This study attempted to determine if the "comparative advantages" debate case is a legitimate and logical approach to affirmative case construction in college and high school debate. The study population totaled 25 high school debate directors and 40 college and university debate directors. Four tape-recorded debates, in which an affirmative team presented a "typical" comparative-advantages case, were sent to coaches for critique and evaluation, structured around several suggested questions. The objective of the study was to develop models to aid coaches and students in developing their comparative-advantages cases. The models also could eliminate the confusions present in textbooks and articles concerning speaker responsibilities and the proper organization of such cases. In general, however, the study was disappointing. The population sample was too small and the general nature of some critiques made evaluation difficult. However, the comparative-advantages method is an acceptable form of case construction although a model case seems difficult to organize. (Author/DE)