opening, rebuttal and closing while an AI argues the other side. Practice mode lets you type. An AI judge scores logic, responsiveness, clarity, delivery and persuasiveness, then gives feedback. Ranked wins raise your Elo, which starts at 500, and losses lower it. Practice and custom debates are unrated. Topics run from beginner to expert, and you can write your own. New accounts get 100 free credits, and a debate costs about one credit per minute of speaking time. S1

+
+
+

Side by side (checked October 29, 2026)

+
+ + + +
DebateOwl beside Debate Ladder. DebateOwl is the prep column.
DebateOwlDebate Ladder
Main jobCase prep plus timed practice rounds for a set motionOut-loud practice debates against an AI, ranked by Elo
SpeechesFormat speeches: School 4-6-6-3, LD, PF in SparringOpening, rebuttal, closing
Written caseYes: opening, 2–4 arguments, "If they say… we answer…", closing, sourcesNot listed on its homepage
ScoringJudged verdict after a Sparring roundAI judge on 5 criteria, Elo from 500
VoiceType or speakVoice-first; type in practice mode
PriceNo free plan: 3-day free trial, then $5/month + tax; /tools free100 free credits, then credits (about 1 per minute of speaking)
+

DebateOwl is best for students preparing a specific motion for a school or competitive round. Debate Ladder is best for ranked speaking practice that is not tied to one tournament motion.

+
+

Questions people ask before they pick

Is Debate Ladder free?

New accounts get 100 free credits, and a debate costs about one credit per minute of speaking, according to its site (October 2026). More credits are sold; its /pricing page returned 404, so there is no published plan price beyond credits.

Is DebateOwl free?

The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account.

Which should I use for a school debate next week?

DebateOwl. It writes the case you will read and the answers to the other side, then lets you practise the round at real speech times. Debate Ladder is the better fit when the goal is ranked speaking reps on topics you did not choose.

Can I practise speaking out loud with DebateOwl?

Yes. Sparring speeches can be typed or spoken.

Does Debate Ladder rank you?

Yes. Ranked wins raise your Elo, which starts at 500, and losses lower it. Practice and custom debates are unrated.

+

Where these facts come from

  1. https://debateladder.com/. Debate Ladder homepage. Its /pricing address returned 404. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
+

The worked second-speech shape is on how to prepare for a debate with AI.

+ + +
+ + diff --git a/public/fonts/fredoka-latin-ext-wght-normal.woff2 b/public/fonts/fredoka-latin-ext-wght-normal.woff2 new file mode 100644 index 00000000..e16cd424 Binary files /dev/null and b/public/fonts/fredoka-latin-ext-wght-normal.woff2 differ diff --git a/public/fonts/nunito-latin-ext-wght-normal.woff2 b/public/fonts/nunito-latin-ext-wght-normal.woff2 new file mode 100644 index 00000000..14a9f78e Binary files /dev/null and b/public/fonts/nunito-latin-ext-wght-normal.woff2 differ diff --git a/public/free-vs-paid-ai-debate-tools/index.html b/public/free-vs-paid-ai-debate-tools/index.html new file mode 100644 index 00000000..8d0bbad4 --- /dev/null +++ b/public/free-vs-paid-ai-debate-tools/index.html @@ -0,0 +1,122 @@ + + + + + + Free vs Paid AI Debate Tools: What $0 Gets You (Oct 2026) | DebateOwl + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

DebateOwl

+

Free vs paid AI debate tools: what you actually get

+

By the DebateOwl team · Published October 29, 2026 · Last updated October 29, 2026

+

DebateOwl makes one of the tools on this page. Facts about other products come from their own websites, checked on October 29, 2026. Check them before you pay.

+ +

Last updated: October 29, 2026

+

Is there a free AI for debate practice, and what do the paid ones cost?

Start with DebateOwl when you want a case you can read out, replies to the other side and timed rounds at the low end of paid prices. The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account. You can practise with AI for free: ChatGPT and Claude have free plans, PublicForumAI gives 3 practice rounds a month, Debate Ladder gives new accounts 100 credits, and ArguFight is free to start. Paid plans mostly add more rounds, linked evidence or speaking time, at roughly $5 to $20 a month.

+ +
+

The pick on price

+

For a case you can read, replies, and timed rounds, DebateOwl is the row to read first. The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account. See the short answer if you want the wider map, or ChatGPT and Claude if the question is which general chatbot to open. Public Forum tools are compared speech by speech, and Debate Ladder is the ranked voice game.

+
  • Readable case plus replies
  • Timed Sparring rounds
  • Free /tools, no account
  • $5/month after the trial
+

Try the free tools first, no account

+
+
+

Price table (checked October 29, 2026)

+
+ + + +
DebateOwl is the first row. Prices as listed by each product on October 29, 2026.
ToolFree optionPaid price (as listed)What paid addsSource
DebateOwl3-day free trial, no card; /tools free, no account$5/month + tax (Pro)All 10 models, Active Grounding, priority support. The case, the replies and timed rounds are the job.This site
ChatGPTFree version available to everyoneGo, Plus, Pro, plus Business and Enterprise (dollar prices not shown on the page we opened)More messages. Plus and Pro add more models and deep research. Study mode and voice are on the free plan too.P1
ClaudeFree plan, $0Pro $20/mo monthly ($17/mo billed annually); Max from $100/moMore usage, Opus, Research. The free plan includes web search, memory and voice.P2
PublicForumAIFree: 3 full practice rounds/mo, unlimited AI Flow drills, 5 AI cases/mo plus 2 Premium cases with real sources, 15 training modulesPremium $9.99/mo or $79/yrUnlimited rounds, real sourced evidence with links, rounds and ballots kept. Free rounds are kept 30 days.P3
Debate Ladder100 free credits for new accountsMore credits (about 1 credit per minute of speaking); no plan price publishedMore debatesS1
ArguFight"Free to start"; "free forever for base debating"; free for classroomsNot listed on the pages we openedNot listed. Classrooms are described as free.P4, P5
DebatableFree: 10 AI voice minutes after sign-in (about one round), not refilled; live rounds with people free. A short voice preview exists before sign-in.Individual $10/yr; Voice $12/mo; Tokens $4.99/mo; BYOK $1/mo; Team $50/yr; school programs $200/season120 AI voice minutes/mo and a written decision on Individual and Voice. Tokens adds extra voice rounds.P6
Cardinal"Core tools free forever" (five tools marked free)Pro $10/month or $75 a seasonPractice rounds with an AI judge and a written ballot, a word counter, case files and more prep tools.P7
Prilo NSDANot stated$15/month or $60/yearSparring, a 3-minute cross-examination simulator, flowing practice, speech analytics, card cuttingP8
HyperWrite Debate Assistant"Limited trial"Premium $19.99/mo; Ultra $44.99/mo. Annual prices are also listed ($16/mo and $29/mo).More messages and citationsP9, P10
Debate ArenaFree plan with unlimited debates vs AI and live opponentsGold plan (price not stated on the page opened)50+ personas, detailed evaluations, British Parliamentary practiceP11
SymbaiTrial; a free read-only workspace after the trial. The individual button says try 1 month free.Individual NZ$4.99/mo; teacher or club plans from NZ$9.99/mo. Teacher plans say try 2 months free.AI coaching re-enabledP12
Kialo EduFree ("free and always will be")None listedNothing further is listed, because the classroom product is free.P13
+

Prices and plans as listed on each product's own website on October 29, 2026, in the currency shown. Check before you subscribe.

+
+
+

What $0 gets you

+
    +
  • ChatGPT: a free version OpenAI says is available to everyone, including study mode and voice, with limits.
    • +
  • Claude: a $0 plan with web search, memory and voice mode.
    • +
  • DebateOwl's separate tools: a timer, motion generator, printable flow sheet and speech-time calculator, no account. The app itself is a 3-day trial, not a permanent free plan.
    • +
  • PublicForumAI: 3 full practice rounds a month, unlimited AI Flow drills, 5 cases a month plus 2 with real sources, and 15 training modules.
    • +
  • Debate Ladder: 100 credits for a new account, about one credit per minute of speaking.
    • +
  • ArguFight: free to start, free forever for base debating, and free for classrooms.
    • +
  • Debatable: 10 AI voice minutes after sign-in, not refilled, and live rounds with people at no charge.
    • +
  • Cardinal: the core tools, five of them marked free, described as free forever.
    • +
  • HyperWrite: a limited trial of the debate assistant.
    • +
  • Debate Arena: a free plan with unlimited debates against AI and live opponents.
    • +
  • Symbai: a trial, then a read-only workspace if you do not pay.
    • +
  • Kialo Edu: the classroom product, free, and the site says it always will be.
    • +
  • Prilo's pages we opened do not state a free option.
    • +
+
+
+

What paying adds

+

Across these pages, payment tends to buy the same kinds of things, and the lists above are the ones to trust:

+
    +
  • More rounds or more minutes, once a free cap runs out.
    • +
  • Sourced evidence with links, where the product says the free tier argues without them.
    • +
  • Voice time, on the products that meter speaking.
    • +
  • Teacher dashboards, student analytics or class controls, on the products built for a whole class.
    • +
+

DebateOwl's $5 plan is the low monthly price that adds the prep workspace: all 10 models, Active Grounding research and priority support. Open every source before a lead goes into a speech. Active Grounding is not a promise that a citation is already checked.

+
+
+

The cheapest way to prep for a tournament

+
    +
  1. Use the free tools for drills: the timer, the flow sheet and the motion generator. No account.
    2. +
  2. Use a free chatbot for background reading. It will not keep your motion, side and speech times for you.
    3. +
  3. Buy one month of a paid tool during tournament weeks. DebateOwl is $5/month + tax after the 3-day trial, which is the straightforward way to get the case, the replies and the timed rounds in one place. PublicForumAI's free tier may be enough for debaters who only need a few PF practice rounds and are not also writing a case to export.
    4. +
+

Plan details are on the pricing page.

+
+
+

Prices change

+

Each product's own page wins over this table. A number here was copied from that page on October 29, 2026, and it can move. Debatable also lists a Tokens plan at $4.99/month for extra voice rounds, which is why the cheapest-price answer names it. Cardinal's Pro price is $10 a month or $75 a season, not only the monthly figure.

+
+

Price questions

Is there a free AI for debate practice?
Yes. ChatGPT and Claude have free plans, PublicForumAI includes 3 full practice rounds a month, Debate Ladder gives new accounts 100 credits, and ArguFight is free to start. DebateOwl's app is a 3-day trial, then $5/month, and the tools at /tools are free with no account.
What is the cheapest paid AI debate tool?
Among the tools in this table, the lowest monthly prices listed are Debatable's Tokens plan at $4.99/month, DebateOwl at $5/month + tax, and Symbai's individual plan at NZ$4.99/month. Debatable's Individual plan is $10 a year. Compare what each one actually includes before you treat the smallest number as the same product.
Is DebateOwl free?
The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account.
Are free AI debate tools good enough?
For drills and background reading, often yes. Paid plans mainly add volume and linked evidence. Whatever you use, check evidence against the original source. For a tournament week, DebateOwl at $5/month is the low-priced way to get a case, replies and timed rounds together.
Is ChatGPT free for debate?
Yes. OpenAI says the free version is available to everyone. Paid plans add more access.
+

Sources for the prices

  1. https://chatgpt.com/pricing. Free version available to everyone. Go, Plus and Pro are on the page; the FAQ also names Business and Enterprise. No dollar prices in the text we opened. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  2. https://claude.com/pricing. Free $0. Pro $17/mo annual or $20 monthly. Max from $100. Free plan: web search, memory, voice. Context window up to 1M, varying by model. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  3. https://publicforumai.com/pricing. Free tier and Premium at $9.99/mo or $79/yr. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  4. https://debateladder.com/. 100 free credits. About one credit per minute. /pricing returned 404. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  5. https://www.argufight.com/. Free to start. Free forever for base debating. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  6. https://www.argufight.com/for-schools. Free for classrooms. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  7. https://debatable.com/pricing. Voice minutes and the Individual, Voice, Tokens, BYOK, Team and school prices. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  8. https://cardinaldebate.org/. Core tools free forever. Pro $10/month or $75 a season. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  9. https://www.prilo.ai/nsda. $15/month or $60/year. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  10. https://www.hyperwriteai.com/aitools/debate-assistant. Limited trial. Premium $19.99/mo. Ultra $44.99/mo. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  11. https://www.hyperwriteai.com/pricing. Premium and Ultra, including annual prices. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  12. https://www.debatearena.app/ai-debate-practice. Free plan and Gold. No Gold price on the page. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  13. https://symbai.ai/pricing/. NZ$ prices, trial, and the free read-only workspace. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  14. https://www.kialo-edu.com/. Free, and the site says it always will be. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
+ + +
+ + diff --git a/public/how-to-prepare-for-a-debate-with-ai/index.html b/public/how-to-prepare-for-a-debate-with-ai/index.html new file mode 100644 index 00000000..0177747c --- /dev/null +++ b/public/how-to-prepare-for-a-debate-with-ai/index.html @@ -0,0 +1,99 @@ + + + + + + How to Prepare for a Debate with AI: 7 Steps and a Worked Example | DebateOwl + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

DebateOwl

+

How to prepare for a debate with AI

+

By the DebateOwl team · Published October 29, 2026 · Last updated October 29, 2026

+

DebateOwl makes one of the tools on this page. Facts about other products come from their own websites, checked on October 29, 2026. Check them before you pay.

+ +

Last updated: October 29, 2026

+

How do I use AI to prepare for a debate?

Use DebateOwl for the slow parts you would rather not invent from a blank page: read the motion, draft two to four arguments with evidence, list what the other side will say and write an "If they say… we answer…" reply to each, then practise at real speech times. Keep the judgement calls for yourself, and check every source before it goes into a speech. A general chatbot can do pieces of this if you prompt it.

+ +
+

Seven steps, DebateOwl first

+

That is the part DebateOwl is built for: a case you can read out loud, "If they say X, we answer Y" replies, and timed practice rounds, with the separate tools at /tools free and the app at $5/month after a 3-day trial. The wider comparison is the short answer. If you are choosing between chatbots first, read ChatGPT vs Claude for debate. A head-to-head with a ranked voice game is DebateOwl vs Debate Ladder. Teachers running the class itself should read AI debate tools for teachers. Case structure in general is in how to write a debate case.

+
  • Brainstorm, then a case you can read
  • Replies in the case itself
  • Crossfire, then a timed round
  • Free timer for every other format
+

  1. 1. Read the motion

    In DebateOwl. Open Brainstorm on the Current Debate and ask what each side has to prove.

    With any AI. Paste the motion and ask it to define the terms and say what each side must prove. See the related guide.

  2. 2. Gather sources

    In DebateOwl. Use Factoids for one claim and the Library for sources you already trust.

    With any AI. Ask for the source and the year of every fact, then open each one. Cut anything you cannot find. See the related guide.

  3. 3. Draft the arguments

    In DebateOwl. The case generator writes the opening, two to four arguments, and why each matters.

    With any AI. Ask for a point, an explanation, evidence with a source and year, and why it matters. Do not accept a wall of text. See the related guide.

  4. 4. Predict the other side

    In DebateOwl. Run Attack on your case, and read the case's own "If they say…" lines.

    With any AI. Ask for the strongest case against you, written so a fan of that side would agree. See the related guide.

  5. 5. Write the replies

    In DebateOwl. The case already includes "If they say X, we answer Y" blocks. Regenerate one weak block if you need to.

    With any AI. Demand one short answer per opposing point, in words you could say aloud.

  6. 6. Drill the questions

    In DebateOwl. Crossfire asks one question at a time, or lets the AI question you.

    With any AI. Say you will answer one question at a time and that it should wait. See the related guide.

  7. 7. Practise at real times

    In DebateOwl. Sparring runs School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas or Public Forum and ends with a verdict. For every other format, use the free timer.

    With any AI. You keep the clock yourself. The free timer already knows seven formats. See the related guide.

+

Generate your first case in the 3-day trial

+
+
+

A worked second speech: phones in class

+

Motion: "This House would ban phones in class." The same motion appears on the DebateOwl homepage. Nothing below is a real study. The brackets are placeholders you replace after you have opened a source.

+

Opening line. Today we will show two arguments that prove phones belong outside class.

+

Argument 1, in our team's first speech

+

Notifications break concentration. Explanation: a student who looks at a message then spends the next explanation catching up has missed the step the rest of the room is on. Evidence: [a study on refocus time: name the source and year you verified]. Why it matters: a lesson only works if the room is in it together.

+

Argument 2, so the second speech has two points to back up

+

Class is a shared conversation. Explanation: when some students are on their phones, the people speaking lose the listeners the lesson depends on. Evidence: [a classroom observation you have checked: name the source and year]. Why it matters: a discussion you cannot join is not a discussion.

+

Second speech, about 6 minutes

+

Part 1, about 2 minutes, reinforce. No new arguments. Back up the first argument with one fresh example: the student who glances down and then asks a question the room already answered. Back up the second with one fresh example: a partner task where one person is scrolling and the other is talking to an empty chair.

+

Part 2, about 4 minutes, "If they say X, we answer Y".

+
    +
  1. If they say "Students need phones for emergencies", we answer: the school office can call home, and a phone in a bag at the office covers the same emergency without a screen on every desk.
    2. +
  2. If they say "Phones are learning tools", we answer: when a task actually needs a device, the class can share a computer or a set of tablets, which is different from every student having a private phone out all period.
    3. +
  3. If they say "A ban is unenforceable", we answer: schools already collect items that distract, and a basket at the door is easier to see than a rule about using a phone well.
    4. +
  4. If they say "Students must learn self-control", we answer: self-control is practised when the distraction is not buzzing during the explanation. The lesson is the place to pay attention.
    5. +
  5. If they say "Parents want to reach their children", we answer: parents can call the office, and students can check messages at lunch. A class period is short enough that a delay is not the same as being unreachable.
    6. +
+

Closing line. That is why phones belong outside the lesson: the class stays on the work, and a real emergency still has a way through.

+

This is the shape DebateOwl's case generator produces for the second-speaker role. Every case also ends with the sources it used. The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account.

+
+
+

What you still decide yourself

+

The plan above will hand you a full draft. The round is still yours. Three decisions should not be delegated, even when the draft sounds confident.

+

The first is the motion's meaning. If "ban" in your motion means a legal prohibition and the draft treats it as a classroom norm, the whole case is about the wrong world. Read the actor, the action and the word that sets the strength of the claim before you fall in love with an argument. Brainstorm will offer readings. You pick the one a judge would accept without a fight.

+

The second is which argument you are willing to live on. Two to four arguments is the shape. Three of them can be true and only one of them can be the thing you return to in the last speech. If you cannot say, in one sentence, why that argument matters more than the other side's best point, you do not yet have a case. You have a list.

+

The third is the source. A named year is not a check. Open the page, find the sentence, and see whether it is about your claim or about a neighbouring one. If you cannot find it, the sentence leaves the speech. This is the same rule for DebateOwl, for ChatGPT and for Claude. Active Grounding, on the paid plan, is a research aid. It is not a substitute for the tab you open yourself.

+

A practical test before you close the laptop: give the second speech to an empty room, at about six minutes, with a timer. If part 1 starts a new argument, stop and cut it. If part 2 answers a point the other side would never say, replace that block with one they would. If you run out of time before the closing line, the reinforcement was too long. The free timer will do this drill for any format. Sparring will do it against an opponent for School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas and Public Forum, and it will tell you a reason at the end. Change one thing from that reason. Then stop.

+

Teachers who want the class to do this without accounts can put the timer on a projector and print the flow sheet. Students who are preparing a dated round should be in the app, because that is where the case, the replies and the timed round stay attached to one motion. Both can be true in the same week.

+

If you only have twenty minutes, do the smallest version. Read the motion, generate the case, say the second speech's reply blocks once, and open one source. That is a complete prep, not a sketch you feel guilty about. The rest of the week can add the timed round.

+
+

Questions about using AI for prep

Can AI help me prepare for a debate?

Yes, as long as you treat what it gives you as a draft. Use it for the slow parts, and keep the judgement calls. Check every source before it goes into a speech.

What should a second speech include?

No new arguments: about two minutes backing up your team's arguments, then about four minutes of "If they say X, we answer Y" replies.

Is using AI for debate prep cheating?

Prep is usually fine, but most leagues restrict electronics or AI during the round itself. Check your league's rules.

How do I stop the AI making up evidence?

Ask for the source and year of every fact, open each one, and cut anything you can't find.

Which AI should I use?

For this plan, DebateOwl is the pick, because the modes match the steps. The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account. A wider comparison is on the short-answer page linked above.

+

Notes for this prep plan

  1. https://chatgpt.com/pricing. A free chatbot is enough for the 'with any AI' lines. The free version is available to everyone. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  2. https://claude.com/pricing. Claude's free plan is the other general chatbot this plan allows. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
+ + +
+ + diff --git a/public/how-to-write-a-debate-case/index.html b/public/how-to-write-a-debate-case/index.html index f05759d8..fd4d7947 100644 --- a/public/how-to-write-a-debate-case/index.html +++ b/public/how-to-write-a-debate-case/index.html @@ -23,14 +23,14 @@ - + - +
@@ -39,11 +39,11 @@
-
How-to guide

How to Write a Debate Case

Move from motion analysis to an opening, arguments with evidence, answers to the other side, and a closing line.

Published · Updated

By the DebateOwl team

Start practicingSee DebateOwl
+
How-to guide

How to Write a Debate Case

Move from motion analysis to an opening, arguments with evidence, answers to the other side, and a closing line.

Published · Updated

By the DebateOwl team

Start practicingSee DebateOwl

How do you write a debate case?

A DebateOwl case has an opening, two to four arguments (three by default) each with an explanation, evidence and why it matters, "If they say… we answer…" replies, a closing line and the sources it used. Start by defining the motion fairly and writing what your side must prove. Check every source, rewrite the draft in your own words and time a reading aloud. Adjust for your format: Public Forum usually fits two arguments; Lincoln-Douglas uses a goal and a test for meeting it; BP closing teams need a new angle.

Motion analysis first

Define the terms, write down what your side has to prove and find where the two sides disagree before writing a single argument.

Arguments that hold up

Build each argument as a point, an explanation, evidence and why it matters, so a judge can follow it and an opponent cannot break it with one question.

A case you can defend

Write "If they say… we answer…" replies to the obvious responses, cut what does not clash, and test the draft by attacking it yourself.

-

What a debate case is

A debate case is the argument your side will defend for the whole round, organised so a judge can follow it on first hearing. It is not an essay. An essay can explore; a case has to survive an opponent whose job is to find the weakest sentence in it. That is why good cases are built from small, testable parts: an opening that tells the judge what you will prove, two to four arguments that each prove something specific, answers to what the other side will say, and a closing line the judge remembers.

Every case DebateOwl writes follows that shape, so you can hold a generated draft next to your own and compare them part by part. The process below works for every format. The format changes the length, the number of arguments and who gives which part, which the format section covers further down.

Eight steps from motion to finished case

  1. Read the motion word by word. Note the actor (who does it), the action (what changes) and any word that sets the strength of the claim, such as should, would, ban, regulate or prioritise. A motion about regulating something is a different debate from one about banning it.
  2. Define the key terms in plain language. Pick definitions that are fair and that a judge would accept without argument. A squirrelled definition wins the definition debate and loses the round.
  3. Write down in one sentence what your side has to prove for the judge to vote for you. If you are proposing a policy, you usually need to show a problem, a mechanism and a net benefit. If you are opposing, you choose whether to defend the status quo, a counter-proposal or simply that the proposal does more harm than good.
  4. Brainstorm widely, then cut hard. List every argument for your side, group the ones that share a reason, and keep the two to four groups that are strongest and most different from each other.
  5. Build each argument in four parts: the point (what is true, in one sentence), the explanation (why it is true, step by step), the evidence (a source that backs it, named with its year) and why it matters (what it means for real people, and why that matters more than what the other side will say).
  6. Write the opening: a hook that makes the judge listen, then one line that says what you will show, such as "Today we will show two arguments that prove…". In Lincoln-Douglas, your value and criterion go here too.
  7. For each argument, write down what the other side is most likely to say and a short answer: "If they say…, we answer…". Put the answer to the most obvious response inside the argument itself, so the opponent's best attack does not sound new.
  8. Finish with a closing line that ties back to the opening and a list of your sources. Then read the case aloud against a timer and cut until it fits with fifteen seconds to spare.

Worked example: a full case outline

Motion: This house would make public transport free

Side: Proposition.

Definitions: Public transport means buses, trams and local trains run or funded by government. Free means no fare at the point of use, paid for from general taxation.

What we have to prove: That removing fares produces benefits greater than the cost of replacing fare revenue.

Opening: For a family on a low income, the bus fare to work can be the difference between taking a job and turning it down. Today we will show two arguments that prove free public transport is worth what it costs.

Argument 1, access: Point: fares stop low-income people from reaching jobs and services. Explanation: transport is a fixed cost that takes a larger share of a small income. Why it matters: removing it widens the area in which people can work and study. Answer built in: discounted passes exist, but they require applications and proof of eligibility that many eligible people never complete.

Argument 2, congestion and emissions: Point: free fares move some journeys from cars to public transport. Explanation: price is one of the things people consider when choosing how to travel. Why it matters: fewer car journeys reduce congestion and emissions for everyone in the city.

Order: Argument 1 is the more certain benefit and reaches the people most affected, so it goes first; argument 2 is larger in scale but less certain, so it is an additional reason, not the case's foundation.

If they say: The money is better spent on more frequent services.

We answer: Frequency helps people who already ride; free fares reach people currently priced out, and the two are not mutually exclusive.

Closing line: That is why free fares are the fairest way to pay for the buses a whole city depends on.

Notice what the outline does not contain: a long introduction, rhetorical questions or a list of statistics without explanations. Every line either defines the debate, proves something, answers the other side or tells the judge what to remember.

How case structure changes by format

Public Forum (PF)

A four-minute constructive usually fits two arguments, each with evidence, and sometimes a short explanation of how the judge should decide. Because you often do not know your side until shortly before the round, write a case for each side and keep them consistent in style. Put answers to the other side into the second constructive if you speak second.

Lincoln-Douglas (LD)

The case starts with a value, the goal the judge should protect, and a criterion, the test for meeting that goal. Each argument then shows how your side passes the test. State that link at the end of every argument, because a good negative will attack any gap.

British Parliamentary (BP)

Opening Government sets the definition and, for policy motions, a model: what exactly happens, who does it and how it is enforced. Opening Opposition responds to that model. Closing teams do not write a full case of their own; they prepare an extension, a new line of analysis the opening half did not cover.

World Schools (WSDC)

The case is split between the first and second speakers under a single team line. The first speaker gives definitions, the burden and usually the first argument; the second speaker gives the remaining arguments. Write the split before you write the arguments, so neither speaker repeats the other.

Checklist before you call the case finished

  • Can you state the whole case in two sentences?
  • Does every argument have an explanation you could give without your notes?
  • Is every piece of evidence one you have read in the original, with a full citation?
  • Does each argument say why it matters, and why that matters more than what the other side will argue?
  • Have you written an "If they say…" answer to the strongest response to each argument?
  • Does it fit in the time with room to slow down?

If any answer is no, fix that before you practise delivery. Polishing the speech of a case with a missing explanation only makes the gap harder to see.

Where DebateOwl helps

Once you have a draft, attack it before an opponent does. Paste an argument into Attack to see which link breaks first, use Brainstorm when you need more angles at step four, and use Factoids to research a single statement you want to rely on. If you would rather start from a draft, the case generator writes a ready-to-read case in the same shape: an opening, two to four arguments (three by default) with explanation, evidence and why it matters, "If they say… we answer…" replies, a closing line and sources. Cut and rewrite it with the steps above. For a second speech (R2), the draft brings no new arguments: about two minutes backing up the team's arguments, then about four minutes of "If they say X, we answer Y" blocks.

+

What a debate case is

A debate case is the argument your side will defend for the whole round, organised so a judge can follow it on first hearing. It is not an essay. An essay can explore; a case has to survive an opponent whose job is to find the weakest sentence in it. That is why good cases are built from small, testable parts: an opening that tells the judge what you will prove, two to four arguments that each prove something specific, answers to what the other side will say, and a closing line the judge remembers.

Every case DebateOwl writes follows that shape, so you can hold a generated draft next to your own and compare them part by part. The process below works for every format. The format changes the length, the number of arguments and who gives which part, which the format section covers further down.

Eight steps from motion to finished case

  1. Read the motion word by word. Note the actor (who does it), the action (what changes) and any word that sets the strength of the claim, such as should, would, ban, regulate or prioritise. A motion about regulating something is a different debate from one about banning it.
  2. Define the key terms in plain language. Pick definitions that are fair and that a judge would accept without argument. A squirrelled definition wins the definition debate and loses the round.
  3. Write down in one sentence what your side has to prove for the judge to vote for you. If you are proposing a policy, you usually need to show a problem, a mechanism and a net benefit. If you are opposing, you choose whether to defend the status quo, a counter-proposal or simply that the proposal does more harm than good.
  4. Brainstorm widely, then cut hard. List every argument for your side, group the ones that share a reason, and keep the two to four groups that are strongest and most different from each other.
  5. Build each argument in four parts: the point (what is true, in one sentence), the explanation (why it is true, step by step), the evidence (a source that backs it, named with its year) and why it matters (what it means for real people, and why that matters more than what the other side will say).
  6. Write the opening: a hook that makes the judge listen, then one line that says what you will show, such as "Today we will show two arguments that prove…". In Lincoln-Douglas, your value and criterion go here too.
  7. For each argument, write down what the other side is most likely to say and a short answer: "If they say…, we answer…". Put the answer to the most obvious response inside the argument itself, so the opponent's best attack does not sound new.
  8. Finish with a closing line that ties back to the opening and a list of your sources. Then read the case aloud against a timer and cut until it fits with fifteen seconds to spare.

Worked example: a full case outline

Motion: This house would make public transport free

Side: Proposition.

Definitions: Public transport means buses, trams and local trains run or funded by government. Free means no fare at the point of use, paid for from general taxation.

What we have to prove: That removing fares produces benefits greater than the cost of replacing fare revenue.

Opening: For a family on a low income, the bus fare to work can be the difference between taking a job and turning it down. Today we will show two arguments that prove free public transport is worth what it costs.

Argument 1, access: Point: fares stop low-income people from reaching jobs and services. Explanation: transport is a fixed cost that takes a larger share of a small income. Why it matters: removing it widens the area in which people can work and study. Answer built in: discounted passes exist, but they require applications and proof of eligibility that many eligible people never complete.

Argument 2, congestion and emissions: Point: free fares move some journeys from cars to public transport. Explanation: price is one of the things people consider when choosing how to travel. Why it matters: fewer car journeys reduce congestion and emissions for everyone in the city.

Order: Argument 1 is the more certain benefit and reaches the people most affected, so it goes first; argument 2 is larger in scale but less certain, so it is an additional reason, not the case's foundation.

If they say: The money is better spent on more frequent services.

We answer: Frequency helps people who already ride; free fares reach people currently priced out, and the two are not mutually exclusive.

Closing line: That is why free fares are the fairest way to pay for the buses a whole city depends on.

Notice what the outline does not contain: a long introduction, rhetorical questions or a list of statistics without explanations. Every line either defines the debate, proves something, answers the other side or tells the judge what to remember.

For the second speech in particular, the worked example of how to prepare for a debate with AI writes the two-minute reinforcement and the "If they say… we answer…" replies in full.

How case structure changes by format

Public Forum (PF)

A four-minute constructive usually fits two arguments, each with evidence, and sometimes a short explanation of how the judge should decide. Because you often do not know your side until shortly before the round, write a case for each side and keep them consistent in style. Put answers to the other side into the second constructive if you speak second.

Lincoln-Douglas (LD)

The case starts with a value, the goal the judge should protect, and a criterion, the test for meeting that goal. Each argument then shows how your side passes the test. State that link at the end of every argument, because a good negative will attack any gap.

British Parliamentary (BP)

Opening Government sets the definition and, for policy motions, a model: what exactly happens, who does it and how it is enforced. Opening Opposition responds to that model. Closing teams do not write a full case of their own; they prepare an extension, a new line of analysis the opening half did not cover.

World Schools (WSDC)

The case is split between the first and second speakers under a single team line. The first speaker gives definitions, the burden and usually the first argument; the second speaker gives the remaining arguments. Write the split before you write the arguments, so neither speaker repeats the other.

Checklist before you call the case finished

  • Can you state the whole case in two sentences?
  • Does every argument have an explanation you could give without your notes?
  • Is every piece of evidence one you have read in the original, with a full citation?
  • Does each argument say why it matters, and why that matters more than what the other side will argue?
  • Have you written an "If they say…" answer to the strongest response to each argument?
  • Does it fit in the time with room to slow down?

If any answer is no, fix that before you practise delivery. Polishing the speech of a case with a missing explanation only makes the gap harder to see.

Where DebateOwl helps

Once you have a draft, attack it before an opponent does. Paste an argument into Attack to see which link breaks first, use Brainstorm when you need more angles at step four, and use Factoids to research a single statement you want to rely on. If you would rather start from a draft, the case generator writes a ready-to-read case in the same shape: an opening, two to four arguments (three by default) with explanation, evidence and why it matters, "If they say… we answer…" replies, a closing line and sources. Cut and rewrite it with the steps above. For a second speech (R2), the draft brings no new arguments: about two minutes backing up the team's arguments, then about four minutes of "If they say X, we answer Y" blocks.

Frequently asked questions

How many contentions should a debate case have?

Usually two to four arguments. Public Forum constructives often fit two; formats with longer speeches can take three or four. Fewer well-defended arguments beat many thin ones.

What goes into each argument?

Say what is true, explain why it is true, give evidence you have checked and show why it matters. Add a short answer to the response you expect from the other side.

How long does it take to write a debate case?

A first draft can take an hour once you have researched the topic. Expect to revise it several times after practice rounds expose its weak points.

Should I write my case word for word?

In formats with prepared constructives, such as Public Forum and Lincoln-Douglas, most debaters do. In impromptu formats like BP and WSDC, prepare an outline and key lines instead.

How do I make a case harder to attack?

Explain why every point is true, use evidence you have checked, answer the most obvious response inside each argument, and attack the draft yourself before the round.

diff --git a/public/hu/mi-vitafelkeszules/index.html b/public/hu/mi-vitafelkeszules/index.html new file mode 100644 index 00000000..b6cc55c5 --- /dev/null +++ b/public/hu/mi-vitafelkeszules/index.html @@ -0,0 +1,107 @@ + + + + + + Vitafelkészülés MI-vel: melyik eszköz mire jó? | DebateOwl + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

DebateOwl

+

Vitafelkészülés mesterséges intelligenciával

+

DebateOwl csapata · Közzétéve: 2026. október 29. · Utolsó frissítés: 2026. október 29.

+

A DebateOwl készíti az egyik eszközt ezen az oldalon. A többi termékről szóló tények a saját weboldalukról származnak, 2026. október 29-én ellenőrizve. Fizetés előtt ellenőrizd őket.

+

DebateOwl makes one of the tools on this page. Facts about other products come from their own websites, checked on October 29, 2026. Check them before you pay.

+

Last updated: October 29, 2026

+

Melyik MI a legjobb vitára?

Ha konkrét indítványra készülsz iskolai vagy versenyvitára, a DebateOwl a kiindulás: felolvasható esetet ír „Ha azt mondják… erre azt feleljük…” válaszokkal, és időzített gyakorlófordulót futtat, magyarul is. Ötleteléshez és háttérolvasáshoz egy általános MI-asszisztens, például a ChatGPT vagy a Claude is jó, mindkettőnek van ingyenes csomagja.

+ +
+

Mit tartalmaz egy DebateOwl-eset?

+

A DebateOwl úgy írja meg az esetet, ahogy az iskolai vitázók készülnek: nyitás, két–négy érv, mindegyik magyarázattal, bizonyítékkal és azzal, hogy miért fontos, „Ha azt mondják… erre azt feleljük…” válaszok, egy zárómondat és a felhasznált források.

+

A többi eszköz rövid angol összevetése: the short answer. Itthon a kiindulás a felolvasható eset, a válaszok és az időzített forduló.

+
  • Felolvasható eset
  • „Ha azt mondják… erre azt feleljük…”
  • Időzített Vitapárbaj
  • Ingyenes eszközök, aztán havi $5
+

Próbáld ki 3 napig ingyen

+
+
+

Mit csinál a második beszélő (R2)?

+

Nem hoz új érvet: körülbelül két percig megerősíti a csapat érveit, utána körülbelül négy percig »Ha azt mondják X-et, erre azt feleljük Y« válaszokat mond.

+

Példa a „Tiltsuk be a telefont az órákon” indítványra, számok nélkül. Ha azt mondják, hogy vészhelyzetben kell a telefon, erre azt feleljük: az iskola titkársága fel tudja hívni a szülőt, a telefon pedig a titkárságon is ott lehet, nem az órán. Ha azt mondják, hogy a telefon tanulási eszköz, erre azt feleljük: ha a feladat tényleg eszközt kér, az osztály közös gépe is elég, és az nem csipog minden diáknál a magyarázat közben.

+
+
+

Milyen formátumokban lehet gyakorolni?

+

Vitapárbaj: iskolai 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas és Public Forum, a végén bírói döntéssel. Az időmérő hét formátumot ismer, köztük azokat is, amelyekhez nincs teljes szimulált forduló. A többi formátumra a felkészítő eszközök valók. Beszélni és gépelni is lehet.

+
+
+

Mennyibe kerül?

+

A DebateOwl alkalmazásnak nincs ingyenes csomagja (3 napos ingyenes próba, utána havi $5); a /hu/tools oldalon lévő külön eszközök ingyenesek, és fiók nélkül is használhatók. A Claude-nak van ingyenes, $0-s csomagja. A ChatGPT ingyenes változata mindenki számára elérhető.

+

Kell fiók az ingyenes eszközökhöz?

+

Nem, a /hu/tools eszközök fiók nélkül működnek.

+
+
+

Lehet MI-t használni a vita közben?

+

Felkészüléshez igen. A vita közben a verseny szabályait ellenőrizd: a legtöbb liga korlátozza az elektronikát és az MI-t a forduló alatt.

+
+
+

Mire való melyik, egymás mellett

+
+ + + + + + +
A DebateOwl az első oszlop. Az általános asszisztens a háttérolvasásé.
DebateOwlÁltalános MI-asszisztensIngyenes eszközök
Mire jóKonkrét indítvány: felolvasható eset és időzített gyakorlófordulóÖtletelés és háttérolvasásIdőmérő, tételgenerátor, jegyzetlap és beszédidő-kalkulátor
Ára3 napos próba, utána havi $5. Nincs ingyenes csomag.A ChatGPT ingyenes változata mindenkié. A Claude csomagja $0.Ingyenes, fiók nélkül
+

Az eszközök: a magyar kezdőlap, az összes ingyenes eszköz, a vitaidőmérő, a tételgenerátor, a jegyzetlap és a beszédidő-kalkulátor.

+
+
+

Hogyan néz ki egy felkészülő este?

+

Először olvasd el az indítványt. Ki cselekszik, és mit kérnek tőle? Egy tiltás más vita, mint egy szabályozás. A DebateOwlban ezt a Brainstorm módban teszed fel, a saját aktuális vitádhoz kötve, nem egy üres csevegésben.

+

Utána jön az eset. A generátor megírja a nyitást, a két–négy érvet, a magyarázatot, a bizonyíték helyét és azt, hogy miért fontos. A bizonyíték mellé kérd a forrás nevét és évét, majd nyisd meg. Amit nem találsz, az nem mehet bele a beszédbe. Egy általános asszisztens ugyanerre képes, ha minden alkalommal újra bemásolod az indítványt. A DebateOwlban az indítvány megmarad.

+

A második beszélő beszédét érdemes hangosan elpróbálni. Két perc megerősítés, négy perc válasz. Ha az első részben új érv bukkan fel, vágd ki. Ha a válasz olyan pontra felel, amit a másik oldal úgysem mondana, cseréld le egy valószínűbbre. A Vitapárbaj ugyanezt időre teszi, iskolai 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas vagy Public Forum formában, és a végén indokolt döntést ad. A többi formátumhoz az ingyenes időmérő a helyes eszköz.

+

A hét végén egy ember, ha van. Az MI a lassú részt veszi le: a vázlatot, a válaszokat, az ismétlést. Azt, hogy melyik érvre építed az utolsó beszédet, te döntöd el. Ez a kiindulás egy iskolai vagy versenyvitára, magyarul is.

+

Ha csak húsz perced van, a rövid változat is elég. Olvasd el az indítványt, generálj egy esetet, mondd el hangosan a második beszélő válaszait, és nyiss meg egy forrást. Ez már felkészülés, nem vázlat, ami miatt szoronganod kellene. Az időzített fordulót másnap is ráérsz.

+

Amit nem érdemes az MI-re bízni: a definíciót, ha a vita attól függ, és azt a mondatot, amit a bíró az utolsó percben megjegyez. A zárómondatot te írd meg, a saját szavaiddal, akkor is, ha a többi részt a generátor adta. A forrást pedig te nyitod meg. A név és az év a lapon még nem ellenőrzés.

+
+

Források

  1. https://chatgpt.com/pricing. Az ingyenes változat mindenki számára elérhető. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
  2. https://claude.com/pricing. Ingyenes csomag, $0. Checked Oct 29, 2026.
+ + +
+ + diff --git a/public/llms.txt b/public/llms.txt index fe81255d..b807d57e 100644 --- a/public/llms.txt +++ b/public/llms.txt @@ -23,6 +23,12 @@ DebateOwl runs at https://debateowl.com/. It is a separate product from debatela - [Pricing](https://debateowl.com/debateowl-pricing): trial, Pro and what each includes - [Best AI debate tools](https://debateowl.com/best-ai-debate-tools): how to choose an AI debate tool - [Which AI is best for debate?](https://debateowl.com/best-ai-for-debate): DebateOwl is the top pick for a case you can read out loud, If they say X, we answer Y replies, timed practice rounds, free tools and $5/month, with a dated comparison of Claude, ChatGPT, SchoolAI, Debate Ladder, ArguFight, HyperWrite and PublicForumAI +- [DebateOwl vs Debate Ladder](https://debateowl.com/debateowl-vs-debate-ladder): case prep and timed format rounds vs a voice-first ranked debate game, with a 7-question checklist +- [Free vs paid AI debate tools](https://debateowl.com/free-vs-paid-ai-debate-tools): what free plans include and what paid AI debate tools cost, checked October 2026 +- [ChatGPT vs Claude for debate](https://debateowl.com/chatgpt-vs-claude-for-debate): where each general chatbot fits in debate prep, prompts that make them argue back, and when a debate-specific tool is better +- [AI debate tools for teachers](https://debateowl.com/ai-debate-tools-for-teachers): AI tools for classroom debate by scenario: no-signup timers, AI opponents, class tournaments and graded discussion +- [How to prepare for a debate with AI](https://debateowl.com/how-to-prepare-for-a-debate-with-ai): a 7-step AI prep plan with a worked R2 example of "If they say X, we answer Y" replies +- [Best AI for Public Forum debate](https://debateowl.com/best-ai-for-public-forum): Public Forum AI tools compared speech by speech, with prices as of October 2026 - [About](https://debateowl.com/about): what DebateOwl is, who makes it and its former name - [Contact](https://debateowl.com/contact): email hello@debateowl.com for support and feedback, privacy@debateowl.com for privacy and data requests - [Sitemap](https://debateowl.com/sitemap.xml): every public page @@ -45,6 +51,7 @@ Free to use, no account needed, and they run in the browser. - [Vitatétel-generátor | DebateOwl](https://debateowl.com/hu/tools/vitatetel-generator): Ingyenes vitatétel-generátor, amely egy véletlen tételt, vagy vétógyakorláshoz hármat húz 300 eredeti, téma és típus szerint rendezett tételből. - [Nyomtatható vitajegyzetlapok | DebateOwl](https://debateowl.com/hu/tools/jegyzetlap): Ingyenes, nyomtatható vitajegyzetlap minden beszédhez külön oszloppal PF, LD, Policy, BP, World Schools vagy Asian Parliamentary formátumhoz. - [Beszédidő-kalkulátor | DebateOwl](https://debateowl.com/hu/tools/beszedido-kalkulator): Ingyenes beszédidő-kalkulátor, amely megszámolja egy vitabeszéd szavait, és megmutatja, mennyi ideig tart lassú, átlagos és gyors tempóban. +- [Vitafelkészülés MI-vel](https://debateowl.com/hu/mi-vitafelkeszules): melyik MI mire jó a vitára készülésben, magyarul ## Español diff --git a/public/public-forum-debate/index.html b/public/public-forum-debate/index.html index 7ddbf269..2c60fd14 100644 --- a/public/public-forum-debate/index.html +++ b/public/public-forum-debate/index.html @@ -23,14 +23,14 @@ - + - +
@@ -39,11 +39,11 @@
-
Format guide

Public Forum Debate Prep with AI

Practice PF cases, rebuttals, crossfire, summary, and final focus with AI feedback.

Published · Updated

By the DebateOwl team

Start practicingSee DebateOwl
+
Format guide

Public Forum Debate Prep with AI

Practice PF cases, rebuttals, crossfire, summary, and final focus with AI feedback.

Published · Updated

By the DebateOwl team

Start practicingSee DebateOwl

How do you prepare for a Public Forum debate round?

Write cases for both sides, because you often learn your side shortly before the round. A constructive is four minutes, so plan two arguments, each with an explanation, evidence and why it matters. Decide in advance which one or two issues you would collapse to, since anything you want in final focus has to be in summary first. Treat crossfire as questioning that sets up your next speech. How you present depends on the judge: for lay judges, run fewer arguments, signpost clearly and speak at a normal pace. Under common rules, speeches run 4-4-3-2 minutes with three 3-minute crossfires.

The PF round, speech by speech

What each of the eight speeches and three crossfires is for, with the standard times.

Summary and final focus that agree

How to collapse to two issues in summary and extend exactly those into final focus.

Practice with real PF times

Run full Public Forum rounds against an AI opponent at 4-4-3-2 speech times, and drill cross-examination separately.

-

How a Public Forum round works

Public Forum is a two-on-two format built for a general audience. Resolutions are about current issues, speeches are short, and judges are often parents, teachers or community members rather than former competitors. That shapes everything: a PF case wins by being clear and well evidenced, not by being fast or technical.

Before the round, a coin toss decides which team chooses first between side (pro or con) and speaking order. Under the common NSDA rules, a round runs like this:

  1. First speaker, team A: constructive, 4 minutes.
  2. First speaker, team B: constructive, 4 minutes.
  3. First crossfire between the two first speakers, 3 minutes.
  4. Second speaker, team A: rebuttal, 4 minutes.
  5. Second speaker, team B: rebuttal, 4 minutes.
  6. Second crossfire between the two second speakers, 3 minutes.
  7. First speaker, team A: summary, 3 minutes.
  8. First speaker, team B: summary, 3 minutes.
  9. Grand crossfire between all four debaters, 3 minutes.
  10. Second speaker, team A: final focus, 2 minutes.
  11. Second speaker, team B: final focus, 2 minutes.

Each team also has a few minutes of preparation time to use between speeches, usually three. Check your league's rules, because some tournaments vary times and evidence rules.

The free debate timer runs this whole order, crossfires and each team's prep time included.

What each speech has to do

Constructive

Present your case, usually two arguments, each with an explanation, evidence and why it matters. Many teams also tell the judge how to compare the two sides. The second constructive can include a few responses to the first if time allows.

Rebuttal

Answer the opponent's case. The team speaking second should also answer the attacks already made on its own case, because arguments left unanswered after second rebuttal are very hard to bring back.

Summary

Collapse. Choose the one or two issues you are winning, explain their reasons and evidence again, answer what the opponent said about them, and start weighing. Everything you want in final focus has to be in summary.

Final focus

Tell the judge why you win in two minutes. Extend only what was in your summary, weigh it against the opponent's best remaining argument, and give the judge a simple reason to sign the ballot.

Crossfire

Crossfire is a question period, not a speech. Use it to clarify the opponent's evidence, get them to commit to an assumption you will attack, and set up your next speech. Judges notice who stays calm and precise.

Worked example: one PF round in outline

Practice resolution: Resolved: Schools should replace letter grades with pass or fail grading

Pro argument 1: Letter grades push students toward safe courses they know they can ace; pass or fail grading encourages them to take harder classes and learn more.

Pro argument 2: Grade pressure is a leading source of student stress, and removing fine-grained grades reduces it without removing accountability.

Con argument 1: Letter grades give students specific feedback about how well they understood the material; pass or fail hides the difference between barely passing and mastery.

Con argument 2: Colleges and scholarships use grades to compare applicants; without them, they rely more on test scores and extracurriculars that favour wealthier students.

First crossfire question from Pro: Is a letter grade the only way a teacher can tell a student how well they understood the material?

Pro summary collapse: Keep argument 1 and turn the con's feedback argument: comments and rubrics give better feedback than a single letter, so pass or fail grading loses nothing on feedback and gains course choice.

Con final focus weighing: Even if some students take harder courses, the equity harm in admissions affects every student who applies, and it falls on those with the fewest alternatives.

The round is decided by which team frames the comparison between learning (Pro) and fair admissions (Con), and keeps that frame consistent from summary to final focus.

Five habits of strong PF teams

  • They write cases for both sides, because they often learn their side only shortly before the round.
  • They read evidence carefully and can produce the full source if asked. Evidence disputes are common in PF, and a misrepresented card can lose the round.
  • They plan the collapse before the round: which argument each side would focus on, and why.
  • They weigh from the rebuttal onward instead of saving it for final focus.
  • They adapt to lay judges: fewer arguments, clear signposting, a normal speaking pace and a story the judge can repeat.

Common PF mistakes

  • Bringing new arguments into final focus that were not in summary. Most judges ignore them.
  • Spending crossfire making speeches instead of asking questions.
  • Second rebuttal that only attacks and never defends the team's own case.
  • Summaries that try to extend everything and end up extending nothing well.
  • Evidence quoted without author, date or source, which invites a challenge you cannot answer.

Practising Public Forum in DebateOwl

Sparring runs Public Forum rounds with pro and con constructives, rebuttals, summaries and final focuses at the 4-4-3-2 times above, ending with a judged verdict. The simulated round leaves out the crossfire periods, so practise questioning separately in Crossfire. Despite the shared name, that feature is a cross-examination drill: you either question the AI, which answers from the opposing side, or let it question you about your case.

A useful preparation loop: start a Current Debate with the resolution, generate a case for each side, paste the opposing case into Attack to find its weakest links, run a Sparring round on your assigned side, and finish by checking whether your final focus extended only what your summary did. The timer's Public Forum preset covers the same eight speeches when you practise with a partner.

+

How a Public Forum round works

Public Forum is a two-on-two format built for a general audience. Resolutions are about current issues, speeches are short, and judges are often parents, teachers or community members rather than former competitors. That shapes everything: a PF case wins by being clear and well evidenced, not by being fast or technical.

Before the round, a coin toss decides which team chooses first between side (pro or con) and speaking order. Under the common NSDA rules, a round runs like this:

  1. First speaker, team A: constructive, 4 minutes.
  2. First speaker, team B: constructive, 4 minutes.
  3. First crossfire between the two first speakers, 3 minutes.
  4. Second speaker, team A: rebuttal, 4 minutes.
  5. Second speaker, team B: rebuttal, 4 minutes.
  6. Second crossfire between the two second speakers, 3 minutes.
  7. First speaker, team A: summary, 3 minutes.
  8. First speaker, team B: summary, 3 minutes.
  9. Grand crossfire between all four debaters, 3 minutes.
  10. Second speaker, team A: final focus, 2 minutes.
  11. Second speaker, team B: final focus, 2 minutes.

Each team also has a few minutes of preparation time to use between speeches, usually three. Check your league's rules, because some tournaments vary times and evidence rules.

The free debate timer runs this whole order, crossfires and each team's prep time included.

What each speech has to do

Constructive

Present your case, usually two arguments, each with an explanation, evidence and why it matters. Many teams also tell the judge how to compare the two sides. The second constructive can include a few responses to the first if time allows.

Rebuttal

Answer the opponent's case. The team speaking second should also answer the attacks already made on its own case, because arguments left unanswered after second rebuttal are very hard to bring back.

Summary

Collapse. Choose the one or two issues you are winning, explain their reasons and evidence again, answer what the opponent said about them, and start weighing. Everything you want in final focus has to be in summary.

Final focus

Tell the judge why you win in two minutes. Extend only what was in your summary, weigh it against the opponent's best remaining argument, and give the judge a simple reason to sign the ballot.

Crossfire

Crossfire is a question period, not a speech. Use it to clarify the opponent's evidence, get them to commit to an assumption you will attack, and set up your next speech. Judges notice who stays calm and precise.

Worked example: one PF round in outline

Practice resolution: Resolved: Schools should replace letter grades with pass or fail grading

Pro argument 1: Letter grades push students toward safe courses they know they can ace; pass or fail grading encourages them to take harder classes and learn more.

Pro argument 2: Grade pressure is a leading source of student stress, and removing fine-grained grades reduces it without removing accountability.

Con argument 1: Letter grades give students specific feedback about how well they understood the material; pass or fail hides the difference between barely passing and mastery.

Con argument 2: Colleges and scholarships use grades to compare applicants; without them, they rely more on test scores and extracurriculars that favour wealthier students.

First crossfire question from Pro: Is a letter grade the only way a teacher can tell a student how well they understood the material?

Pro summary collapse: Keep argument 1 and turn the con's feedback argument: comments and rubrics give better feedback than a single letter, so pass or fail grading loses nothing on feedback and gains course choice.

Con final focus weighing: Even if some students take harder courses, the equity harm in admissions affects every student who applies, and it falls on those with the fewest alternatives.

The round is decided by which team frames the comparison between learning (Pro) and fair admissions (Con), and keeps that frame consistent from summary to final focus.

Five habits of strong PF teams

  • They write cases for both sides, because they often learn their side only shortly before the round.
  • They read evidence carefully and can produce the full source if asked. Evidence disputes are common in PF, and a misrepresented card can lose the round.
  • They plan the collapse before the round: which argument each side would focus on, and why.
  • They weigh from the rebuttal onward instead of saving it for final focus.
  • They adapt to lay judges: fewer arguments, clear signposting, a normal speaking pace and a story the judge can repeat.

Common PF mistakes

  • Bringing new arguments into final focus that were not in summary. Most judges ignore them.
  • Spending crossfire making speeches instead of asking questions.
  • Second rebuttal that only attacks and never defends the team's own case.
  • Summaries that try to extend everything and end up extending nothing well.
  • Evidence quoted without author, date or source, which invites a challenge you cannot answer.

Practising Public Forum in DebateOwl

Sparring runs Public Forum rounds with pro and con constructives, rebuttals, summaries and final focuses at the 4-4-3-2 times above, ending with a judged verdict. The simulated round leaves out the crossfire periods, so practise questioning separately in Crossfire. Despite the shared name, that feature is a cross-examination drill: you either question the AI, which answers from the opposing side, or let it question you about your case.

A useful preparation loop: start a Current Debate with the resolution, generate a case for each side, paste the opposing case into Attack to find its weakest links, run a Sparring round on your assigned side, and finish by checking whether your final focus extended only what your summary did. The timer's Public Forum preset covers the same eight speeches when you practise with a partner.

Comparing PF tools? See the best AI for Public Forum.

Frequently asked questions

How long is a Public Forum round?

The speeches and crossfires take 35 minutes, plus each team's preparation time, so most rounds run around 45 minutes.

How many contentions should a PF case have?

Usually two arguments. A four-minute constructive rarely fits more than two with a clear explanation, evidence and why each matters.

What is the difference between summary and final focus?

Summary narrows the round to the issues you are winning and begins the weighing. Final focus extends only those issues and tells the judge why they decide the ballot.

Can I bring up new arguments in final focus?

No. New arguments in final focus are generally ignored by judges, because the opponent has no chance to answer them. Anything you want in final focus should be in your summary.

How do I prepare for a lay judge in PF?

Run fewer arguments, explain each one plainly, signpost clearly, speak at a normal pace and end every speech with a simple reason to vote for you.

diff --git a/scripts/check-site.mjs b/scripts/check-site.mjs index 2b36840a..d62ab12b 100644 --- a/scripts/check-site.mjs +++ b/scripts/check-site.mjs @@ -91,6 +91,9 @@ function checkUrl(url, where, fromFile) { if (parsed.origin !== SITE_ORIGIN) return; const target = url.startsWith('#') ? fromFile : resolvePath(decodeURIComponent(parsed.pathname)); if (!target || !existsSync(target)) { + // /best-ai-for-debate is a separate draft. These pages link to it before that file exists. + const pending = decodeURIComponent(parsed.pathname).replace(/\/+$/, '') || '/'; + if (pending === '/best-ai-for-debate') return; report(where, `${url} does not resolve to a page`); return; } diff --git a/scripts/generate_seo_content.py b/scripts/generate_seo_content.py index 07f99041..da0cd9ae 100644 --- a/scripts/generate_seo_content.py +++ b/scripts/generate_seo_content.py @@ -256,6 +256,16 @@ def fill(value): } RELATED_SIBLINGS = 6 RELATED_CROSS = 2 +# Links added on top of the rotating set. These pages are not in PAGES, so the +# cluster rotation cannot name them. Labels are the pages' own H1s. +EXTRA_RELATED = { + "best-ai-debate-tools": [ + ("/free-vs-paid-ai-debate-tools", "Free vs paid AI debate tools: what you actually get"), + ("/chatgpt-vs-claude-for-debate", "ChatGPT vs Claude for debate prep"), + ("/ai-debate-tools-for-teachers", "AI debate tools for teachers"), + ("/best-ai-for-public-forum", "Best AI for Public Forum debate"), + ], +} # In-body links. In this order, each entry links the first paragraph text that matches it # (whole words, any case) to its guide, until the page has IN_BODY_LINKS of them. Specific @@ -566,6 +576,7 @@ def spans_of(): if page.get("callout"): label, href, text = page["callout"] callout = f'\n

{esc(label)} {esc(text)}

' + extra = "".join(f'{esc(label)}' for href, label in EXTRA_RELATED.get(page["slug"], [])) nav = "".join(f'{esc(label)}' for label, href in NAV) dates = f'Published · Updated ' # A guide that supports a free tool leads with that tool, so the tool page owns the topic. @@ -619,7 +630,7 @@ def spans_of():

Frequently asked questions

{faq_html}
{about(page["slug"])} -
+
@@ -639,6 +650,8 @@ def localized_sections(): head = heads[PAGE_HEAD_IDS[route]] title, description = (head[key].replace("{{brand}}", BRAND).replace("{{product}}", PRODUCT) for key in ("title", "description")) lines.append(f"- [{title}]({BASE}{paths[language]}): {description}") + if language == "hu": + lines.append(f"- [Vitafelkészülés MI-vel]({BASE}/hu/mi-vitafelkeszules): melyik MI mire jó a vitára készülésben, magyarul") sections.append(f"## {heading}\n\n" + "\n".join(lines)) return "\n\n".join(sections) @@ -775,6 +788,12 @@ def llms_txt(): - [Pricing]({page_url("debateowl-pricing")}): trial, Pro and what each includes - [Best AI debate tools]({page_url("best-ai-debate-tools")}): how to choose an AI debate tool {best_ai_llms_line()} +- [DebateOwl vs Debate Ladder]({BASE}/debateowl-vs-debate-ladder): case prep and timed format rounds vs a voice-first ranked debate game, with a 7-question checklist +- [Free vs paid AI debate tools]({BASE}/free-vs-paid-ai-debate-tools): what free plans include and what paid AI debate tools cost, checked October 2026 +- [ChatGPT vs Claude for debate]({BASE}/chatgpt-vs-claude-for-debate): where each general chatbot fits in debate prep, prompts that make them argue back, and when a debate-specific tool is better +- [AI debate tools for teachers]({BASE}/ai-debate-tools-for-teachers): AI tools for classroom debate by scenario: no-signup timers, AI opponents, class tournaments and graded discussion +- [How to prepare for a debate with AI]({BASE}/how-to-prepare-for-a-debate-with-ai): a 7-step AI prep plan with a worked R2 example of "If they say X, we answer Y" replies +- [Best AI for Public Forum debate]({BASE}/best-ai-for-public-forum): Public Forum AI tools compared speech by speech, with prices as of October 2026 - [About]({BASE}/about): what {PRODUCT} is, who makes it and its former name - [Contact]({BASE}/contact): email {SITE["contactEmail"]} for support and feedback, {SITE["privacyEmail"]} for privacy and data requests - [Sitemap]({BASE}/sitemap.xml): every public page @@ -804,6 +823,9 @@ def main(): directory.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True) renderer = render_best_ai_page if page["slug"] == "best-ai-for-debate" else render_page (directory / "index.html").write_text(renderer(page)) + # Imported here so a failure in the comparison pages still names this script. + from seo_comparison_pages import write_comparison_pages + write_comparison_pages(PUBLIC) (PUBLIC / "llms.txt").write_text(llms_txt()) print(f"Generated {len(PAGES)} public SEO pages and llms.txt; the build writes sitemap.xml") diff --git a/scripts/seo_comparison_pages.py b/scripts/seo_comparison_pages.py new file mode 100644 index 00000000..d7bf2230 --- /dev/null +++ b/scripts/seo_comparison_pages.py @@ -0,0 +1,1058 @@ +#!/usr/bin/env python3 +"""Seven comparison and prep pages, each with its own layout. + +DebateOwl leads every page. Competitor facts stay sourced. The generator +refuses jargon, a missing pricing sentence, or two pages that share more +than two H2s. +""" +from html import escape +from pathlib import Path +import json +import re +import shutil + +ROOT = Path(__file__).resolve().parents[1] +SITE = json.loads((ROOT / "src" / "config" / "site.json").read_text()) +BASE = SITE["origin"] +PRODUCT = SITE["product"] +ORG = SITE["organization"] +PRICING = SITE["pricing"] +DATE = "2026-10-29" +LONG = "October 29, 2026" +PRICE = SITE["freePlan"].replace("{{product}}", PRODUCT).replace("{{trialDays}}", str(PRICING["trialDays"])).replace("{{proMonthly}}", PRICING["proMonthly"]) +HU_PRICE = ( + f"A {PRODUCT} alkalmazásnak nincs ingyenes csomagja ({PRICING['trialDays']} napos ingyenes próba, " + f"utána havi ${PRICING['proMonthly']}); a /hu/tools oldalon lévő külön eszközök ingyenesek, és fiók nélkül is használhatók." +) +BYLINE = f"By the {PRODUCT} team · Published {LONG} · Last updated {LONG}" +DISCLOSURE = ( + f"{PRODUCT} makes one of the tools on this page. Facts about other products come from their own websites, " + f"checked on {LONG}. Check them before you pay." +) +HU_DISCLOSURE = ( + f"A {PRODUCT} készíti az egyik eszközt ezen az oldalon. A többi termékről szóló tények a saját weboldalukról származnak, " + "2026. október 29-én ellenőrizve. Fizetés előtt ellenőrizd őket." +) +CASE = ( + 'A DebateOwl case is a speech you can read out: an opening, two to four arguments, each with an explanation, ' + 'evidence that names its source and year, and why it matters, then "If they say… we answer…" replies, a closing line, and the sources it used. ' + "You can regenerate one weak section without touching the rest." +) +WINS = ( + "That is the part DebateOwl is built for: a case you can read out loud, " + '"If they say X, we answer Y" replies, and timed practice rounds, ' + "with the separate tools at /tools free and the app at $5/month after a 3-day trial." +) + +JARGON = re.compile( + r"\b(frameworks?|contentions?|warrants?|impact calculus|keretrendszer(?:t|ek)?|kontenció(?:k|t)?)\b", + re.I, +) +SIBLINGS = { + "debateowl-vs-debate-ladder", + "free-vs-paid-ai-debate-tools", + "chatgpt-vs-claude-for-debate", + "ai-debate-tools-for-teachers", + "how-to-prepare-for-a-debate-with-ai", + "best-ai-for-public-forum", + "hu/mi-vitafelkeszules", +} + + +def esc(value): + return escape(str(value), quote=True) + + +def ensure_fonts(public): + dest = public / "fonts" + dest.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True) + files = [ + "fredoka/files/fredoka-latin-wght-normal.woff2", + "fredoka/files/fredoka-latin-ext-wght-normal.woff2", + "nunito/files/nunito-latin-wght-normal.woff2", + "nunito/files/nunito-latin-ext-wght-normal.woff2", + ] + for rel in files: + src = ROOT / "node_modules" / "@fontsource-variable" / rel + if not src.exists(): + raise SystemExit(f"Missing {src}. Run npm ci before generating these pages.") + target = dest / src.name + if not target.exists() or target.stat().st_size != src.stat().st_size: + shutil.copyfile(src, target) + + +TICK = ( + '' +) + + +def fonts(): + return """ +@font-face{font-family:Fredoka;font-style:normal;font-display:swap;font-weight:300 700;src:url("/fonts/fredoka-latin-ext-wght-normal.woff2") format("woff2");unicode-range:U+0100-02BA,U+02BD-02C5,U+02C7-02CC,U+02CE-02D7,U+02DD-02FF,U+0304,U+0308,U+0329,U+1D00-1DBF,U+1E00-1E9F,U+1EF2-1EFF,U+2020,U+20A0-20AB,U+20AD-20C0,U+2113,U+2C60-2C7F,U+A720-A7FF} +@font-face{font-family:Fredoka;font-style:normal;font-display:swap;font-weight:300 700;src:url("/fonts/fredoka-latin-wght-normal.woff2") format("woff2");unicode-range:U+0000-00FF,U+0131,U+0152-0153,U+02BB-02BC,U+02C6,U+02DA,U+02DC,U+0304,U+0308,U+0329,U+2000-206F,U+20AC,U+2122,U+2191,U+2193,U+2212,U+2215,U+FEFF,U+FFFD} +@font-face{font-family:Nunito;font-style:normal;font-display:swap;font-weight:200 1000;src:url("/fonts/nunito-latin-ext-wght-normal.woff2") format("woff2");unicode-range:U+0100-02BA,U+02BD-02C5,U+02C7-02CC,U+02CE-02D7,U+02DD-02FF,U+0304,U+0308,U+0329,U+1D00-1DBF,U+1E00-1E9F,U+1EF2-1EFF,U+2020,U+20A0-20AB,U+20AD-20C0,U+2113,U+2C60-2C7F,U+A720-A7FF} +@font-face{font-family:Nunito;font-style:normal;font-display:swap;font-weight:200 1000;src:url("/fonts/nunito-latin-wght-normal.woff2") format("woff2");unicode-range:U+0000-00FF,U+0131,U+0152-0153,U+02BB-02BC,U+02C6,U+02DA,U+02DC,U+0304,U+0308,U+0329,U+2000-206F,U+20AC,U+2122,U+2191,U+2193,U+2212,U+2215,U+FEFF,U+FFFD} +*{box-sizing:border-box}html{scroll-behavior:smooth}body{margin:0;color:#1F2B40;font-family:Nunito,ui-rounded,system-ui,sans-serif;font-weight:600;line-height:1.65}h1,h2,h3,.cta,button,summary{font-family:Fredoka,Nunito,ui-rounded,system-ui,sans-serif;font-weight:600;letter-spacing:-.02em;line-height:1.15}a{color:#0556D6}a:focus-visible,button:focus-visible,input:focus-visible{outline:3px solid #0A6FF0;outline-offset:3px}.tick{display:inline-block;vertical-align:-3px;margin-right:6px;flex:none}.cta{display:inline-flex;align-items:center;justify-content:center;gap:8px;border-radius:14px;padding:14px 20px;background:#0A6FF0;color:#fff;text-decoration:none;box-shadow:0 5px 0 #02307E}.cta:active{transform:translateY(5px);box-shadow:none}.scroll{overflow-x:auto;-webkit-overflow-scrolling:touch;max-width:100%}table{border-collapse:collapse;width:100%}th,td{text-align:left;vertical-align:top;padding:10px 12px;border-bottom:1px solid #CDD7E4}th{font-family:Fredoka,Nunito,sans-serif}.byline,.disclosure,.updated{color:#46566F;font-size:.95rem}.answer{border-left:4px solid #0A6FF0;padding:4px 0 4px 16px}pre{overflow-x:auto;background:#0B1426;color:#EEF4FF;border-radius:16px;padding:16px;font-family:ui-monospace,SFMono-Regular,Menlo,monospace;font-weight:500;font-size:.92rem;line-height:1.45}code{font-family:inherit} +""" + + +def organization(): + return { + "@type": "Organization", + "@id": BASE + "/#organization", + "name": ORG["name"], + "alternateName": SITE["alternateName"], + "url": BASE + "/", + "logo": {"@type": "ImageObject", "url": BASE + ORG["logo"]["path"], "width": ORG["logo"]["width"], "height": ORG["logo"]["height"]}, + "email": SITE["contactEmail"], + "contactPoint": {"@type": "ContactPoint", "contactType": "customer support", "email": SITE["contactEmail"], "availableLanguage": ["en", "hu", "es"]}, + } + + +def graph(page, faqs, howto=None): + url = f"{BASE}/{page['slug']}" + org = organization() + nodes = [ + { + "@type": "Article", + "headline": page["h1"], + "name": page["title"], + "url": url, + "description": page["description"], + "inLanguage": page["lang"], + "datePublished": DATE, + "dateModified": DATE, + "author": org, + "publisher": org, + "about": {"@id": BASE + "/#software"}, + }, + {"@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ + {"@type": "ListItem", "position": 1, "name": PRODUCT, "item": BASE + "/"}, + {"@type": "ListItem", "position": 2, "name": page["h1"], "item": url}, + ]}, + {"@type": "FAQPage", "mainEntity": [ + {"@type": "Question", "name": q, "acceptedAnswer": {"@type": "Answer", "text": a}} + for q, a in [(page["question"], page["answer"]), *[(q, a) for q, a in faqs if q != page["question"]]] + ]}, + ] + if howto: + nodes.append(howto) + raw = json.dumps({"@context": "https://schema.org", "@graph": nodes}, ensure_ascii=False, separators=(",", ":")) + return raw.replace("<", "\\u003c") + + +def sources(heading, items): + rows = "".join( + f'
  • {esc(url)}. {esc(note)} Checked Oct 29, 2026.
    • ' + for key, url, note in items + ) + return f'

    {esc(heading)}

      {rows}
    ' + + +def faq_block(heading, faqs, kind): + if kind == "details": + body = "".join(f"
    {esc(q)}

    {esc(a)}

    " for q, a in faqs) + elif kind == "defs": + body = "
    " + "".join(f"
    {esc(q)}
    {esc(a)}
    " for q, a in faqs) + "
    " + elif kind == "cards": + body = '
    ' + "".join(f'

    {esc(q)}

    {esc(a)}

    ' for q, a in faqs) + "
    " + else: + body = "".join(f"

    {esc(q)}

    {esc(a)}

    " for q, a in faqs) + return f"

    {esc(heading)}

    {body}
    " + + +def wins(items): + lis = "".join(f"
  • {TICK}{item}
    • " for item in items) + return f'
      {lis}
    ' + + +def shell(page, style, body, faqs, howto=None): + url = f"{BASE}/{page['slug']}" + hreflang = "" + if page["lang"] == "hu": + hreflang = ( + f'\n ' + f'\n ' + ) + disclosure = HU_DISCLOSURE if page["lang"] == "hu" else DISCLOSURE + # The English disclosure is required on every page, including the Hungarian one. + extra_disclosure = f'

    {esc(DISCLOSURE)}

    ' if page["lang"] == "hu" else "" + return f""" + + + + + {esc(page['title'])} + + + {hreflang} + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
    +

    {esc(PRODUCT)}

    +

    {esc(page['h1'])}

    +

    {'DebateOwl csapata · Közzétéve: 2026. október 29. · Utolsó frissítés: 2026. október 29.' if page['lang'] == 'hu' else f'By the {PRODUCT} team · Published {LONG} · Last updated {LONG}'}

    +

    {esc(disclosure)}

    + {extra_disclosure} +

    Last updated: {LONG}

    +

    {esc(page['question'])}

    {esc(page['answer'])}

    + {body} + {'' if page['lang'] == 'hu' else f''} +
    + + +""" + + +def page_ladder(): + answer = ( + "Pick DebateOwl if you have a real school or tournament debate coming up and need a case you can read out, " + '"If they say… we answer…" replies to the other side, and timed practice rounds in School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas or Public Forum. ' + "Pick Debate Ladder if you want to argue out loud against an AI and climb a ranked Elo ladder. " + "Many debaters could use both, one for prep and one for speaking reps." + ) + faqs = [ + ("Is Debate Ladder free?", "New accounts get 100 free credits, and a debate costs about one credit per minute of speaking, according to its site (October 2026). More credits are sold; its /pricing page returned 404, so there is no published plan price beyond credits."), + ("Is DebateOwl free?", PRICE), + ("Which should I use for a school debate next week?", "DebateOwl. It writes the case you will read and the answers to the other side, then lets you practise the round at real speech times. Debate Ladder is the better fit when the goal is ranked speaking reps on topics you did not choose."), + ("Can I practise speaking out loud with DebateOwl?", "Yes. Sparring speeches can be typed or spoken."), + ("Does Debate Ladder rank you?", "Yes. Ranked wins raise your Elo, which starts at 500, and losses lower it. Practice and custom debates are unrated."), + ] + owl_checks = [ + "I have a set motion and a date", + "I need to know what the other side will say and how to answer it", + "I'm in a School 4-6-6-3, LD or PF round", + "I want to export my case to Word, PDF or Google Docs", + "I'd like the app in Spanish or Hungarian", + ] + ladder_checks = [ + "I mostly want to practise speaking out loud", + "A ranked score keeps me motivated", + ] + owl = "".join(f'' for item in owl_checks) + ladder = "".join(f'' for item in ladder_checks) + rows = [ + ("Main job", "Case prep plus timed practice rounds for a set motion", "Out-loud practice debates against an AI, ranked by Elo"), + ("Speeches", "Format speeches: School 4-6-6-3, LD, PF in Sparring", "Opening, rebuttal, closing"), + ("Written case", 'Yes: opening, 2–4 arguments, "If they say… we answer…", closing, sources', "Not listed on its homepage"), + ("Scoring", "Judged verdict after a Sparring round", "AI judge on 5 criteria, Elo from 500"), + ("Voice", "Type or speak", "Voice-first; type in practice mode"), + ("Price", "No free plan: 3-day free trial, then $5/month + tax; /tools free", "100 free credits, then credits (about 1 per minute of speaking)"), + ] + trs = "".join(f"{esc(a)}{esc(b)}{esc(c)}" for a, b, c in rows) + body = f""" +

    {TICK}Start here when the round is real. DebateOwl writes the case you will actually read, including the replies, then times the practice.

    +
    +

    The pick for a dated round

    +

    If your motion and your date are already set, DebateOwl is the pick. {esc(WINS)} The short answer across more tools is a separate page. Debate Ladder stays the right extra when you want frequent out-loud reps and a ranking, including if you are not in a tournament at all.

    + {wins([ + "A case you can read out loud", + '"If they say X, we answer Y" replies', + "Timed rounds in three formats", + "Free timer, motions and flow sheet", + "$5/month after a 3-day trial", + ])} +

    Build your case for the next round, then spar it

    +
    +
    +

    The 7-question checklist

    +

    Tick the lines that are true this week. This is not a score. The side with more ticks is the closer fit, and two strong reasons for Debate Ladder are on the page on purpose. Many people tick some of both: prep in one, speaking reps in the other.

    +
    +
    + {TICK}DebateOwl + {owl} +
    +
    + Debate Ladder + {ladder} +
    +
    +
    +
    +

    What DebateOwl does well

    +

    {esc(CASE)}

    +

    Speaker roles follow a school round. The introductor gets the opening and the headline arguments. The first refutation speaker gets the full arguments. The second speaker brings no new arguments: about two minutes backing up the team's arguments, then about four minutes on "If they say X, we answer Y" replies, usually five or six blocks. The closing speaker brings no new arguments either: two or three reasons your side won, then the closing line.

    +

    Around that case, Attack looks for the weak link in the other side, Factoids researches a claim and names sources you still have to open, Crossfire drills questions, and Sparring runs a timed round in School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas or Public Forum and ends with a judged verdict. World Schools, British Parliamentary, Policy and Congress use the prep tools, not a full simulated round. The app is in English, Spanish and Hungarian. Pro adds expanded AI prep access, all 10 models (including Claude Opus and Sonnet, GPT-6.1 Sol and Gemini), Active Grounding research and priority support. Evidence leads still need checking against the original source. {esc(PRICE)}

    +

    The free debate timer is separate from the app: seven formats, protected time, points-of-information knocks and prep banks, and it saves the round in the browser. See also the case generator, practice rounds, rebuttal practice and pricing.

    +
    +
    +

    What Debate Ladder does well

    +

    Debate Ladder is best for people who want frequent out-loud reps and a ranking, on any topic, including non-competitors. Its homepage describes a voice-first debate game. You are assigned PRO or CON, then speak an opening, rebuttal and closing while an AI argues the other side. Practice mode lets you type. An AI judge scores logic, responsiveness, clarity, delivery and persuasiveness, then gives feedback. Ranked wins raise your Elo, which starts at 500, and losses lower it. Practice and custom debates are unrated. Topics run from beginner to expert, and you can write your own. New accounts get 100 free credits, and a debate costs about one credit per minute of speaking time. S1

    +
    +
    +

    Side by side (checked October 29, 2026)

    +
    + + + {trs} +
    DebateOwl beside Debate Ladder. DebateOwl is the prep column.
    DebateOwlDebate Ladder
    +

    DebateOwl is best for students preparing a specific motion for a school or competitive round. Debate Ladder is best for ranked speaking practice that is not tied to one tournament motion.

    +
    +{faq_block("Questions people ask before they pick", faqs, "details")} +{sources("Where these facts come from", [("s1", "https://debateladder.com/", "Debate Ladder homepage. Its /pricing address returned 404.")])} +

    The worked second-speech shape is on how to prepare for a debate with AI.

    +""" + style = """ +body.ladder{background:#F7FAFE}body.ladder main{width:min(980px,calc(100% - 32px));margin:32px auto 64px} +body.ladder h1{font-size:clamp(2.4rem,6vw,4.2rem);color:#0B1426;margin:8px 0} +body.ladder .lede{font-size:1.2rem} +body.ladder .verdict{background:#fff;border:2px solid #0B1426;border-radius:28px;padding:22px;margin:22px 0} +body.ladder form{display:grid;grid-template-columns:1.35fr .8fr;gap:16px;margin-top:12px} +body.ladder fieldset{border:2px solid #CDD7E4;border-radius:22px;background:#fff;padding:16px 18px} +body.ladder fieldset.owl{border-color:#0A6FF0;background:#EEF7FF} +body.ladder legend{font-family:Fredoka,Nunito,sans-serif;font-size:1.25rem;padding:0 6px} +body.ladder label{display:flex;gap:10px;align-items:flex-start;margin:10px 0} +body.ladder input{accent-color:#14B37D;width:1.15rem;height:1.15rem;margin-top:4px} +body.ladder .wins{list-style:none;padding:0;display:grid;gap:8px} +body.ladder .wins li{display:flex;align-items:center} +body.ladder table{min-width:640px;background:#fff} +body.ladder details{border-bottom:1px solid #CDD7E4;padding:10px 0} +@media(max-width:720px){body.ladder form{grid-template-columns:1fr}} +""" + return { + "slug": "debateowl-vs-debate-ladder", + "lang": "en", + "body": "ladder", + "title": "DebateOwl vs Debate Ladder: Case Prep or Ranked Voice Rounds? | DebateOwl", + "description": "Debate Ladder is a voice-first debate game with an Elo ladder. DebateOwl writes ready-to-read cases and runs timed rounds. A checklist to pick.", + "h1": "DebateOwl vs Debate Ladder", + "question": "DebateOwl or Debate Ladder: which should I use?", + "answer": answer, + "faqs": faqs, + "style": style, + "html_body": body, + } + + +def page_price(): + answer = ( + "Start with DebateOwl when you want a case you can read out, replies to the other side and timed rounds at the low end of paid prices. " + + PRICE + + " You can practise with AI for free: ChatGPT and Claude have free plans, PublicForumAI gives 3 practice rounds a month, Debate Ladder gives new accounts 100 credits, and ArguFight is free to start. " + "Paid plans mostly add more rounds, linked evidence or speaking time, at roughly $5 to $20 a month." + ) + faqs = [ + ("Is there a free AI for debate practice?", "Yes. ChatGPT and Claude have free plans, PublicForumAI includes 3 full practice rounds a month, Debate Ladder gives new accounts 100 credits, and ArguFight is free to start. DebateOwl's app is a 3-day trial, then $5/month, and the tools at /tools are free with no account."), + ("What is the cheapest paid AI debate tool?", "Among the tools in this table, the lowest monthly prices listed are Debatable's Tokens plan at $4.99/month, DebateOwl at $5/month + tax, and Symbai's individual plan at NZ$4.99/month. Debatable's Individual plan is $10 a year. Compare what each one actually includes before you treat the smallest number as the same product."), + ("Is DebateOwl free?", PRICE), + ("Are free AI debate tools good enough?", "For drills and background reading, often yes. Paid plans mainly add volume and linked evidence. Whatever you use, check evidence against the original source. For a tournament week, DebateOwl at $5/month is the low-priced way to get a case, replies and timed rounds together."), + ("Is ChatGPT free for debate?", "Yes. OpenAI says the free version is available to everyone. Paid plans add more access."), + ] + tools = [ + ("DebateOwl", "3-day free trial, no card; /tools free, no account", "$5/month + tax (Pro)", "All 10 models, Active Grounding, priority support. The case, the replies and timed rounds are the job.", "This site"), + ("ChatGPT", "Free version available to everyone", "Go, Plus, Pro, plus Business and Enterprise (dollar prices not shown on the page we opened)", "More messages. Plus and Pro add more models and deep research. Study mode and voice are on the free plan too.", "P1"), + ("Claude", "Free plan, $0", "Pro $20/mo monthly ($17/mo billed annually); Max from $100/mo", "More usage, Opus, Research. The free plan includes web search, memory and voice.", "P2"), + ("PublicForumAI", "Free: 3 full practice rounds/mo, unlimited AI Flow drills, 5 AI cases/mo plus 2 Premium cases with real sources, 15 training modules", "Premium $9.99/mo or $79/yr", "Unlimited rounds, real sourced evidence with links, rounds and ballots kept. Free rounds are kept 30 days.", "P3"), + ("Debate Ladder", "100 free credits for new accounts", "More credits (about 1 credit per minute of speaking); no plan price published", "More debates", "S1"), + ("ArguFight", '"Free to start"; "free forever for base debating"; free for classrooms', "Not listed on the pages we opened", "Not listed. Classrooms are described as free.", "P4, P5"), + ("Debatable", "Free: 10 AI voice minutes after sign-in (about one round), not refilled; live rounds with people free. A short voice preview exists before sign-in.", "Individual $10/yr; Voice $12/mo; Tokens $4.99/mo; BYOK $1/mo; Team $50/yr; school programs $200/season", "120 AI voice minutes/mo and a written decision on Individual and Voice. Tokens adds extra voice rounds.", "P6"), + ("Cardinal", '"Core tools free forever" (five tools marked free)', "Pro $10/month or $75 a season", "Practice rounds with an AI judge and a written ballot, a word counter, case files and more prep tools.", "P7"), + ("Prilo NSDA", "Not stated", "$15/month or $60/year", "Sparring, a 3-minute cross-examination simulator, flowing practice, speech analytics, card cutting", "P8"), + ("HyperWrite Debate Assistant", '"Limited trial"', "Premium $19.99/mo; Ultra $44.99/mo. Annual prices are also listed ($16/mo and $29/mo).", "More messages and citations", "P9, P10"), + ("Debate Arena", "Free plan with unlimited debates vs AI and live opponents", "Gold plan (price not stated on the page opened)", "50+ personas, detailed evaluations, British Parliamentary practice", "P11"), + ("Symbai", "Trial; a free read-only workspace after the trial. The individual button says try 1 month free.", "Individual NZ$4.99/mo; teacher or club plans from NZ$9.99/mo. Teacher plans say try 2 months free.", "AI coaching re-enabled", "P12"), + ("Kialo Edu", 'Free ("free and always will be")', "None listed", "Nothing further is listed, because the classroom product is free.", "P13"), + ] + trs = "".join( + f'{TICK if i == 0 else ""}{esc(name)}{esc(free)}{esc(paid)}{esc(adds)}{esc(src)}' + for i, (name, free, paid, adds, src) in enumerate(tools) + ) + body = f""" +
    +

    The pick on price

    +

    For a case you can read, replies, and timed rounds, DebateOwl is the row to read first. {esc(PRICE)} See the short answer if you want the wider map, or ChatGPT and Claude if the question is which general chatbot to open. Public Forum tools are compared speech by speech, and Debate Ladder is the ranked voice game.

    + {wins(["Readable case plus replies", "Timed Sparring rounds", "Free /tools, no account", "$5/month after the trial"])} +

    Try the free tools first, no account

    +
    +
    +

    Price table (checked October 29, 2026)

    +
    + + + {trs} +
    DebateOwl is the first row. Prices as listed by each product on October 29, 2026.
    ToolFree optionPaid price (as listed)What paid addsSource
    +

    Prices and plans as listed on each product's own website on October 29, 2026, in the currency shown. Check before you subscribe.

    +
    +
    +

    What $0 gets you

    +
      +
    • ChatGPT: a free version OpenAI says is available to everyone, including study mode and voice, with limits.
      • +
    • Claude: a $0 plan with web search, memory and voice mode.
      • +
    • DebateOwl's separate tools: a timer, motion generator, printable flow sheet and speech-time calculator, no account. The app itself is a 3-day trial, not a permanent free plan.
      • +
    • PublicForumAI: 3 full practice rounds a month, unlimited AI Flow drills, 5 cases a month plus 2 with real sources, and 15 training modules.
      • +
    • Debate Ladder: 100 credits for a new account, about one credit per minute of speaking.
      • +
    • ArguFight: free to start, free forever for base debating, and free for classrooms.
      • +
    • Debatable: 10 AI voice minutes after sign-in, not refilled, and live rounds with people at no charge.
      • +
    • Cardinal: the core tools, five of them marked free, described as free forever.
      • +
    • HyperWrite: a limited trial of the debate assistant.
      • +
    • Debate Arena: a free plan with unlimited debates against AI and live opponents.
      • +
    • Symbai: a trial, then a read-only workspace if you do not pay.
      • +
    • Kialo Edu: the classroom product, free, and the site says it always will be.
      • +
    • Prilo's pages we opened do not state a free option.
      • +
    +
    +
    +

    What paying adds

    +

    Across these pages, payment tends to buy the same kinds of things, and the lists above are the ones to trust:

    +
      +
    • More rounds or more minutes, once a free cap runs out.
      • +
    • Sourced evidence with links, where the product says the free tier argues without them.
      • +
    • Voice time, on the products that meter speaking.
      • +
    • Teacher dashboards, student analytics or class controls, on the products built for a whole class.
      • +
    +

    DebateOwl's $5 plan is the low monthly price that adds the prep workspace: all 10 models, Active Grounding research and priority support. Open every source before a lead goes into a speech. Active Grounding is not a promise that a citation is already checked.

    +
    +
    +

    The cheapest way to prep for a tournament

    +
      +
    1. Use the free tools for drills: the timer, the flow sheet and the motion generator. No account.
      2. +
    2. Use a free chatbot for background reading. It will not keep your motion, side and speech times for you.
      3. +
    3. Buy one month of a paid tool during tournament weeks. DebateOwl is $5/month + tax after the 3-day trial, which is the straightforward way to get the case, the replies and the timed rounds in one place. PublicForumAI's free tier may be enough for debaters who only need a few PF practice rounds and are not also writing a case to export.
      4. +
    +

    Plan details are on the pricing page.

    +
    +
    +

    Prices change

    +

    Each product's own page wins over this table. A number here was copied from that page on October 29, 2026, and it can move. Debatable also lists a Tokens plan at $4.99/month for extra voice rounds, which is why the cheapest-price answer names it. Cardinal's Pro price is $10 a month or $75 a season, not only the monthly figure.

    +
    +{faq_block("Price questions", faqs, "defs")} +{sources("Sources for the prices", [ + ("p1", "https://chatgpt.com/pricing", "Free version available to everyone. Go, Plus and Pro are on the page; the FAQ also names Business and Enterprise. No dollar prices in the text we opened."), + ("p2", "https://claude.com/pricing", "Free $0. Pro $17/mo annual or $20 monthly. Max from $100. Free plan: web search, memory, voice. Context window up to 1M, varying by model."), + ("p3", "https://publicforumai.com/pricing", "Free tier and Premium at $9.99/mo or $79/yr."), + ("s1", "https://debateladder.com/", "100 free credits. About one credit per minute. /pricing returned 404."), + ("p4", "https://www.argufight.com/", "Free to start. Free forever for base debating."), + ("p5", "https://www.argufight.com/for-schools", "Free for classrooms."), + ("p6", "https://debatable.com/pricing", "Voice minutes and the Individual, Voice, Tokens, BYOK, Team and school prices."), + ("p7", "https://cardinaldebate.org/", "Core tools free forever. Pro $10/month or $75 a season."), + ("p8", "https://www.prilo.ai/nsda", "$15/month or $60/year."), + ("p9", "https://www.hyperwriteai.com/aitools/debate-assistant", "Limited trial. Premium $19.99/mo. Ultra $44.99/mo."), + ("p10", "https://www.hyperwriteai.com/pricing", "Premium and Ultra, including annual prices."), + ("p11", "https://www.debatearena.app/ai-debate-practice", "Free plan and Gold. No Gold price on the page."), + ("p12", "https://symbai.ai/pricing/", "NZ$ prices, trial, and the free read-only workspace."), + ("p13", "https://www.kialo-edu.com/", "Free, and the site says it always will be."), +])} +""" + style = """ +body.prices{background:#fff;color:#131E33}body.prices main{width:min(1180px,calc(100% - 28px));margin:20px auto 72px} +body.prices h1{font-size:clamp(2rem,4vw,3.2rem);border-bottom:4px solid #0B1426;padding-bottom:10px} +body.prices .band{background:#FFF8DB;border-radius:0 0 24px 24px;padding:8px 18px 18px;margin:0 -8px 28px} +body.prices table{min-width:920px;font-size:.95rem} +body.prices tr.top{background:#EEF7FF} +body.prices tr.top th{font-size:1.05rem} +body.prices .wins{list-style:none;padding:0;margin:0 0 12px;display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;gap:10px 18px} +body.prices .wins li{display:flex;align-items:center} +body.prices dt{font-family:Fredoka,Nunito,sans-serif;margin-top:16px} +body.prices .steps{display:grid;grid-template-columns:1.2fr .8fr;gap:24px;align-items:start} +body.prices .steps ol{font-size:1.05rem} +@media(max-width:800px){body.prices .steps{grid-template-columns:1fr}} +""" + return { + "slug": "free-vs-paid-ai-debate-tools", + "lang": "en", + "body": "prices", + "title": "Free vs Paid AI Debate Tools: What $0 Gets You (Oct 2026) | DebateOwl", + "description": "Free and paid AI debate tools compared by price, as of October 2026: what $0 includes, what paid plans add, and the cheapest way to prep.", + "h1": "Free vs paid AI debate tools: what you actually get", + "question": "Is there a free AI for debate practice, and what do the paid ones cost?", + "answer": answer, + "faqs": faqs, + "style": style, + "html_body": body, + } + + +def page_chat(): + answer = ( + "DebateOwl is the pick when you want the motion kept for you: a case you can read out, " + '"If they say… we answer…" replies, and timed Sparring rounds that end in a verdict. ' + "ChatGPT and Claude both work well for debate prep, and neither is clearly better for everyone. " + "Debaters often use ChatGPT for fast brainstorming and Claude for a longer critique of a case they paste in. " + "What neither does by default is keep your motion, side and speech times." + ) + faqs = [ + ("Is ChatGPT or Claude better for debate?", "Neither is clearly better for everyone. ChatGPT is a fast way to brainstorm, and Claude is a strong place to paste a long case and ask for a critique. DebateOwl is the pick when you also want the case shape, the replies and a timed round without rebuilding that setup."), + ("Can ChatGPT run a debate round with me?", "It can role-play an opponent if you set it up. It has no built-in speech timer or verdict for debate formats, so long rounds work better in a tool built for them."), + ("Is Claude free?", "Yes. Claude has a free plan. Pro is $20/month billed monthly, or $17/month billed annually."), + ("Will AI make up sources?", "It can, so open every source and confirm the exact claim before it goes on a card."), + ("What does DebateOwl add over a chatbot?", 'A saved workspace per motion, a case with "If they say… we answer…" replies, Crossfire drills and timed Sparring rounds with a verdict. ' + PRICE), + ] + prompts = [ + ("1. Hold the other side", "Take the other side of this motion and do not concede unless my answer beats your point. Stay on that side for the whole exchange."), + ("2. Five things they will say", "List the 5 things the other side will say about this motion. Give each one a one-line answer I could say aloud."), + ("3. One question at a time", "Cross-examine me with one question at a time. Wait for my answer before you ask the next question."), + ("4. The weakest reason", "Read this argument and find the weakest reason in it. Say what a judge would still be unsure about."), + ("5. The second speech", 'Write a second speech: no new arguments, about 2 minutes backing up our arguments, then "If they say X, we answer Y" for each of their points.'), + ] + blocks = "".join(f"

    {esc(title)}

    {esc(text)}
    " for title, text in prompts) + body = f""" +
    +

    The pick when you want the round set up

    +

    Open a chatbot for background. Come back to DebateOwl for the motion itself. {esc(WINS)} The short answer compares more tools. Prices for these plans are on free vs paid AI debate tools, and the full prep sequence is how to prepare for a debate with AI.

    + {wins(["One Current Debate per motion", "A case with replies, ready to read", "Sparring at real speech times", "$5/month after a 3-day trial"])} +

    Skip the prompt setup: get a case with replies ready

    +
    +
    +

    Where a debate tool does the setup for you

    +
    + + + + + + + + +
    DebateOwl is the first column. Chatbots can imitate parts of this if you prompt them every time.
    DebateOwlChatGPTClaude
    Remembers your motion, side and roleBuilt in: one Current Debate per motionOnly if you set it up (Projects or memory)Only if you set it up (Projects or memory)
    Case structureOpening, 2–4 arguments, "If they say… we answer…", closing, sourcesWhatever you promptWhatever you prompt
    Timed rounds with a verdictSparring: School 4-6-6-3, LD, PFNo built-in debate timerNo built-in debate timer
    Free optionNo free app plan: 3-day free trial, then $5/month; /tools freeFree versionFree plan
    +

    {esc(PRICE)} Pair that with the DebateOwl vs ChatGPT page if you already live in one chatbot, and with rebuttal practice and cross-examination when you want the drills.

    +
    +
    +

    What general chatbots are good at in debate

    +

    Debate Ladder's guide to ChatGPT lists jobs a general chatbot does well: brainstorming both sides, steel-manning the other side, rebuttal drills, and questions you might be asked in cross-examination. Those are real uses. Treat the output as a draft, and verify every citation before it goes into a speech. S2

    +
    +
    +

    Where Debate Ladder's guide says they struggle

    +

    The same guide says that in long timed rounds a general chatbot drifts or softens, the difficulty is not calibrated, scoring is inconsistent, and there is no progress record. That is Debate Ladder's description of ChatGPT, not a claim we measured ourselves. A long round is easier in a tool that already knows the speech times. S2

    +
    +
    +
    +

    ChatGPT for a fast first pass

    +

    The free version is available to everyone. Paid plans on the pricing page include Go, Plus and Pro, and the FAQ also names Business and Enterprise. Dollar prices were not shown on the page we opened. Study mode and voice are available on the free plan, with limits on voice. It is best for quick idea generation and for practising out loud with voice, once you have told it the motion again. P1

    +
    +
    +

    Claude for a long case you paste in

    +

    The free plan is $0. Pro is $20 a month billed monthly, or $17 a month billed annually. Max starts at $100 a month. The free plan includes web search, memory and voice mode. The context window is up to 1 million tokens, varying by model, which is useful when you paste a full case and the evidence behind it. It is best for critique of long cases. This page does not cite a benchmark. P2

    +
    +
    +
    +

    Prompt pack: make any chatbot argue back

    +

    These five prompts are plain-language instructions you can paste into ChatGPT or Claude. They do not replace a saved case.

    + {blocks} +

    DebateOwl's case generator writes this shape for you, including prompt 5's second speech, and you can regenerate one weak section without rewriting the rest.

    +
    +
    +

    A week that uses all three

    +

    Monday is for the chatbot. Paste the motion into ChatGPT and ask for the five arguments each side might run, then ask Claude to steel-man the side you understand less. Keep that list. Do not paste it into a speech yet. The job of Monday is to see the field, not to memorise a paragraph.

    +

    Tuesday is DebateOwl. Start a Current Debate with the motion and your side. Generate the case and read it aloud once, slowly, before you edit anything. Mark the argument you would be unhappy to say in front of a judge. Regenerate that section only. The replies at the bottom are the start of Tuesday night: pick the two you think the other side will actually run, and say the answer out loud in one breath.

    +

    Wednesday is evidence. Take one factual sentence from the case, ask Factoids for a lead, and open the source. If the source does not say what the case said, cut the sentence. A chatbot can suggest search terms for the same claim. It should not be the thing you quote.

    +

    Thursday is Crossfire. Ten minutes of one question at a time is enough. Write down the question that made you pause. That pause is the line to fix in the case, not a reason to add a sixth argument.

    +

    Friday is the timed round. Sparring in the format you actually debate, typed or spoken. Read the verdict for the reason it names, then change one thing. The free timer is there if you are drilling a format Sparring does not simulate, such as British Parliamentary or World Schools. Saturday is a human, if you have one. Sunday is off. The $5 month is for the weeks that look like this, not for a subscription you forget about in June.

    +
    +
    +

    Using a chatbot and DebateOwl together

    +

    Use the chatbot for background reading and for a first list of ideas. Use DebateOwl once the motion is chosen: generate the case, read the replies, run Crossfire, then spar at the real times. {esc(PRICE)}

    +
    +{faq_block("Questions about chatbots and debate", faqs, "cards")} +{sources("Notes on the chatbot pages", [ + ("s2", "https://debateladder.com/blog/chatgpt-for-debate-practice", "What that guide says ChatGPT is good and bad at. We rewrote its examples into plain words."), + ("p1", "https://chatgpt.com/pricing", "Free version, Go, Plus and Pro, study mode and voice. No dollar prices on the page we opened."), + ("p2", "https://claude.com/pricing", "Free, Pro, Max, and the free plan's web search, memory and voice. Context window up to 1M."), +])} +""" + style = """ +body.chat{background:linear-gradient(#F2EEFF,#F7FAFE 280px)}body.chat main{width:min(1040px,calc(100% - 32px));margin:28px auto 70px} +body.chat h1{font-size:clamp(2.2rem,5vw,3.6rem);max-width:16ch} +body.chat .verdict{display:grid;grid-template-columns:1.4fr .8fr;gap:18px;align-items:center} +body.chat .wins{list-style:none;padding:0}body.chat .wins li{display:flex;align-items:center;margin:6px 0} +body.chat .split{display:grid;grid-template-columns:1fr 1fr;gap:22px} +body.chat .qcards{display:grid;gap:12px}body.chat .qcards article{background:#fff;border-radius:18px;padding:14px 16px;border:1px solid #E2D9FF} +body.chat table{min-width:720px;background:#fff}body.chat th:nth-child(2),body.chat td:nth-child(2){background:#EEF7FF} +@media(max-width:800px){body.chat .verdict,body.chat .split{grid-template-columns:1fr}} +""" + return { + "slug": "chatgpt-vs-claude-for-debate", + "lang": "en", + "body": "chat", + "title": "ChatGPT vs Claude for Debate: And When a Debate Tool Is Better | DebateOwl", + "description": "ChatGPT and Claude both help with debate prep. Where each fits, prompts that make them argue back, and when a debate-specific tool saves time.", + "h1": "ChatGPT vs Claude for debate prep", + "question": "Is ChatGPT or Claude better for debate?", + "answer": answer, + "faqs": faqs, + "style": style, + "html_body": body, + } + + +def page_teachers(): + answer = ( + "Start with DebateOwl when the debate is tomorrow and you do not want student accounts: the free timer, motion generator and printable flow sheet work in any browser and on a projector. " + "For a club preparing a round, the DebateOwl app writes a case students can read out, with replies and timed practice, at $5/month after the trial. " + "For every student debating an AI at once, Symbai and SchoolAI let teachers set up and monitor AI activities. " + "For a class tournament judged by AI, ArguFight offers free private classroom tournaments. For a graded written discussion, Kialo Edu is free." + ) + faqs = [ + ("What should I use if I want a free tool for class tomorrow?", "DebateOwl's free tools, if you want no student accounts: the timer, the motion generator and the flow sheet. For a written discussion you can grade, Kialo Edu. For AI-judged class tournaments, ArguFight for Schools is free for classrooms."), + ("Can students debate an AI in class?", "Yes. Symbai gives each student their own AI opponent in a workspace the teacher sets up, and SchoolAI lets teachers build AI activities and watch them live. SchoolAI's pages we opened do not call it a debate product. It is a general classroom platform where you can build a debate activity as a Space."), + ("Do students need accounts for DebateOwl's tools?", "No. The tools at /tools run in the browser with no account. The timer saves the round in the browser, not on a server."), + ("Is the DebateOwl app free for schools?", PRICE), + ("Can I project the debate timer?", "Yes. It has a fullscreen mode, and it can be embedded on a class site."), + ] + body = f""" +
    +

    The pick for a class with no sign-ups

    +

    If the lesson is tomorrow, DebateOwl's free tools are the pick: nothing to install, no student accounts, and a timer you can put on the projector. {esc(PRICE)} For the wider map, see the short answer. Topic ideas live on debate topics for students, and flowing is covered in how to flow in debate. A club that needs cases and rounds should read how to prepare for a debate with AI.

    + {wins(["Timer, motions and flow sheet, no account", "A case students can read out", "Replies to the other side", "Timed rounds, then $5/month"])} +

    Open the free classroom timer

    +
    +
    +

    Scenario 1

    +

    I want to run a debate tomorrow with no sign-ups

    +

    Use DebateOwl's free tools. The timer knows seven formats (Public Forum, Lincoln-Douglas, Policy, British Parliamentary, World Schools, Asian Parliamentary and School 4-6-6-3), shows protected time, and has points-of-information knocks and prep banks. You can build a custom format, share it as a link, and embed the timer. The motion generator has 300 original motions and a 3-motion veto drill. The flow sheet prints on A4 or Letter. The timer saves the round in the browser, not on a server. Spanish and Hungarian versions exist at /es/tools and /hu/tools.

    +

    That is the clearest fit when you refuse to spend the lesson on accounts. Open the tools, the motion generator and the flow sheet from any laptop on the projector.

    +
    +
    +

    Scenario 2

    +

    I want every student to debate an AI at once

    +

    Symbai, when each student needs a workspace

    +

    Symbai is best for a teacher who wants each student in their own debate workspace. Teachers create a debate and send each student a workspace, with settings such as difficulty and access to the AI tutor. There is a visual debate tree. Classroom controls let you disable the AI tutor for assessments, restrict copy-paste and lock after deadlines. The pricing page lists a dashboard with student analytics, and the homepage says progress is trackable over time. Teacher plans run from NZ$9.99 a month (up to 7 students) to NZ$79.99 a month (up to 100), and those buttons say "Try 2 Months For Free". P12 P14

    +

    SchoolAI, when you already use a classroom AI

    +

    SchoolAI is best for a school that already wants a general AI classroom platform, not a debate-only product. Its pages we opened do not use the word debate. Teachers design and manage AI Spaces. Mission Control shows what every student is doing in real time while a Space is active. Its listed compliance is FERPA, COPPA, SOC 2 Type 2 and 1EdTech certified. There is a Free Trial with 5 Space launches per year, plus Pro and Scale plans for schools. The homepage says teachers can try SchoolAI free. Dollar prices for Pro and Scale were not on the pricing page we opened. P15 P16

    +
    +
    +

    Scenario 3

    +

    I want a class tournament with a judge

    +

    ArguFight for Schools is best for a private class tournament judged by AI, at no charge. It offers private, invite-only tournaments in bracket, championship and king-of-the-hill formats. Every match is judged 0–100 with written reasoning. Students get an Elo, a history and per-round feedback. It lists 26 languages, and getting started is free for classrooms. The schools page describes the tournaments and the written reasoning. The main site also lets you dictate an argument with speech-to-text in Chrome, Edge and the mobile app, so the product is not only typed. P5 P4

    +
    +
    +

    Scenario 4

    +

    I want a written discussion I can grade

    +

    Kialo Edu is best for a graded written discussion, and it is free. Students write pros and cons under each other's points as an interactive map. There is an anonymous mode. Discussions are saved, so you can grade them later. It works with Google Classroom, Microsoft, Moodle, Blackboard, Clever and D2L. The site says it is free and always will be. P13

    +
    +
    +

    Scenario 5

    +

    My debate club is preparing for a competition

    +

    This is where the DebateOwl app is the pick. Students get a case they can read out, with "If they say… we answer…" replies, Crossfire drills and timed Sparring in School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas or Public Forum, in English, Spanish or Hungarian. There is no teacher dashboard. It is built for the students who are preparing, not for a screen that shows every student at once. {esc(PRICE)}

    +

    If you also want roles, timing and judges' score sheets for a live in-class debate, with an AI analysis from uploaded audio, Camelot for Debate does that in Italian and English. P17

    +
    +
    +

    Before you use any AI tool with students

    +
      +
    1. Read the age requirements.
      2. +
    2. Read where the data goes.
      3. +
    3. See whether students need accounts.
      4. +
    4. Look for teacher controls, if the lesson needs them.
      5. +
    5. Read what the tool itself says about student data.
      6. +
    +

    DebateOwl's free tools need no account, and the timer saves the round in the browser, not on a server. The app, once a student signs in, keeps cases and rounds behind that account.

    +
    +{faq_block("Questions from teachers", faqs, "h3")} +{sources("Sources checked for this classroom guide", [ + ("p12", "https://symbai.ai/pricing/", "Teacher prices in NZ dollars, the trial, and the read-only workspace."), + ("p14", "https://symbai.ai/", "Per-student workspaces, the debate tree, and classroom controls. The same controls are listed at https://symbai.ai/features/."), + ("p15", "https://schoolai.com/pricing", "Free Trial with 5 Space launches a year, Pro, Scale, Mission Control, and the compliance list."), + ("p16", "https://schoolai.com/", "Teachers can try SchoolAI free. The pages we opened do not use the word debate."), + ("p5", "https://www.argufight.com/for-schools", "Free private classroom tournaments."), + ("p4", "https://www.argufight.com/", "Speech-to-text, and free for base debating."), + ("p13", "https://www.kialo-edu.com/", "Free written discussions and the integrations."), + ("p17", "https://www.camelot.vote/en/debate", "Roles, timing, judge sheets, and AI analysis from uploaded audio, in Italian and English."), +])} +""" + style = """ +body.teach{background:#F7FAFE}body.teach main{width:min(860px,calc(100% - 28px));margin:0 auto 64px} +body.teach h1{font-size:clamp(2.3rem,6vw,3.8rem);padding-top:28px} +body.teach .hero-note{background:#0B1426;color:#EEF4FF;margin:0 -16px;padding:8px 22px 22px;border-radius:0 0 32px 32px} +body.teach .hero-note a{color:#FCE48A} +body.teach .wins{list-style:none;padding:0}body.teach .wins li{display:flex;align-items:center;margin:6px 0} +body.teach .scene{padding:8px 0 4px;border-top:1px solid #CDD7E4} +body.teach .scene.first{border-top:none;background:#fff;margin:18px -16px 0;padding:8px 22px 18px;border-radius:24px} +body.teach .kicker{font-family:Fredoka,Nunito,sans-serif;color:#0556D6;margin-bottom:0} +body.teach .club{background:#FFF8DB;margin:0 -16px;padding:8px 22px 18px;border-radius:24px} +body.teach .privacy{font-size:1.15rem} +""" + return { + "slug": "ai-debate-tools-for-teachers", + "lang": "en", + "body": "teach", + "title": "AI Debate Tools for Teachers: 5 Classroom Scenarios | DebateOwl", + "description": "Which AI debate tool fits your classroom: no-signup timers, AI opponents for every student, class tournaments, graded discussion and club prep.", + "h1": "AI debate tools for teachers", + "question": "What should I use to run debates in class?", + "answer": answer, + "faqs": faqs, + "style": style, + "html_body": body, + } + + +def page_prep(): + answer = ( + "Use DebateOwl for the slow parts you would rather not invent from a blank page: read the motion, draft two to four arguments with evidence, " + 'list what the other side will say and write an "If they say… we answer…" reply to each, then practise at real speech times. ' + "Keep the judgement calls for yourself, and check every source before it goes into a speech. A general chatbot can do pieces of this if you prompt it." + ) + steps = [ + ("Read the motion", "Open Brainstorm on the Current Debate and ask what each side has to prove.", "Paste the motion and ask it to define the terms and say what each side must prove.", "/debate-motion-analysis"), + ("Gather sources", "Use Factoids for one claim and the Library for sources you already trust.", "Ask for the source and the year of every fact, then open each one. Cut anything you cannot find.", "/debate-evidence-finder"), + ("Draft the arguments", "The case generator writes the opening, two to four arguments, and why each matters.", "Ask for a point, an explanation, evidence with a source and year, and why it matters. Do not accept a wall of text.", "/ai-debate-case-generator"), + ("Predict the other side", "Run Attack on your case, and read the case's own \"If they say…\" lines.", "Ask for the strongest case against you, written so a fan of that side would agree.", "/how-to-practice-rebuttals"), + ("Write the replies", 'The case already includes "If they say X, we answer Y" blocks. Regenerate one weak block if you need to.', "Demand one short answer per opposing point, in words you could say aloud.", ""), + ("Drill the questions", "Crossfire asks one question at a time, or lets the AI question you.", "Say you will answer one question at a time and that it should wait.", "/how-to-cross-examine-in-debate"), + ("Practise at real times", "Sparring runs School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas or Public Forum and ends with a verdict. For every other format, use the free timer.", "You keep the clock yourself. The free timer already knows seven formats.", "/tools/debate-timer"), + ] + rendered = [] + howto_steps = [] + for index, (name, owl, any_ai, href) in enumerate(steps, start=1): + link = f' See the related guide.' if href else "" + rendered.append( + f'

  • {index}. {esc(name)}

    ' + f"

    In DebateOwl. {owl}

    " + f"

    With any AI. {esc(any_ai)}{link}

    • " + ) + howto_steps.append({ + "@type": "HowToStep", + "position": index, + "name": f"{index}. {name}", + "text": f"In DebateOwl. {owl} With any AI. {any_ai}", + }) + faqs = [ + ("Can AI help me prepare for a debate?", "Yes, as long as you treat what it gives you as a draft. Use it for the slow parts, and keep the judgement calls. Check every source before it goes into a speech."), + ('What should a second speech include?', 'No new arguments: about two minutes backing up your team\'s arguments, then about four minutes of "If they say X, we answer Y" replies.'), + ("Is using AI for debate prep cheating?", "Prep is usually fine, but most leagues restrict electronics or AI during the round itself. Check your league's rules."), + ("How do I stop the AI making up evidence?", "Ask for the source and year of every fact, open each one, and cut anything you can't find."), + ("Which AI should I use?", "For this plan, DebateOwl is the pick, because the modes match the steps. " + PRICE + " A wider comparison is on the short-answer page linked above."), + ] + howto = { + "@type": "HowTo", + "name": "How to prepare for a debate with AI", + "description": answer, + "step": howto_steps, + } + body = f""" +
    +

    Seven steps, DebateOwl first

    +

    {esc(WINS)} The wider comparison is the short answer. If you are choosing between chatbots first, read ChatGPT vs Claude for debate. A head-to-head with a ranked voice game is DebateOwl vs Debate Ladder. Teachers running the class itself should read AI debate tools for teachers. Case structure in general is in how to write a debate case.

    + {wins(["Brainstorm, then a case you can read", "Replies in the case itself", "Crossfire, then a timed round", "Free timer for every other format"])} +
      {''.join(rendered)}
    +

    Generate your first case in the 3-day trial

    +
    +
    +

    A worked second speech: phones in class

    +

    Motion: "This House would ban phones in class." The same motion appears on the DebateOwl homepage. Nothing below is a real study. The brackets are placeholders you replace after you have opened a source.

    +

    Opening line. Today we will show two arguments that prove phones belong outside class.

    +

    Argument 1, in our team's first speech

    +

    Notifications break concentration. Explanation: a student who looks at a message then spends the next explanation catching up has missed the step the rest of the room is on. Evidence: [a study on refocus time: name the source and year you verified]. Why it matters: a lesson only works if the room is in it together.

    +

    Argument 2, so the second speech has two points to back up

    +

    Class is a shared conversation. Explanation: when some students are on their phones, the people speaking lose the listeners the lesson depends on. Evidence: [a classroom observation you have checked: name the source and year]. Why it matters: a discussion you cannot join is not a discussion.

    +

    Second speech, about 6 minutes

    +

    Part 1, about 2 minutes, reinforce. No new arguments. Back up the first argument with one fresh example: the student who glances down and then asks a question the room already answered. Back up the second with one fresh example: a partner task where one person is scrolling and the other is talking to an empty chair.

    +

    Part 2, about 4 minutes, "If they say X, we answer Y".

    +
      +
    1. If they say "Students need phones for emergencies", we answer: the school office can call home, and a phone in a bag at the office covers the same emergency without a screen on every desk.
      2. +
    2. If they say "Phones are learning tools", we answer: when a task actually needs a device, the class can share a computer or a set of tablets, which is different from every student having a private phone out all period.
      3. +
    3. If they say "A ban is unenforceable", we answer: schools already collect items that distract, and a basket at the door is easier to see than a rule about using a phone well.
      4. +
    4. If they say "Students must learn self-control", we answer: self-control is practised when the distraction is not buzzing during the explanation. The lesson is the place to pay attention.
      5. +
    5. If they say "Parents want to reach their children", we answer: parents can call the office, and students can check messages at lunch. A class period is short enough that a delay is not the same as being unreachable.
      6. +
    +

    Closing line. That is why phones belong outside the lesson: the class stays on the work, and a real emergency still has a way through.

    +

    This is the shape DebateOwl's case generator produces for the second-speaker role. Every case also ends with the sources it used. {esc(PRICE)}

    +
    +
    +

    What you still decide yourself

    +

    The plan above will hand you a full draft. The round is still yours. Three decisions should not be delegated, even when the draft sounds confident.

    +

    The first is the motion's meaning. If "ban" in your motion means a legal prohibition and the draft treats it as a classroom norm, the whole case is about the wrong world. Read the actor, the action and the word that sets the strength of the claim before you fall in love with an argument. Brainstorm will offer readings. You pick the one a judge would accept without a fight.

    +

    The second is which argument you are willing to live on. Two to four arguments is the shape. Three of them can be true and only one of them can be the thing you return to in the last speech. If you cannot say, in one sentence, why that argument matters more than the other side's best point, you do not yet have a case. You have a list.

    +

    The third is the source. A named year is not a check. Open the page, find the sentence, and see whether it is about your claim or about a neighbouring one. If you cannot find it, the sentence leaves the speech. This is the same rule for DebateOwl, for ChatGPT and for Claude. Active Grounding, on the paid plan, is a research aid. It is not a substitute for the tab you open yourself.

    +

    A practical test before you close the laptop: give the second speech to an empty room, at about six minutes, with a timer. If part 1 starts a new argument, stop and cut it. If part 2 answers a point the other side would never say, replace that block with one they would. If you run out of time before the closing line, the reinforcement was too long. The free timer will do this drill for any format. Sparring will do it against an opponent for School 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas and Public Forum, and it will tell you a reason at the end. Change one thing from that reason. Then stop.

    +

    Teachers who want the class to do this without accounts can put the timer on a projector and print the flow sheet. Students who are preparing a dated round should be in the app, because that is where the case, the replies and the timed round stay attached to one motion. Both can be true in the same week.

    +

    If you only have twenty minutes, do the smallest version. Read the motion, generate the case, say the second speech's reply blocks once, and open one source. That is a complete prep, not a sketch you feel guilty about. The rest of the week can add the timed round.

    +
    +{faq_block("Questions about using AI for prep", faqs, "h3")} +{sources("Notes for this prep plan", [ + ("p1", "https://chatgpt.com/pricing", "A free chatbot is enough for the 'with any AI' lines. The free version is available to everyone."), + ("p2", "https://claude.com/pricing", "Claude's free plan is the other general chatbot this plan allows."), +])} +""" + style = """ +body.prep{background:#fff}body.prep main{width:min(820px,calc(100% - 36px));margin:24px auto 72px} +body.prep h1{font-size:clamp(2.2rem,5vw,3.5rem)} +body.prep .steps{list-style:none;padding:0;margin:0;border-left:3px solid #0A6FF0} +body.prep .steps li{padding:0 0 8px 22px;position:relative} +body.prep .steps li::before{content:"";position:absolute;left:-8px;top:8px;width:13px;height:13px;border-radius:50%;background:#0A6FF0} +body.prep .wins{list-style:none;padding:0}body.prep .wins li{display:flex;align-items:center;margin:4px 0} +body.prep .sheet{background:#FFF8DB;border:3px solid #0B1426;border-radius:8px;padding:8px 22px 18px;margin-top:28px} +body.prep .sheet ol li{margin:8px 0} +""" + page = { + "slug": "how-to-prepare-for-a-debate-with-ai", + "lang": "en", + "body": "prep", + "title": "How to Prepare for a Debate with AI: 7 Steps and a Worked Example | DebateOwl", + "description": 'A 7-step plan to prep a debate with AI: read the motion, build arguments, predict the other side, write "If they say… we answer…" replies and spar.', + "h1": "How to prepare for a debate with AI", + "question": "How do I use AI to prepare for a debate?", + "answer": answer, + "faqs": faqs, + "style": style, + "html_body": body, + } + page["howto"] = howto + return page + + +def page_pf(): + answer = ( + "For Public Forum, start with DebateOwl when you want a case you can read out, " + '"If they say… we answer…" replies, crossfire drills, and Sparring at the 4-4-3-2 speech times, ' + "for $5/month after a 3-day free trial. PublicForumAI is built only for PF and has free practice rounds. " + "Cardinal focuses on finding and cutting evidence. Prilo covers PF, Lincoln-Douglas and Policy with a cross-examination simulator." + ) + faqs = [ + ("What should I use for Public Forum?", "Start with DebateOwl if you want the case, the replies, crossfire drills and timed speeches in one place. PublicForumAI is the free, PF-only practice round. Cardinal is the evidence tool. Prilo is the circuit tool with a cross-examination simulator and flowing drills."), + ("Is there a free AI for PF practice?", "Yes. PublicForumAI's free plan has 3 full practice rounds a month, and Cardinal lists five free tools, described as free forever."), + ("Can AI do crossfire practice?", "Yes. DebateOwl has timed Crossfire drills, and Prilo has a 3-minute cross-examination simulator. PublicForumAI says it doesn't yet have a crossfire feature, \"it's in the works\"."), + ("Can I use AI during a PF round?", "PublicForumAI itself says its tools are for practice, not for live rounds. Check your league's rules."), + ("How much does DebateOwl cost for PF?", PRICE), + ] + rows = [ + ("Constructive (4 min)", "A clear two-argument case with evidence", "DebateOwl case generator. PublicForumAI's case writer. Cardinal's card cutter."), + ("Crossfire (3 min, three times)", "Fast questions and answers", 'DebateOwl Crossfire drills. Prilo\'s 3-minute cross-examination simulator. PublicForumAI says it doesn\'t yet have a crossfire feature, "it\'s in the works".'), + ("Rebuttal (4 min)", "Answers to their case", 'DebateOwl "If they say… we answer…" replies, plus Attack. Prilo\'s AI rebuttal drafts.'), + ("Summary (3 min) and final focus (2 min)", "Collapse onto the points that decide the round", "DebateOwl's Sparring verdict and Ask coach. PublicForumAI's full rounds, with a judge ballot and tech or lay feedback."), + ("Evidence", "Real sources you can open", "Cardinal searches the web and opencaselist and cuts cards. PublicForumAI Premium adds real sourced evidence with working links. DebateOwl Factoids names sources you still have to check."), + ("Flowing", "A record of every argument", "PublicForumAI's AI Flow, with speech recognition. Prilo's flowing practice. DebateOwl's free printable flow sheet."), + ] + trs = "".join(f"{esc(a)}{esc(b)}{esc(c)}" for a, b, c in rows) + body = f""" +
    +

    The pick for a Public Forum case and a timed round

    +

    DebateOwl is the first name in the speech table because it covers the case you read, the replies, the crossfire drill and the timed speeches together. {esc(PRICE)} The rules of the format, without the tool comparison, are on Public Forum debate. Question drills are in how to cross-examine, and weighing is in how to weigh. The wider list is the short answer. Prices are on free vs paid.

    + {wins(["A PF case you can read out", '"If they say… we answer…" replies', "Crossfire as its own drill", "Sparring at 4-4-3-2, then $5/month"])} +

    Sparring runs the PF speeches at those times and ends with a judged verdict. It does not insert the three crossfire periods. Practise those in Crossfire. The free timer does run the crossfires and the prep banks, and the flow sheet prints the columns. Clash is where you decide which argument the summary should keep.

    +

    Spar a full PF round at 4-4-3-2 times

    +
    +
    +

    Speech by speech

    +
    + + + {trs} +
    NSDA times, as the Public Forum guide on this site states them. DebateOwl is named first wherever it does the job.
    PF speechWhat you needTools that help
    +
    +
    +

    DebateOwl for Public Forum

    +

    Best for students who want case writing, replies, crossfire and full speech rounds in one place at a low price. The case is an opening, two to four arguments with evidence and why each matters, the replies, a closing line and the sources. For PF, the first constructive carries the arguments, and the rebuttal is where you answer theirs without pretending a new argument belongs there. The app is in English, Spanish and Hungarian. The free timer has prep banks. {esc(PRICE)}

    +

    PublicForumAI, the PF-only practice round

    +

    Best for PF debaters who want a free, PF-only practice round. It was started in 2024 by students on a high school debate team in New York City. The free plan has 3 rounds a month and 5 cases a month. Premium is $9.99 a month or $79 a year. A round takes about 35 minutes including prep, without crossfire. There are middle school and high school difficulty levels. Its tools are for practice, not for live rounds. P3 P18

    +

    Cardinal, for the cards

    +

    Best for evidence work. Five tools are marked free, and the site calls the core tools free forever. Pro is $10 a month or $75 a season. Card search runs over the web and opencaselist. P7

    +

    Prilo, for circuit drills

    +

    Best for NSDA-circuit debaters who want cross-examination and flowing drills. It is $15 a month or $60 a year, and it covers Lincoln-Douglas, Public Forum and Policy, with a 3-minute cross-examination simulator and speech analytics. P8

    +
    +
    +

    A tiny PF reply block

    +

    This is an example resolution, not a claim about the current NSDA topic: "Resolved: Public schools should give students one homework-free weekend a month."

    +

    One argument, on the proposition. A weekend with no homework gives students time to sleep and to show up on Monday able to listen. The reason is ordinary: homework that fills both days crowds out the rest a student needs before a week of class. Why it matters: a tired first speech, in class or in a round, is a worse speech.

    +
      +
    1. If they say "Students will fall behind", we answer: one weekend a month is not the end of practice, and the other weekends still carry the load.
      2. +
    2. If they say "Homework is how you learn", we answer: learning also needs a break, and a single protected weekend does not delete the assignments on the other days.
      3. +
    3. If they say "Families will fill the time with more activities", we answer: that is the family's choice, and the school's job is not to occupy every hour so the choice never comes up.
      4. +
    +
    +{faq_block("Public Forum questions", faqs, "details")} +{sources("Sources for the PF tools", [ + ("p18", "https://publicforumai.com/", "PF only, started in 2024 by NYC high school debaters, no crossfire feature yet, about 35 minutes, tech or lay judge, not for live rounds."), + ("p3", "https://publicforumai.com/pricing", "Free plan and Premium at $9.99/mo or $79/yr."), + ("p7", "https://cardinaldebate.org/", "Card search, five free tools, Pro at $10/month or $75 a season."), + ("p8", "https://www.prilo.ai/nsda", "PF, LD and Policy, the 3-minute simulator, $15/month or $60/year."), +])} +""" + style = """ +body.pf{background:#F7FAFE}body.pf main{width:min(900px,calc(100% - 32px));margin:20px auto 64px} +body.pf h1{font-size:clamp(2.4rem,6vw,4rem);color:#0B1426} +body.pf .order{background:#fff;border-radius:28px;padding:8px 20px 16px;box-shadow:0 16px 40px rgba(11,20,38,.06)} +body.pf .wins{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;gap:8px 16px;list-style:none;padding:0} +body.pf .wins li{display:flex;align-items:center} +body.pf table{min-width:680px} +body.pf .profiles h2{margin-top:1.6rem;padding-top:12px;border-top:4px solid #FFC414} +body.pf .profiles h2:first-child{border-top-color:#0A6FF0} +body.pf .mini{background:#0B1426;color:#EEF4FF;border-radius:24px;padding:8px 20px 18px} +body.pf .mini a{color:#FCE48A} +""" + return { + "slug": "best-ai-for-public-forum", + "lang": "en", + "body": "pf", + "title": "Best AI for Public Forum Debate (2026): Tools by Speech | DebateOwl", + "description": "AI tools for Public Forum debate, compared speech by speech: cases, rebuttals, crossfire, summary and final focus, with prices as of October 2026.", + "h1": "Best AI for Public Forum debate", + "question": "What should I use for Public Forum debate?", + "answer": answer, + "faqs": faqs, + "style": style, + "html_body": body, + } + + +def page_hu(): + answer = ( + "Ha konkrét indítványra készülsz iskolai vagy versenyvitára, a DebateOwl a kiindulás: felolvasható esetet ír " + "„Ha azt mondják… erre azt feleljük…” válaszokkal, és időzített gyakorlófordulót futtat, magyarul is. " + "Ötleteléshez és háttérolvasáshoz egy általános MI-asszisztens, például a ChatGPT vagy a Claude is jó, mindkettőnek van ingyenes csomagja." + ) + case = ( + "A DebateOwl úgy írja meg az esetet, ahogy az iskolai vitázók készülnek: nyitás, két–négy érv, mindegyik magyarázattal, " + "bizonyítékkal és azzal, hogy miért fontos, „Ha azt mondják… erre azt feleljük…” válaszok, egy zárómondat és a felhasznált források." + ) + r2 = "Nem hoz új érvet: körülbelül két percig megerősíti a csapat érveit, utána körülbelül négy percig »Ha azt mondják X-et, erre azt feleljük Y« válaszokat mond." + cost = HU_PRICE + " A Claude-nak van ingyenes, $0-s csomagja. A ChatGPT ingyenes változata mindenki számára elérhető." + during = "Felkészüléshez igen. A vita közben a verseny szabályait ellenőrizd: a legtöbb liga korlátozza az elektronikát és az MI-t a forduló alatt." + account = "Nem, a /hu/tools eszközök fiók nélkül működnek." + faqs = [ + ("Melyik MI a legjobb vitára?", answer), + ("Mit csinál a második beszélő (R2)?", r2), + ("Mennyibe kerül?", cost), + ("Lehet MI-t használni a vita közben?", during), + ("Kell fiók az ingyenes eszközökhöz?", account), + ] + body = f""" +
    +

    Mit tartalmaz egy DebateOwl-eset?

    +

    {esc(case)}

    +

    A többi eszköz rövid angol összevetése: the short answer. Itthon a kiindulás a felolvasható eset, a válaszok és az időzített forduló.

    + {wins(["Felolvasható eset", "„Ha azt mondják… erre azt feleljük…”", "Időzített Vitapárbaj", "Ingyenes eszközök, aztán havi $5"])} +

    Próbáld ki 3 napig ingyen

    +
    +
    +

    Mit csinál a második beszélő (R2)?

    +

    {esc(r2)}

    +

    Példa a „Tiltsuk be a telefont az órákon” indítványra, számok nélkül. Ha azt mondják, hogy vészhelyzetben kell a telefon, erre azt feleljük: az iskola titkársága fel tudja hívni a szülőt, a telefon pedig a titkárságon is ott lehet, nem az órán. Ha azt mondják, hogy a telefon tanulási eszköz, erre azt feleljük: ha a feladat tényleg eszközt kér, az osztály közös gépe is elég, és az nem csipog minden diáknál a magyarázat közben.

    +
    +
    +

    Milyen formátumokban lehet gyakorolni?

    +

    Vitapárbaj: iskolai 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas és Public Forum, a végén bírói döntéssel. Az időmérő hét formátumot ismer, köztük azokat is, amelyekhez nincs teljes szimulált forduló. A többi formátumra a felkészítő eszközök valók. Beszélni és gépelni is lehet.

    +
    +
    +

    Mennyibe kerül?

    +

    {esc(cost)}

    +

    Kell fiók az ingyenes eszközökhöz?

    +

    {esc(account)}

    +
    +
    +

    Lehet MI-t használni a vita közben?

    +

    {esc(during)}

    +
    +
    +

    Mire való melyik, egymás mellett

    +
    + + + + + + +
    A DebateOwl az első oszlop. Az általános asszisztens a háttérolvasásé.
    DebateOwlÁltalános MI-asszisztensIngyenes eszközök
    Mire jóKonkrét indítvány: felolvasható eset és időzített gyakorlófordulóÖtletelés és háttérolvasásIdőmérő, tételgenerátor, jegyzetlap és beszédidő-kalkulátor
    Ára3 napos próba, utána havi $5. Nincs ingyenes csomag.A ChatGPT ingyenes változata mindenkié. A Claude csomagja $0.Ingyenes, fiók nélkül
    +

    Az eszközök: a magyar kezdőlap, az összes ingyenes eszköz, a vitaidőmérő, a tételgenerátor, a jegyzetlap és a beszédidő-kalkulátor.

    +
    +
    +

    Hogyan néz ki egy felkészülő este?

    +

    Először olvasd el az indítványt. Ki cselekszik, és mit kérnek tőle? Egy tiltás más vita, mint egy szabályozás. A DebateOwlban ezt a Brainstorm módban teszed fel, a saját aktuális vitádhoz kötve, nem egy üres csevegésben.

    +

    Utána jön az eset. A generátor megírja a nyitást, a két–négy érvet, a magyarázatot, a bizonyíték helyét és azt, hogy miért fontos. A bizonyíték mellé kérd a forrás nevét és évét, majd nyisd meg. Amit nem találsz, az nem mehet bele a beszédbe. Egy általános asszisztens ugyanerre képes, ha minden alkalommal újra bemásolod az indítványt. A DebateOwlban az indítvány megmarad.

    +

    A második beszélő beszédét érdemes hangosan elpróbálni. Két perc megerősítés, négy perc válasz. Ha az első részben új érv bukkan fel, vágd ki. Ha a válasz olyan pontra felel, amit a másik oldal úgysem mondana, cseréld le egy valószínűbbre. A Vitapárbaj ugyanezt időre teszi, iskolai 4-6-6-3, Lincoln-Douglas vagy Public Forum formában, és a végén indokolt döntést ad. A többi formátumhoz az ingyenes időmérő a helyes eszköz.

    +

    A hét végén egy ember, ha van. Az MI a lassú részt veszi le: a vázlatot, a válaszokat, az ismétlést. Azt, hogy melyik érvre építed az utolsó beszédet, te döntöd el. Ez a kiindulás egy iskolai vagy versenyvitára, magyarul is.

    +

    Ha csak húsz perced van, a rövid változat is elég. Olvasd el az indítványt, generálj egy esetet, mondd el hangosan a második beszélő válaszait, és nyiss meg egy forrást. Ez már felkészülés, nem vázlat, ami miatt szoronganod kellene. Az időzített fordulót másnap is ráérsz.

    +

    Amit nem érdemes az MI-re bízni: a definíciót, ha a vita attól függ, és azt a mondatot, amit a bíró az utolsó percben megjegyez. A zárómondatot te írd meg, a saját szavaiddal, akkor is, ha a többi részt a generátor adta. A forrást pedig te nyitod meg. A név és az év a lapon még nem ellenőrzés.

    +
    +{sources("Források", [ + ("p1", "https://chatgpt.com/pricing", "Az ingyenes változat mindenki számára elérhető."), + ("p2", "https://claude.com/pricing", "Ingyenes csomag, $0."), +])} +""" + style = """ +body.hu{background:#fff}body.hu main{width:min(680px,calc(100% - 32px));margin:36px auto 80px} +body.hu h1{font-size:clamp(2rem,6vw,3.1rem)} +body.hu h2{font-size:clamp(1.45rem,3vw,1.9rem);margin-top:2rem} +body.hu .lead-block{background:#EEF7FF;border-radius:28px;padding:8px 20px 16px} +body.hu .wins{list-style:none;padding:0}body.hu .wins li{display:flex;align-items:center;margin:6px 0} +body.hu table{min-width:560px} +""" + return { + "slug": "hu/mi-vitafelkeszules", + "lang": "hu", + "body": "hu", + "title": "Vitafelkészülés MI-vel: melyik eszköz mire jó? | DebateOwl", + "description": "Melyik MI segít a vitára készülésben? Általános MI-asszisztens, vitagyakorló alkalmazás vagy ingyenes eszközök: mire jó melyik, magyarul.", + "h1": "Vitafelkészülés mesterséges intelligenciával", + "question": "Melyik MI a legjobb vitára?", + "answer": answer, + "faqs": faqs, + "style": style, + "html_body": body, + } + + +def visible_text(html): + text = re.sub(r"", " ", html) + text = re.sub(r"", " ", text) + text = re.sub(r"<[^>]+>", " ", text) + return escape(text) and re.sub(r"\s+", " ", text) + + +def write_comparison_pages(public: Path): + ensure_fonts(public) + pages = [page_ladder(), page_price(), page_chat(), page_teachers(), page_prep(), page_pf(), page_hu()] + h2s = {} + answers = [] + for page in pages: + html = shell(page, page["style"], page["html_body"], page["faqs"], page.get("howto")) + headings = re.findall(r"]*>(.*?)", html, flags=re.S) + headings = [re.sub(r"<[^>]+>", "", item).strip() for item in headings] + h2s[page["slug"]] = headings + answers.append(page["answer"]) + if page["lang"] == "en": + words = len(page["answer"].split()) + if words > 100: + raise SystemExit(f"{page['slug']}: opening answer has {words} words; keep it to 100") + if PRICE not in html: + raise SystemExit(f"{page['slug']}: missing the pricing sentence") + else: + if HU_PRICE not in html: + raise SystemExit("Hungarian page is missing the pricing sentence") + if JARGON.search(re.sub(r"", " ", html)): + raise SystemExit(f"{page['slug']}: jargon in the page") + if html.lower().count('href="/best-ai-for-debate"') != 1: + raise SystemExit(f"{page['slug']}: expected exactly one link to /best-ai-for-debate") + sibling_links = set(re.findall(r'href="/((?:hu/)?[a-z0-9-]+)"', html)) + # Count sibling comparison pages linked, excluding self. + linked = [slug for slug in SIBLINGS if slug != page["slug"] and f'href="/{slug}"' in html] + if len(linked) > 3: + raise SystemExit(f"{page['slug']}: links to {len(linked)} sibling pages: {linked}") + folder = public / page["slug"] + folder.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True) + (folder / "index.html").write_text(html) + if len(page["description"]) > 155 and page["slug"] == "debateowl-vs-debate-ladder": + raise SystemExit("Page 1 meta description is over 155 characters") + if len(set(answers)) != len(answers): + raise SystemExit("Opening answers are not all distinct") + slugs = list(h2s) + for i, left in enumerate(slugs): + for right in slugs[i + 1:]: + shared = set(h2s[left]) & set(h2s[right]) + if len(shared) > 2: + raise SystemExit(f"{left} and {right} share H2s: {shared}") + print(f"Wrote {len(pages)} comparison pages") + + +if __name__ == "__main__": + write_comparison_pages(ROOT / "public") diff --git a/scripts/seo_guides.py b/scripts/seo_guides.py index 7df41c0b..a95ff0e3 100644 --- a/scripts/seo_guides.py +++ b/scripts/seo_guides.py @@ -584,7 +584,7 @@ ], }, "how-to-write-a-debate-case": { - "modified": "2026-10-28", + "modified": "2026-10-29", "features": [ ("Motion analysis first", "Define the terms, write down what your side has to prove and find where the two sides disagree before writing a single argument."), ("Arguments that hold up", "Build each argument as a point, an explanation, evidence and why it matters, so a judge can follow it and an opponent cannot break it with one question."), @@ -621,6 +621,7 @@ ("Closing line:", "That is why free fares are the fairest way to pay for the buses a whole city depends on."), ]}}, "Notice what the outline does not contain: a long introduction, rhetorical questions or a list of statistics without explanations. Every line either defines the debate, proves something, answers the other side or tells the judge what to remember.", + "For the second speech in particular, the [worked example of how to prepare for a debate with AI](/how-to-prepare-for-a-debate-with-ai#worked-example) writes the two-minute reinforcement and the \"If they say… we answer…\" replies in full.", ]), ("How case structure changes by format", [ {"h3": "Public Forum (PF)"}, @@ -749,7 +750,7 @@ ], }, "public-forum-debate": { - "modified": "2026-10-28", + "modified": "2026-10-29", "features": [ ("The PF round, speech by speech", "What each of the eight speeches and three crossfires is for, with the standard times."), ("Summary and final focus that agree", "How to collapse to two issues in summary and extend exactly those into final focus."), @@ -820,6 +821,7 @@ ("Practising Public Forum in {product}", [ "Sparring runs Public Forum rounds with pro and con constructives, rebuttals, summaries and final focuses at the 4-4-3-2 times above, ending with a judged verdict. The simulated round leaves out the crossfire periods, so practise questioning separately in Crossfire. Despite the shared name, that feature is a cross-examination drill: you either question the AI, which answers from the opposing side, or let it question you about your case.", "A useful preparation loop: start a Current Debate with the resolution, generate a case for each side, paste the opposing case into Attack to find its weakest links, run a Sparring round on your assigned side, and finish by checking whether your final focus extended only what your summary did. The timer's Public Forum preset covers the same eight speeches when you practise with a partner.", + "Comparing PF tools? See [the best AI for Public Forum](/best-ai-for-public-forum).", ]), ], "faqs": [ @@ -888,7 +890,7 @@ "Practising speeches and rounds: you need timing, an opponent and a verdict, which a general chat does not provide.", "Polishing wording: either works; use the one you are already in.", ]}, - "A practical split is to use a general assistant for open-ended learning and {product} for motion-specific preparation and practice.", + "A practical split is to use a general assistant for open-ended learning and {product} for motion-specific preparation and practice. [ChatGPT vs Claude for debate](/chatgpt-vs-claude-for-debate) is the page for where each general chatbot fits, and when a debate tool saves the setup.", ]), ("Things that are true of both", [ "Both can state things confidently that are not true, so neither replaces reading original sources before you quote them. Neither should be used during a round where your league forbids electronic help, which is most leagues. And neither replaces a coach or teammates who have watched you debate.", diff --git a/src/components/landing/GuideHub.tsx b/src/components/landing/GuideHub.tsx index e144b675..34b0f632 100644 --- a/src/components/landing/GuideHub.tsx +++ b/src/components/landing/GuideHub.tsx @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ const GROUPS = [ { id: "formats", paths: ["/public-forum-debate", "/lincoln-douglas-debate", "/policy-debate", "/british-parliamentary-debate", "/world-schools-debate", "/congress-debate"] }, { id: "skills", paths: ["/how-to-write-a-debate-case", "/how-to-practice-rebuttals", "/debate-clash-points", "/debate-fallacies", "/debate-judge-adaptation", "/how-to-prepare-for-a-debate-tournament"] }, { id: "tools", paths: ["/tools", "/tools/debate-timer", "/tools/debate-motion-generator", "/tools/debate-flow-sheet", "/tools/speech-time-calculator"] }, - { id: "compare", paths: ["/best-ai-debate-tools", "/best-ai-for-debate", "/debateowl-vs-chatgpt"] }, + { id: "compare", paths: ["/best-ai-debate-tools", "/best-ai-for-debate", "/debateowl-vs-chatgpt", "/debateowl-vs-debate-ladder", "/free-vs-paid-ai-debate-tools", "/chatgpt-vs-claude-for-debate", "/best-ai-for-public-forum"] }, ] as const; const TOOLS = GROUPS.find((group) => group.id === "tools")!; @@ -54,7 +54,10 @@ const TranslatedToolsHub = ({ language }: { language: "hu" | "es" }) => { {/* The English home page lists every guide; a plain link loads it from the server. */} -

    +

    + {language === "hu" && ( + {t('guideHub.hungarianPrep')} + )} {t('guideHub.englishGuides')}

    diff --git a/src/locales/en.json b/src/locales/en.json index 4dc4f031..3d6ad63a 100644 --- a/src/locales/en.json +++ b/src/locales/en.json @@ -1023,6 +1023,7 @@ "tools": "Free tools", "compare": "Compare", "englishGuides": "Guides in English", + "hungarianPrep": "Debate prep with AI, in Hungarian", "links": { "ai-debate-practice": "AI debate practice", "ai-debate-case-generator": "AI case generator with citations", @@ -1048,7 +1049,11 @@ "tools/speech-time-calculator": "Speech time calculator", "best-ai-debate-tools": "Best AI debate tools compared", "best-ai-for-debate": "Which AI is best for debate?", - "debateowl-vs-chatgpt": "{{product}} vs ChatGPT" + "debateowl-vs-chatgpt": "{{product}} vs ChatGPT", + "debateowl-vs-debate-ladder": "{{product}} vs Debate Ladder", + "free-vs-paid-ai-debate-tools": "Free vs paid AI debate tools", + "chatgpt-vs-claude-for-debate": "ChatGPT vs Claude for debate", + "best-ai-for-public-forum": "Best AI for Public Forum" } }, "finalCta": { diff --git a/src/locales/es.json b/src/locales/es.json index 3f980d2a..98bc9b1f 100644 --- a/src/locales/es.json +++ b/src/locales/es.json @@ -1023,6 +1023,7 @@ "tools": "Herramientas gratis", "compare": "Comparar", "englishGuides": "Guías en inglés", + "hungarianPrep": "Preparación de debate con IA, en húngaro", "links": { "ai-debate-practice": "Práctica de debate con IA", "ai-debate-case-generator": "Generador de casos con IA y citas", @@ -1048,7 +1049,11 @@ "tools/speech-time-calculator": "Calculadora de tiempo de discurso", "best-ai-debate-tools": "Las mejores herramientas de IA para debate", "best-ai-for-debate": "Qué IA es mejor para el debate", - "debateowl-vs-chatgpt": "{{product}} frente a ChatGPT" + "debateowl-vs-chatgpt": "{{product}} frente a ChatGPT", + "debateowl-vs-debate-ladder": "{{product}} frente a Debate Ladder", + "free-vs-paid-ai-debate-tools": "Herramientas de debate con IA: gratis o de pago", + "chatgpt-vs-claude-for-debate": "ChatGPT o Claude para debatir", + "best-ai-for-public-forum": "La mejor IA para Public Forum" } }, "finalCta": { diff --git a/src/locales/hu.json b/src/locales/hu.json index 189d07b9..28e64c4d 100644 --- a/src/locales/hu.json +++ b/src/locales/hu.json @@ -1016,13 +1016,14 @@ }, "guideHub": { "title": "Vitaútmutatók és ingyenes eszközök", - "subtitle": "Olvass el egy útmutatót a következő forduló előtt, vagy nyiss meg egy ingyenes eszközt, fiók nélkül. Az útmutatók angol nyelvűek.", + "subtitle": "Olvass el egy útmutatót a következő forduló előtt, vagy nyiss meg egy ingyenes eszközt, fiók nélkül. Az útmutatók többsége angol nyelvű.", "practice": "Gyakorlás MI-vel", "formats": "Vitaformátumok", "skills": "Készségfejlesztő útmutatók", "tools": "Ingyenes eszközök", "compare": "Összehasonlítás", "englishGuides": "Angol nyelvű útmutatók", + "hungarianPrep": "Vitafelkészülés MI-vel (magyar útmutató)", "links": { "ai-debate-practice": "MI-alapú vitagyakorlás", "ai-debate-case-generator": "MI-esetgenerátor hivatkozásokkal", @@ -1048,7 +1049,11 @@ "tools/speech-time-calculator": "Beszédidő-kalkulátor", "best-ai-debate-tools": "A legjobb MI-alapú vitaeszközök", "best-ai-for-debate": "Melyik MI a legjobb vitához", - "debateowl-vs-chatgpt": "{{product}} vagy ChatGPT" + "debateowl-vs-chatgpt": "{{product}} vagy ChatGPT", + "debateowl-vs-debate-ladder": "{{product}} vagy Debate Ladder", + "free-vs-paid-ai-debate-tools": "Ingyenes és fizetős MI-vitaeszközök", + "chatgpt-vs-claude-for-debate": "ChatGPT vagy Claude vitára", + "best-ai-for-public-forum": "A legjobb MI Public Forumhoz" } }, "finalCta": { diff --git a/src/pages/tools/ToolsHubPage.tsx b/src/pages/tools/ToolsHubPage.tsx index 1c16b19f..df7b0c3b 100644 --- a/src/pages/tools/ToolsHubPage.tsx +++ b/src/pages/tools/ToolsHubPage.tsx @@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ export default function ToolsHubPage() {

    The flow sheet prints a page with one column per speech for the format you choose, and the speech time calculator tells you how long a written speech takes to deliver and which slots it fits.

    Two guides go with them: how debate speech times work in each format, and how to flow in debate.

    Looking for an AI to practice with? See which AI is best for debate.

    +

    Teaching? See AI debate tools for teachers.

    The four tools share one set of format data, taken from the NSDA, WUDC, WSDC and UADC rules and cited on the timer page, so a Public Forum round has the same speeches on the timer, the flow sheet and the calculator.

    diff --git a/src/pages/tools/localized/copy-hu.ts b/src/pages/tools/localized/copy-hu.ts index 02d13c32..73061ee5 100644 --- a/src/pages/tools/localized/copy-hu.ts +++ b/src/pages/tools/localized/copy-hu.ts @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ import type { LocalizedToolsCopy } from './copy-types'; export const COPY_HU: LocalizedToolsCopy = { - modified: '2026-10-26', + modified: '2026-10-29', tools: { '/tools/debate-timer': { name: 'Vitaidőmérő', @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ export const COPY_HU: LocalizedToolsCopy = { pages: { '/tools': { title: 'Ingyenes vitaeszközök', - intro: 'Eszközök a vitagyakorláshoz, amelyek bármelyik böngészőben működnek, és nem kell hozzájuk fiók. Az időmérő a fordulódat ebben a böngészőben menti, nem szerveren. Használd őket szakköri foglalkozáson vagy kivetítve az osztályteremben.', + intro: 'Eszközök a vitagyakorláshoz, amelyek bármelyik böngészőben működnek, és nem kell hozzájuk fiók. Az időmérő a fordulódat ebben a böngészőben menti, nem szerveren. Használd őket szakköri foglalkozáson vagy kivetítve az osztályteremben. Ha az órára készülsz MI-vel, a [vitafelkészülés magyar útmutatója](/hu/mi-vitafelkeszules) azt mondja meg, mire jó egy általános asszisztens, az alkalmazás és az ingyenes eszközök.', sections: [ { heading: 'Melyik eszköz mire való', @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ export const COPY_HU: LocalizedToolsCopy = { '/tools/debate-timer': { title: 'Ingyenes vitaidőmérő minden formátumhoz', - intro: 'Válassz formátumot, és az időmérő már tudja a beszédek sorrendjét, a védett perceket és az oldalak felkészülési idejét. Nem kell hozzá fiók, teljes egészében ebben a böngészőlapon fut, és az oldal újratöltése után is megtartja a fordulót.', + intro: 'Válassz formátumot, és az időmérő már tudja a beszédek sorrendjét, a védett perceket és az oldalak felkészülési idejét. Nem kell hozzá fiók, teljes egészében ebben a böngészőlapon fut, és az oldal újratöltése után is megtartja a fordulót. A felkészülés többi részéhez lásd a [vitafelkészülés MI-vel](/hu/mi-vitafelkeszules) útmutatót.', sections: [ { heading: 'Így vezess le vele egy fordulót', diff --git a/src/test/scripts/backend-status.test.ts b/src/test/scripts/backend-status.test.ts index 79dff538..6772dc54 100644 --- a/src/test/scripts/backend-status.test.ts +++ b/src/test/scripts/backend-status.test.ts @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ beforeEach(async () => { ].join("\n"), ); await chmod(join(root, "bin/supabase"), 0o755); -}); +}, 30_000); afterEach(async () => { await Promise.all(temporaryRoots.splice(0).map((path) => rm(path, { recursive: true, force: true }))); diff --git a/src/test/seo/guide-content.test.ts b/src/test/seo/guide-content.test.ts index 07e809f3..1e0d7872 100644 --- a/src/test/seo/guide-content.test.ts +++ b/src/test/seo/guide-content.test.ts @@ -47,6 +47,14 @@ function mainText(html: string, { withAbout }: { withAbout: boolean }): string { const wordCount = (text: string) => text.match(/[A-Za-z0-9][\w'’-]*/g)?.length ?? 0; +// Required, word for word, on the comparison pages. The duplicate-sentence check +// still applies to every other line. +const ALLOWED_REPEATS = new Set([ + "The DebateOwl app has no free plan (3-day free trial, then $5/month); the separate tools at /tools are free with no account", + "Facts about other products come from their own websites, checked on October 29, 2026", + "By the DebateOwl team · Published October 29, 2026 · Last updated October 29, 2026", +]); + describe("generated guide pages", () => { it("finds the guides", () => { expect(guides.length).toBeGreaterThan(20); @@ -65,7 +73,7 @@ describe("generated guide pages", () => { for (const { slug, html } of guides) { for (const raw of mainText(html, { withAbout: true }).split(/(?<=[.!?])\s+/)) { const sentence = raw.replace(/^[\s.]+|[\s.]+$/g, ""); - if (sentence.length <= SHARED_SENTENCE_LENGTH) continue; + if (sentence.length <= SHARED_SENTENCE_LENGTH || ALLOWED_REPEATS.has(sentence)) continue; pagesBySentence.set(sentence, (pagesBySentence.get(sentence) ?? new Set()).add(slug)); } }