To clarify, when I said write a list of blocks, I didn’t mean
You need to go more in depth than that and subdivide things more. So to take realism as an example, there are many nuances that you will want to have different blocks for
-realism good vs realism inevitable- these are very different arguments, though related. There is a uniqueness component here that you will need to be aware of and reflect in your blocks
-realism inevitable- can have multiple warrants- biology/evolution, societal pressure, inertia etc. You will (ideally) want to read different cards depending on what the argument is.
Many teams just get up and read the same 5 realism bad cards no matter what the aff says. This is not necessarily a losing strategy, but it is definitely not the optimum strategy. This is an area where good are separated from great.
As for practicing vs a dummy 2AC, below I have made one. It took about a minute. I just opened a genero camp k answer file and cut and pasted a bunch of stuff together like a sloppy 2AC might. Some of the arguments are repetitive/overlap. Part of debating the K well is being able to identify this so that you can intelligently group things. I was too lazy to write out analytics but you can imagine you will have to deal with some of those as well. So what I would do is read through these cards and try to sort them out into groups of arguments, and then go through your blocks and see which ones best respond to these groups, or are their individual cards that need special attention.