9spaceking is fairly hard to lose against

I was supposed to argue that it is easy to lose against the Pro, but I'm willing to debate the opposite though it may be harder. Before I begin my arguments, I will like to rebut some of the points made by Pro. 1. "I do not prepare for any of my debates, thus, I have to ab-lib along the way," How many people actually take time to prepare for debates? I don't and I only lost one debate. In fact, most debates do not need any preparations. One only needs to post what one thinks about a certain topic and what one doubts on one's opponents' arguments. Of all the debates out on this site, very small proportion of the users actually write out and edit their responses numerous times. As most people on this site are not professional debaters, they do not have time nor motivation to spent significant amount of time on their responses. 2. " I just scan over my response before I post it. " This is another ubiquitous behavior that most users of this site do. Only a few people actually put in the effort to edit and look over their answers numerous times. They simply use the "check your spelling" function at the bottom of the page and submit. 3. "I tried to support my position, but I failed in round one, because my grammar was incorrect and worded in a run-on sentence" Your grammar was not the issue in Round 1. It is the fact that Con, which is me, had to imply his stance using the double negative. There was confusion because the topic "9spaceking is fairly hard to lose against" becomes a double negative in Con's perspective. For example, as Con, I would have to argue that 9spaceking is not fairly hard to lose against, which is confusing. Therefore, it can even be argued that it is Con's fault of the confusion that had arisen in Round 1. 4. "I have only won debates my opponents forfeited" This assertion is a fact. I went through Pro's profile and discovered that his opponents forfeited all six of the debates he has won in the past. However, this does not mean Pro is easy to lose against. It simply means that the opponents of Pro's debates were lazy and unmotivated. 5. " Because of my one-sided topics that are usually way too biased, all my opponent has to do is minimum to no research at all" The fact that topics are one-sided does not indicate anything. If debates are way too biased, they are not debates at all. For example, the topic "who is bald," which Pro is debating currently, is not a debate. [1] Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines "debate" as "a contention by words or arguments. " [2] Since the topic "who is bald" can not be a contention, it is not a debate. 6. "I even make up and accept extremely dumb debate topics" It is my firm belief that no debates are stupid. Even topics such as "torture is cool" can be debated. Who is to decide whether a debate is dumb or not. Also, accepting extremely dumb debates do not support Pro's stance. 7. "As you can all see, I am very hard to lose against. " WHAT? All your arguments support the opposite that it is easy to lose against you. Which side are you debating? I cannot state my arguments if my stance is ambiguous. Please clarify. .. Because of the confusion, I will present my arguments in Round 3 after Pro states the stance of Con. I await Pro's clarification. [1]. http://www.debate.org... [2]. http://www.merriam-webster.com...