When it comes to winning an argument, there may be nothing more challenging than trying to best a teenager. That would probably go double for Emily Audet and Ruhi Raje.

The Old Rochester Regional seniors have spent four years on the school’s debate team. This year they are half of an undefeated four-person team arguing in favor of a plan to increase economic engagement between the United States and Venezuela, Cuba or Mexico.

Raje admitted that the topic didn’t exactly enthrall her at the outset.

“You look at the resolve for the first time and say oh gosh, this is going to be boring,” she said. “You don’t know it’s interesting until you start researching.”

Raje and Audet have taken the affirmative position since joining the team as freshmen.

“Affirmatives are in favor of a resolution, make a plan in accordance with that resolution and negatives are always against,” explained Colin Everett, the social studies coordinator and debate coach.

Affirmatives formulate an argument after researching the topic and its history at length. Negatives, such as their fellow undefeated teammates John Hewitt and Justin Smilan, must be prepared to answer any argument they come against in competition.

“We were more of the research oriented type of people,” said Audet.

That means the two have a lot of ground to cover before their first debate. There are debate books that layout various arguments, but this year the girls decided to develop a unique plan.

“To chose to build a plan from scratch, it’s a lot more work, but it’s totally your plan and there are no pre-made arguments against it,” Raje said.

That has given the pair the element of surprise against negative teams they’ve come across in the Southeastern Massachusetts Debate League.

At each debate, the girls and their opponents gather in a classroom where they have to lay out their points.

“The judges don’t know anything about Venezuelan oil. In your short time you have to be able to explain everything, and then explain why we’re right,” Raje said.

They then have to be ready to defend their viewpoint against the objections of the negative team.

The affirmative team needs to win on four different “stock issues,” including the framework of the plan.

Going into their ninth debate, the undefeated seniors live and breathe their argument, always analyzing their position.

“Sometimes before I go to bed I think about debate,” said Raje. But she doesn’t mind the stress.

The longtime friends said if it weren’t fun, they would have quit debate a long time ago.

And now they’re in the unique position of being part of an undefeated team.

“That’s unusual. It takes hard work and dedication,” said Everett.

If both halves of the team win the Feb. 26 “power match,” they could face off against each other in the championship.

“I can’t imagine cross xing a friend because you have to be assertive, and it’d be really hard to be very serious,” Ruji said.

Although they are considered a team, due to their very different roles, the four teammates usually work separately, said Audet.

If the four do end up arguing against each other, Audet and Ruji admit they would not have the surprise factor they do against other teams.

There’s also the issue of keeping a straight face.

The last time they argued against each other was at the beginning of the season in a mock debate.

“That one always ends up devolving into giggles,” said Audet.