BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Russel Westbrook is not a top three point guard

First off I never said that russel Westbrook is a top three point guard cause he is definitely not.and in the link you gave me it was made before the season started and curry is ranked higher so no idea what that proves. When you look at the turnovers, Westbrook is averaging 5.6 tpg and Irving is only averaging two. So there's that. And like I said last post, all three of their teams would destroy Russel Westbrook. Any of these three people could do what Westbrook is doing if they took the place of Westbrook. Russel just simply gets more minutes than all of them. If 50% of the votes are fans of them, then what edge does that give the other three?lol so I am guessing you are saying that Westbrook is not a fan favorite. How does saying that i meant among active players mean that I said he is in the top three. I literally named three players that are better than him and active, so I do not see how that statement means I think he is in the top three lol. Russel Westbrook just simply is not as good of a point guard as everybody thinks he is. And averaging 5.6 and 6.2 assists are not bad. And harden is averaging more sooooooooo yeah. Good game
Russel Westbrook is not a top three point guard

After I accepted this debate, I realized that the title could have referred to all time best point guard and that would have been difficult to argue. My opponent then told me he meant best point guard currently playing ... "First of all, I am sorry for not saying among active players as that is what I meant." As you can see, he said the title of this debate meant of current players, not all time. This is easier to debate, because I believe Westbrook is definitely a top three point guard when eliminating all point guards who are no longer playing. However, my opponent is now telling me he meant that Westbrook is a top three point guard this season. If this is the case, I will have to believe that this debate is already won by me. There is no way anyone who knows NBA basketball who could argue that Westbrook is not a top three point guard this season. As I have stated already, he is averaging a triple double and that alone makes him the best point guard (and definitely top three) in the league this season. There really is no legitimate argument that can be made against that. "Just to let you know curry and irving are starting above him in the all-star game." And this is mainly due to the fans who vote, which accounts to 50% of the total votes. Not making the starting line up in the All Star game isn't always indicative of how great a player is. It's a lot of fan favorites that get voted in like Yao Ming. "so prove the stuff you say buddy with stats. all of my stats are coming from espn." I have backed my claims up with stats. I actually link them as well. But like I mentioned above, there is no way you can argue that Westbrook is not a top three point guard this year. Let's take a look at a more in-depth break down of the top point guards in the league. http://www.nba.com... "and btw kyrie had 49 even though LeBron james and the big three were in the game the whole time last night." Kyrie had 49 point, but how many assists did he have? Four ... four assists. Kyrie Irving is a point guard and he only dished it out 4 times. Not exactly a great point guard if all you're doing is scoring. And the fact that the Cavs still lost that game ... http://www.espn.com... And Kyrie Irving isn't even a great assists man. He averages only 5.6 assists and 2.6 turnovers. Not a great stat for a point guard. http://www.espn.com... Westbrook not a top three point guard this season? Let's get real and just look at the stats and the facts. They don't lie.
Russel Westbrook is not a top three point guard

I was talking about this season and not his career. Westbrook has had a better career than harden since he has started more seasons. And this season Westbrook is averaging more attempts than all of them. Westbrook: 23 fga irving: 19 fga harden: 18 curry: 17. So the more u shoot, the more points u can score so there that. And the more all stars you have the less minutes you will get. the fact that westbrook is averaging five more shots per game and harden is only averaging 2 less points is actually pretty bad. then when you look at the turnovers, westbrook is a turnover machine and he is averaging close to the most turnovers in the league. averaging 5.5 turnovers westbrook is. but I will say harden also needs to stop turning the ball over. when you look at their head to head, the rockets have beat the thunder 2 of 3 times btw. Just to let you know curry and irving are starting above him in the all-star game. then kyrie has really good stats for having the best player in the league and kevin love and will have J,R, smith. and curry is on the mosed stacked roster I have ever seen. currys stats are actually pretty good for having pretty much all all-stars in their starting line up. he is the fourth leading scorer behind kevin Durant and a couple other. so he is just accepting that he will not beable to shoot as much as he could last year. and btw kyrie had 49 even though LeBron james and the big three were in the game the whole time last night. well most of the time. and currys team has beat the thunder both times. so has the rockets beat them 2 of 3 and the cavs have not played them yet. and I am going by this season not career. and by the way you have said like one stat. so prove the stuff you say buddy with stats. all of my stats are coming from espn.
Russel Westbrook is not a top three point guard

Russell Westbrook is definitely a top 3 point guard actively playing in the league today. His stats prove it and so does his team's winning percentage with no other all stars playing alongside him. He's doing all the work and doing a great job of it, too. "James harden has 44% field goal percentage, Kyrie Irving is at 46%, and Steph curry is at 46%"I'll start with James Harden's career field goal percentage (.443). His best shooting season was when he came off the bench in OKC during the 2011-2012 season, shooting .491. His minutes were far fewer then as well (about 7 minutes fewer than during his time in Houston). This is why his field goal percentage was up; he shot the ball less than he does now. Was he a stud coming off the bench for OKC? Of course, he was the best 6th man at the time. But let's not forget, James Harden was not a point guard during this stretch. He was a shooting guard. He only became a point guard at the beginning of this season. So calling him a point guard isn't really fair. He should be eliminated from point guard ranking. . http://www.espn.com... Irving has lebron james and kevin love etc. and steph curry has kevin durant, draymond green, klay thompson, etc. and OKC has absolutely no one good on their team but him. You could argue that Steph Curry and Kyrie Irving are the top two point guards in the league today, but that would still make Westbrook the number three point guard using your top PG list. "irving has lebron james and kevin love etc. and steph curry has kevin durant, draymond green, klay thompson, etc. and OKC has absolutely no one good on their team but him. "The fact that these players have other All Stars on their roster only proves they may not be as great as you claim. With other All Stars they have less burden put on them and therefore they don't have it as hard as Westbrook. But this being said, since I believe Harden shouldn't even be on the point guard list, I can definitely say that Westbrook is definitely in the top 3 of current point guards. My list of top 5 point guards still playing.1) Westbrook2) Curry3) Paul4) Irving5) ThomasAnd of the point guards on your list, Westbrook is the best defensive player. He averages close to 2 steals per game (1.7) for his career. . http://www.foxsports.com...There really isn't much you could argue against Westbrook being the number one point guard in the league today, let alone top 3. Averaging a triple double this year shoots him to the top or the near top of the list.
Russel Westbrook is not a top three point guard

First of all, I am sorry for not saying among active players as that is what I meant. so let me say first who i think is better. 1. James harden 2. Steph curry 3. kyrie irving. 42% is actually pretty bad and all the three i mentioned actually have a better field goal percentage. james harden has 44% field goal percentage, Kyrie Irving is at 46%, and steph curry is at 46% even though he shoots way more threes than twos. then, james hrden has the rockets at the best of the conference and he also has no one to help him. if you compare kyrie irving and steph currys team to okc, then it is beleivable that are not getting as good of stats. james harden is averaging 28 ppg, 8rpg, and 11 apg so he is averaging more assists and only two less at the other two catagories. and like i said before, the rockets have a much better record than that of okc. curys and irvings stats are not as good but they actually have alot of good players around them so they will not get as good of stats. and currys stats: 24 ppg, 4 rpg, and 6 apg. irving stats: 23.8 ppg, 3.4 rpg and 5.6 apg. but make sure you do not forget to compare their rosters. irving has lebron james and kevin love etc. and steph curry has kevin durant, draymond green, klay thompson, etc. and OKC has absolutely no one good on their team but him. all of my information is coming from espn. look the stuff up if you have to.and point guards are notsupposed to be great rebounders. i will say westbrook is a better rebounder than all of them but that is it.
Russel Westbrook is not a top three point guard

I must admit that I accepted this debate on the premise that the title is referring to top three point guards still playing in the NBA today, then after accepting, realizing you could have easily been referring to all-time point guards. I will, however, make the argument for all-time.I'll start by breaking down why I believe Westbrook is a top three point guard in the league today, then will continue afterward as to why I believe he is top three all-time.Let's look at some of his stats in comparison to that of other top point guards in the league today. He's having a remarkable season this year, averaging a triple-double up to this point (just over half way through the season) and shows no sign of slowing down. Leading the league in scoring (30.6) and is also averaging over ten rebounds (10.6) and over ten assists (10.4). No other player with the exception of Oscar Robertson has averaged a triple double in an entire season. This was something that was considered impossible to do in today's NBA. Westbrook is proving that theory wrong.While his shooting percentage is not too outstanding (.423), for a point guard it isn't all that bad. His three point shooting is sitting at .324 which isn't spectacular, but for the amount of shots he's taking, it isn't that bad. So we know he's doing quite well this season. There really isn't much debate against that. He's on pace for MVP.Now let's look at his overall career ...PPG: 22.1RPG: 5.9APG: 7.8FG%: .4343Pt FG%: .305Westbrook was on a team that featured a super star, Kevin Durant, and was still able to play as a superstar himself, not having a bad career due to a team mate who stole the spotlight. Still was able to score points and dish the ball out quite well. Since Durant left the team, Westbrook has been able to flourish even more.As point guards go, there are none that can boast the numbers that Westbrook does on a continuous basis. Chris Paul, Derrick Rose, Tony Parker ... all superstar point guards at one some point in their career, but not on the level in which Westbrook is now. And let's not forget that his team, OKC, is definitely in the playoff hunt and can quite possibly end up in the top four playoff spots by the end of the season. Without him, they aren't even making the playoffs. http://www.espn.com...
In the United States, wealth inequality is detrimental to democratic ideals.

Please take a moment to review these rules and if you have questions, please ask in the comments. Also, when you agree to debate with me you must follow these rules. The first round will just be agreeing with the debate. Rules: No profanity Please debate Lincoln-Douglas style(Value,criterion,definitions,contentions...etc) Please be respectful when debating. (Don't get personal.) If you are observing the debate, you are welcome to leave your opinions on the current debate. I look forward to debating. :)
Should media ban anorexic/eating disorder models (part two)

Clearly you have ignored what I had to say. You really need to think of a new argument; you used it every round, every debate. First of all, politics are a completely different matter. Who said Obama was a model? We are talking advertisement and cover models, not role models. "A model passing out on the runaway from not eating, would harm the show," You are right. In fact, why would they hire anorexic models in the first place? That's why we DON'T WANT ANOREXIC MODELS. Gosh, do I have to repeat this every round? It is harmful to their appearance, health and appeal. Why are you countering that? "Is this the proposed standard on when to ban someone, when you on no objective standard, dislikes how someone looks?" Let's say we are forming a campaign against unhealthy models. Do we deliberately pick out attractive women just because we are jealous of them? Let me ask you, when did I say I disliked their appearance? "Heck as I said before, a lot of people dislike how President Obama looks, maybe this even harms their self-esteem, should he be banned from politics for this reason of looking wrong?" Heck as I said before that we are talking cover models not politics. Also, I stated in my previous counter that who says they disliked how they look? Plus, Obama isn't anorexic. P.S. Sorry if I missed a letter. You should use common sense before offending me. P.P.S. Sorry for being rude, I am pretty stressed out these days :( P.P.P.S. Sure, you can help me do another one to defeat someone else. I have never been good at English class, so I'm new on debate.org so I can practice my language.
Should media ban anorexic/eating disorder models (part two)

In the previous argument I cited human rights violations, lack of standards, actual racism in the proposal, all for the only benefit is hiding a problem instead of addressing it. All of which went unrefuted [1]. Current debate: “me myself have been conidering working out or going on a diet. Should this not be banned?” Currently your argument is actually self-refuting. Also please use spell check. No, you going on a diet or hitting the gym should not be banned. No, things that encourage that healthy behavior should also not be banned. Eating is healthy, but too much of it is a problem, should eating also be banned? Of course not. “Do the models look anorexic?” No they do not. Look at how little of the skeletal structure is visible on their sternum. In the picture below the one on the left may suffer from anorexia, yet what benefit would come from punishing her for it, defining what she is or is not allowed to do with her life? Is this the proposed standard on when to ban someone, when you on no objective standard, dislikes how someone looks? Accusations against Victoria’s Secret Further Victoria’s Secret models are not cast on the basis of how skinny they are, rather according to Sophia Neophitou-Apostolou the creative director: “It's about being show-ready, it's really like being an Olympian - they have to be in peak condition. It's not about being thin or anything like that - it's about being ready to perform and be the best you can be in that moment" [2]. A model passing out on the runaway from not eating, would harm the show. As this clearly demonstrates, the problem is self-regulating. Models are a type of athlete, by the same standards you’ve proposed, we would also have to ban being looking too skinny in any Olympic sport. "Just simply banning them to enforce the self-esteem of young girls, which is enforcing the human rights, am I correct?” Freedom is a human right [3], one that is not violated by someone else not looking how you would like them to look. Heck as I said before, a lot of people dislike how President Obama looks, maybe this even harms their self-esteem, should he be banned from politics for this reason of looking wrong? Oh he also smokes cigarettes, and is a role model, he could also be banned for that unhealthy habit… Or at least banned from having any pictures taken of him, as would be more fitting (equally bad) than banning models for mere perceived (as opposed to actual) unhealthy behavior. Question Is this proposed ban to be carried out solely by current media, or with government oversight? Sources: [1] http://www.debate.org... [2] http://www.vogue.co.uk... [3] http://www.humanrights.com...
Should media ban anorexic/eating disorder models (part two)

I started this debate so I can counter what the contender argued with previously.Take a Victoria secret model for example. Do the models look anorexic? Yes. Is Victoria Secret a popular franchise? Yes. Many girls envy their slim bodies and many girls decide to starve themselves and become anorexic just because of an ad. I, for a girl, know that this is true and me myself have been conidering working out or going on a diet. Should this not be banned? Also, this is not a violation of the "human rights". We are not fining them or throwing them in jail as you suggested. Just simply banning them to enforce the self-esteem of young girls, which is enforcing the human rights, am I correct?
Pigs are the best animal in the world!

You are a homo sapien. Do not try to deny that. And homo sapiens are the only species that have invented philosophy, society, beliefs, mapped the world, explored outer-space, and did I mention advanced-technology?As humans, we have opposable thumbs, something only us and chimpanzees have. This allows humans to operate tools, climb, swim, and "it is the only digit on the human hand which is able to oppose or turn back against the other four fingers, and thus enables the hand to refine its grip to hold objects which it would be unable to do otherwise.", as stated by http://www.ruf.rice.edu...This by itself may not seem impressive, but "humans are the only creatures with a fully opposable thumb." This "fully opposable thumb" is what allows us to do things other animals cannot, invent advanced technology, drive cars, even climb mountains! Although "many animals, primates and others, also have some kind of opposable thumb or toe", the pig is not one of them. Thus, your "superior species" does not have this pig advantage we have.Pigs have more taste buds---but what do they eat? "They can eat vegetables, fruit and even bugs....farmers...use corn or soybean meal as the main ingredient in a pig diet. Many farmers add an ingredient called dried whey for protein and sugar...Farmers also give pigs important minerals.....Calsium." as shown by http://animalsmart.org...-. That's not a big variety, as far as I'm concerned. The human diet, in contrast, is incredibly wide, stretching from bugs, to the "king of the jungle"--lions, and even trees and plants succumb to our weapons.Pigs have more teeth--Soooo? Sharks have 50,000 teeth, but "As these teeth do not have roots, they break off easily and therefore, they last for about only a week before they fall out.", as said by http://www.nlb.gov.sg.... It does not matter about the number of teeth, what matters is how strong the teeth are!Pigs run faster: Wild hogs can run as fast as 40 miles per hour. Other hogs in captivity, may not run more than 7 to 10 miles per hour. As shown by http://www.ask.com.... So it really depends on what kind of pig, eh? I am forced to agree. The world record is merely 28 miles per hour in comparison. HOWEVER....as stated by this source: http://www.livescience.com..., humans theoretically CAN run as fast as your "wild hogs". But humans have yet to do so, so I have to concede this point.Pigs swim faster: I have found a source that tells us pigs indeed do swim, but I have yet to find a source that says how fast they swim. "The average person can swim about 3 miles per hour. An Olympic swimmer can move as quickly as 5 miles per hour." Says http://www.ask.com...
Pigs are the best animal in the world!

Here are 5 basic facts that prove pigs are superior, 1.Pigs have more teeth (44) than humans (adults 32, children 20). 2.Pigs have more taste buds than any other mammal (including humans!). 3.Pigs are very good swimmers and strong runners. On foot they can manage up to 30 miles per hour. If only they were able to ride bikes they could start entering triathlons. Therefore on land and water they are better than humans. 4.They may not be the smartest but pigs are sometimes credited with being the 4th most intelligent non-human animal. Chimpanzees come first in most tests, followed by dolphins, elephants, and pigs, making them very close to humans. 5. You said they aren't technological? Pigs often use mud as a sunscreen. By the definition of technology, thats being technological. Why not impress family and friends by trying it yourself this summer? source:www.youngveggie.org/10thingsabout/pigs#
Pigs are the best animal in the world!

I stand corrected: HOMO sapiens. not humo. Sorry for the mistake. Reason why the homo sapien is the superior spiecies: (sources: http://humanorigins.si.edu...) Pigs are trapped by humans, showing that we are better than them. Does this look like they are superior than us? Yes? Then why are they trapped? 2. Their intelligence.http://www.farmedanimalfriends.org...;While pigs may be as smart as 3-year-old humans, they don't have the sentience humans have. Definition of sentient: http://dictionary.reference.com...;3. Our technology vs what they have.Do pigs have anything? I doubt it. If they are truly as intelligent as us they would have figured out some technology, but until modern day 21st century, they have yet to invent even the simplest thing possible.4. Evolution. As shown by http://www.freerepublic.com..., humans are evolved from pigs.evolution: a product of such development; something evolvedhttp://dictionary.reference.com...;development: the act or process of developing; growth; progress http://dictionary.reference.com...;As shown by these two definitions and the link above, humans are the growed version of pig--the developed, better version of the pig. In conclusion the Homo sapien (not the Humo Sapien) is the superior species on earth.
Pigs are the best animal in the world!

animal: a living organism that feeds on organic matter, typically having specialized sense organs and nervous system and able to respond rapidly to stimuli.https://www.google.com...Earth: the earth, together with all of its countries, peoples, and natural features.https://www.google.com...superior: higher in rank, status, or quality.https://www.google.com...I accept and argue that the most superior species on this Earth is....(drum roll please)The Humo Sapien.