PDA

View Full Version : What's your opinion on...


Candy Sue
11-07-2011, 01:28 PM
The Pork Rule?

Do you believe that the current pork rule regarding the non-reheating of separated pork is important? If so, why? What about the pork collar prohibition?

Thanks!

boogiesnap
11-07-2011, 01:42 PM
i agree with it. i'd maybe even lean so far as to say the pork category should be whole shoulder cooked whole. period.


anyway, how is such a rule enforced? there's no real way.
unfortunately though it is a slippery slope if you remove it altogether. pretty soon i would imagine there would be alot of tenderloin being cooked and turned in.

however, if you can slice a brisket, put it in beef broth, and reheat, why not pork? should be 1 or the other IMHO, but not different for each category.

i'm not touching collar.

bover
11-07-2011, 01:58 PM
The Pork Rule?

Do you believe that the current pork rule regarding the non-reheating of separated pork is important? If so, why? What about the pork collar prohibition?

Thanks!

As for the parting and reheating, it seems to me that a rule that is nearly impossible to enforce is a rule that shouldn't exist. What was the original intent behind it anyway?

Jeff_in_KC
11-07-2011, 02:12 PM
Josh, you probably have to get it from someone who's been around KCBS for 20 years or so but best I recall, it had something to do with proving what part of the pork a team was cooking. Bunny Tuttle is a good person to talk to about this. Maybe she will chime in on this. But the way I see it, if I want to separate every muscle in the butt or shoulder, why would it make any difference? I don't think I would, at risk of drying them out but does it really matter? I don't believe it does. The rule is not enforeable in the first place. Currently, I put my chicken back on. I put my cut ribs back on to set the glaze a bit and I put my burnt ends in a foil pouch to keep them hot while I'm getting everything else ready for the brisket turn-in. There's no solid reason that I know of why pork could not be the same.

Pork collar, though... that's not a legal cut and should not be allowed. Problem is, the average meat inspectior, who, upon looking at a small section of meat that cooks pull up out of the ice during inspections, deems it legal, could in no way determine if it was a butt or something else. I'm not sure it's enforceable and I am not in favor of opening it up to just be "Pork". Don't wanna see pork chops or bacon as an entry. That's not barbecue. Same goes for beef... how long before we see steak turned in? Allowing additional cuts or opening it up wide is a dangerous precident to set. Chicken is different though... any piece of chicken is sufficiently like any other piece that it doesn't matter. Bacon is a lot different than a butt.

YankeeBBQ
11-07-2011, 02:33 PM
The Pork Rule?

Do you believe that the current pork rule regarding the non-reheating of separated pork is important? If so, why? What about the pork collar prohibition?

Thanks!

I think it's important we get rid of it so that our rules are consistent across the board. Making special rules to keep cheaters from cheating isn't very effective if the rule is unenforceable. There are legitimate reasons for separating muscles of the butt that are well within the spirit of bbq and competitions. As far as I know (I've never seen a pork collar in person) pork collar is not part of the Picnic, Butt or Whole Shoulder and therefore is not a legal cut of meat.

Scottie
11-07-2011, 03:45 PM
I like both rules. No need to change.

Cue's Your Daddy
11-07-2011, 04:01 PM
Why was the parting of pork rule put into effect in the 1st place. I understand the pork collar rule and agree with it.

Tarheel
11-07-2011, 05:10 PM
Why was the parting of pork rule put into effect in the 1st place. I understand the pork collar rule and agree with it.

The best I remember it was because people were parting there pork out into smaller pieces in an effort to get more bark.

Personally I see no difference between the pork and the brisket. If you can take a brisket and cut the point off and put it back on the cooker why should you not be able to do the same with a piece of pork.

The way the rule is now you cant even try to keep it warm by putting it back on the cooker or in a warming box once you have pulled it.

boogiesnap
11-07-2011, 07:23 PM
i thought it was to prevent tenderloins being cooked.

it wasn't about "parting" but about the actual cut of meat being put on the cooker.

but, it's before my time.

Rookie'48
11-07-2011, 08:09 PM
As far as the "parting" rule goes, try this one on for size:

I butterfly a butt, leaving the money muscle attached by a very thin strip but it's still attached.

I apply rub to all exposed surfaces of the butt for maximum bark.

When the money muscle is at the temp that I want it I open the smoker, grab the muscle in my left hand, cut the thin connecting tissue with the knife in my right hand, remove the money muscle and close the smoker door.

I now have in my hand a well cooked money muscle that has bark and a smoke ring all the way around it (or so close to all the way that you'd really have to look) and still have the remainder of the butt in the smoker.

I have not "returned" any meat to the smoker after "parting".

Am I legal or not???

I think that this would follow the strict letter of the rule while it probably does violate the intent, whatever the intent was when it was passed. As others have said it's not consistent with the rules for other categories so why have it for pork?

YankeeBBQ
11-07-2011, 08:33 PM
As far as the "parting" rule goes, try this one on for size:

I butterfly a butt, leaving the money muscle attached by a very thin strip but it's still attached.

I apply rub to all exposed surfaces of the butt for maximum bark.

When the money muscle is at the temp that I want it I open the smoker, grab the muscle in my left hand, cut the thin connecting tissue with the knife in my right hand, remove the money muscle and close the smoker door.

I now have in my hand a well cooked money muscle that has bark and a smoke ring all the way around it (or so close to all the way that you'd really have to look) and still have the remainder of the butt in the smoker.

I have not "returned" any meat to the smoker after "parting".

Am I legal or not???

I think that this would follow the strict letter of the rule while it probably does violate the intent, whatever the intent was when it was passed. As others have said it's not consistent with the rules for other categories so why have it for pork?
Clearly not Legal if you read the rule as written. It says and I quote "Pork shall be cooked whole (bone in or bone out) and shall not be separated during the cooking process." The part about pork being returned to a cooker is in another sentence. "At no time shall the meat once separated be returned to a cooker."

Cue's Your Daddy
11-08-2011, 06:16 AM
I think I should have clarified my question a little. What was it that made the powers that be implement a rule in which pork can not be parted? Did something hqppen at a contest or was there a complaint filed somehow. I understand why people part pork, and the purpose of parting all makes sense but it seems that NOT allowing people to have the option to part pork doesn't. The rule is the rule, but I am just wondering why parting is a bad thing and it almost seems that the only answer that I have come up with is "because it is".

swamprb
11-08-2011, 08:04 AM
Just curious how many of you have actually cooked a pork collar, CT Butt, collar trim or Close Trim Butt as I've seen them described or labeled?

It seems like the big deal was the 4 pounders from Snake River Farms that got everyones britches in a bunch. Its not like you see them in every meat dept.

Before we get into a pi$$ing match about the legality of the cut-consider that I cook PNWBA and have only cooked a few KCBS events and I'm not going to knowingly use them. They were presented to us from our supplier as boneless Berkshire CT Butts or "close trim butts".
I'd never heard of them and made sure they weighed over 5 lbs., was told chefs rolled and tied them and sliced it like loins. This was way before the whole SRF 4lb collars came to everyones attention.
Around here they are sold in Asian Markets as Boneless Berkshire Pork Butts and usually sliced thin for Sukiyaki. They are butchered and packed in USDA facilities and sold in the US of A.

So how does the average cook looking for a different breed or grade of Pork differntiate the cuts if they are packaged as boneless butts and weigh over 5 lbs?

How can the Meat Inspector detect a packaged Pork Collar if its sold, packaged and weighs out as a 5lb Boneless Butt??

I believe David Bouska gave the BOD information regarding the Pork Collar before the ruling, and I breifly spoke to him about it at his class earlier this year, and I can live with it.
But with all the niche breed pork products that are out there its only a matter of time before someone is going to spend $25 lb for Mangalista or Mulefoot pork butts, or turn in Pork Short Ribs just to push the envelope! Hint to the KCBS Meat Inspectors working the Pacific Northwest!

I'm with Tarheel and those thanking his post regarding Pork and Brisket.

KCBS member and voting.



Wondering if Snake River Farms could be partnering with KCBS? Be a great fit!

Jorge
11-08-2011, 08:26 AM
I've looked at the rule, and talked to several people about making some changes to the pork category. Feedback has ranged from do it, to leave it as is, and I'm still thinking about it.

My primary concern, and the reason I started looking at the issue has already been brought out. The rule is virtually unenforceable. Unless we pull Reps out of bed at 4AM to start looking in cookers to determine what is actually being cooked we have created a system where the playing field favors those willing to cheat, period.

When the pork collar issue was raised I ordered two to see what the issues were. The first thing I did was trim one and foodsaver it. I will tell you that in my opinion it could easily pass for a butt during meat inspection, and a conversation with someone that has forgotten more about meat and meat processing than most of us will ever collectively know, confirmed that. When I cooked them, I found areas where I believe a cook willing to cheat could gain an advantage based on what they would have available to place in the box.

If we, as an organization don't have the willingness or ability to enforce the existing rule then I think we need an honest discussion about changing the rule. I don't believe the current situation benefits the overwhelming majority of cooks that will play by the rules.

A well known cook thought about a suggestion I made that we need to open the pork category up, and thought about it for almost a week. His reply was that he couldn't support a change that would allow virtually any pork product and his reasoning was sound. He believes that we need at least two long cooks, and at the end of the day it comes down to the honor system. That carries a lot of weight with me. I'm still looking for some middle ground to adequately address all of the issues.

My current proposal would be to form a committee of cooks to review the rules annually at the end of the season. The process would be simple. In each category we would ask the top 3-5 cooks in each category to serve, and possibly allow board members to place additional cooks on the committee to hopefully balance out regional representation. Those cooks would be given 2-3 months to discuss the issues related to the rules for that category and submit one or more interim reports to the board on their progress. The final product would go to the board for a vote, and follow the current policy to insure cooks will be cooking under one set of rules for the entire season. Changes, if any, are coming from the membership and in a more timely manner than a rules meeting at the banquet.

If anyone has concerns or criticism, I'd like to hear it so that I can make changes as needed. It's a process that I think has the potential to benefit everyone.

boogiesnap
11-08-2011, 08:37 AM
i agree with everything you wrote jorge, except for the 2-3 month discussion period.

i think that may be too long.

let's say a change is implemented to the pork rule after 3 months. that could put quite a crunch on teams being able to practice and perfect a "new" cook.

while you'd want a well thought out decision, maybe limit it to say 6 weeks. giving teams plenty of time in the off-season to practice or adapt to any changes.

just my 2 cents.

Jorge
11-08-2011, 08:38 AM
Reviewing my answer, I think I held back.

I'm in favor of getting rid of the parting rule as well for similar reasons. As the rule is currently written it's illegal to remove the money muscle and then return any portion of that butt to the cooker. Another unenforceable rule, unless we are are going to have pork police in every site to watch the cook process the meat and place it in the box.

We need a set of rules that are enforceable, and the willingness to do so. I think we need to allow the many creative cooks we have to do what they do best and allow the judges to determine what is or isn't BBQ. I know I'll take some heat from traditionalists, and purists, and in some cases that may cost me votes. I can live with that. It's what I believe we should do to benefit everyone.

Jorge
11-08-2011, 08:48 AM
i agree with everything you wrote jorge, except for the 2-3 month discussion period.

i think that may be too long.

let's say a change is implemented to the pork rule after 3 months. that could put quite a crunch on teams being able to practice and perfect a "new" cook.

while you'd want a well thought out decision, maybe limit it to say 6 weeks. giving teams plenty of time in the off-season to practice or adapt to any changes.

just my 2 cents.

There really isn't much of an off season for those willing to travel. The current system for rules changes would allow for almost an entire year for cooks to become prepared. In some cases that may not provide a quick enough turnaround for some. I'm willing to look at timing, given enough positive feedback and explanations of when and why if that made the approach more productive in the view of the majority of cooks.

dmprantz
11-08-2011, 09:20 PM
Since you asked....

I am not a big fan of the parting rule, particularly as it pertains to placing cooked meat back in the cooker. I find it inconsistant and would like to see it go away. Not quite sure on how I feel about allowing other cuts of meat, but as long as it is limited to shoulder, I think the category should be renamed from "Pork" on things like score sheets, because there are two pork categories.

I honestly don't see much of a problem with Pork Collar either. I've never cooked one for competition and won't as long as they are illegal, but it just seems like a bunch of whining to me. Please take no offense.

I would personally like to say that I really appreciate you taking the time to ask the membership this question in a forum Candy! One time I asked a question in this forum about rules and was told that few board members read forums and none make rules decisions based on that reading. The fact that you care to ask us our opinion means a lot to me.

dmp

Slamdunkpro
11-08-2011, 10:52 PM
The Pork Rule?

Do you believe that the current pork rule regarding the non-reheating of separated pork is important? If so, why? What about the pork collar prohibition?

Thanks!

First, the pork definition as it currently exists is pretty much gibberish. If you want cooks to use shoulders butts or picnics over 5 pounds so that they're cooking 2 big meats, then tighten up the definition to:

Legal pork shall consist of IMPS shoulder #403 and it's derivatives ( 403B, 403C, 404, 406, 406B, 406C, and 407) where the animal has been broken no further rostral than Cervical vertebra C3 and no further caudal than thoracic vertebra T1 (the first rostral rib).

Problem solved.

As for the parting rule, what would be the result? Everyone would start parting out the money muscle. To me part of the skill involved is cooking the whole butt and getting usable pieces from it at the end. Take that away and we might as well be cooking tenderloins.

Is the current rule unenforceable? No, but it would mean that the reps would have to go out in the field and spot check cookers. As it stands right now with trailers, walled tents, other visual barriers and no spot checks pretty much every rule is subject to being broken except for the integrity of the competitors. Until we put an enforcement mechanism in place and use it it doesn't matter what the rules committee comes up with.

jcpetro97
11-09-2011, 08:29 AM
ok.. total competition noob question, to don't kill me for askin... ;-)

If the big worry is cheating about cuts of meat, especially in the pork category, why not have someone supply the competition with the long-cook meats that seem to be in question.. This way, the playing field is level. the teams could pay for the meat, and even order as much as they want. ie, if a team wants to cook 4 butts, then order 4.... I am sure there are logistical problems that go with this, but I am just wondering why something like this wouldn't be possible, or if there is a flaw in my logic

boogiesnap
11-09-2011, 08:45 AM
take a quick look at the recent clamshell discussion in the time to stir the BOD pot thread.

ModelMaker
11-09-2011, 08:45 AM
I've looked at the rule, and talked to several people about making some changes to the pork category. Feedback has ranged from do it, to leave it as is, and I'm still thinking about it.

My primary concern, and the reason I started looking at the issue has already been brought out. The rule is virtually unenforceable. Unless we pull Reps out of bed at 4AM to start looking in cookers to determine what is actually being cooked we have created a system where the playing field favors those willing to cheat, period.

When the pork collar issue was raised I ordered two to see what the issues were. The first thing I did was trim one and foodsaver it. I will tell you that in my opinion it could easily pass for a butt during meat inspection, and a conversation with someone that has forgotten more about meat and meat processing than most of us will ever collectively know, confirmed that. When I cooked them, I found areas where I believe a cook willing to cheat could gain an advantage based on what they would have available to place in the box.

If we, as an organization don't have the willingness or ability to enforce the existing rule then I think we need an honest discussion about changing the rule. I don't believe the current situation benefits the overwhelming majority of cooks that will play by the rules.

A well known cook thought about a suggestion I made that we need to open the pork category up, and thought about it for almost a week. His reply was that he couldn't support a change that would allow virtually any pork product and his reasoning was sound. He believes that we need at least two long cooks, and at the end of the day it comes down to the honor system. That carries a lot of weight with me. I'm still looking for some middle ground to adequately address all of the issues.

My current proposal would be to form a committee of cooks to review the rules annually at the end of the season. The process would be simple. In each category we would ask the top 3-5 cooks in each category to serve, and possibly allow board members to place additional cooks on the committee to hopefully balance out regional representation. Those cooks would be given 2-3 months to discuss the issues related to the rules for that category and submit one or more interim reports to the board on their progress. The final product would go to the board for a vote, and follow the current policy to insure cooks will be cooking under one set of rules for the entire season. Changes, if any, are coming from the membership and in a more timely manner than a rules meeting at the banquet.

If anyone has concerns or criticism, I'd like to hear it so that I can make changes as needed. It's a process that I think has the potential to benefit everyone.


I would love to see this rule addressed and corrected (my view of it).
I think every cook team has something to say about this rule so it must need tweaking.
Personally as a one contest a year, financially challenged team, I only cook one butt. What a joy it must be to have 3 or 4 butts to cook to different levels of doneness to perfect temps for each muscle group and presentation forms. I would love to pull the money muscle when it's cooked to my liking and return the rest to finish cooking as I desire.
Just like my one packer brisket!!
I believe the majority of the membership wants this, so lets make it so, soon.
As far as the collar cut of pork, it's just a different cut like a chop, I don't think we need new categories of pork.
Ed

mobow
11-09-2011, 09:54 AM
i'm with model maker

ique
11-09-2011, 10:01 AM
As for the parting rule, what would be the result? Everyone would start parting out the money muscle. To me part of the skill involved is cooking the whole butt and getting usable pieces from it at the end. Take that away and we might as well be cooking tenderloins.

A cook can still essentially do that legally now by leaving a 1" token connection between the money muscle and the rest of the butt.

I'm also not sure everyone would go the sliced pork route. I think judges expect some pulled pork. In fact there are many successful pork cooks that submit no slices at all.

I've discussed this with many cooks at classes and at contests and no one has said to me they are interested in fully parting. Most want to just be able to put their fully cooked processed pork back on the pit to set sauce or keep warm.

A rule that would cover this is something along the lines of ... "Pork cannot be parted until fully cooked". While this is not enforceable, either is the current rule.

There are up sides and down sides but I think the best option is to treat Pork the same as Brisket.

And No to pork collar

jcpetro97
11-09-2011, 11:05 AM
take a quick look at the recent clamshell discussion in the time to stir the BOD pot thread.


Ahh.. makes sense... Thanks for pointing that out... I hadn't thought about that part of it.

Podge
11-09-2011, 11:13 AM
I think the pork separation rule is completely silly. There's more rules for pork than the other 3 catagories. All should be on the equal playing field. We can keep the other 3 warm in the smoker if need be, why not pork?.. Geez, just does not make logical sense.


I've never understood what a pork collar is, so can't comment.

dhuffjr
11-09-2011, 11:32 AM
I've never understood what a pork collar is, so can't comment.

Same here. I'd love to see one. I searched a while back and didn't find anything. How bout a picture of a collar and a butt side by side?

sitnfat
11-09-2011, 11:36 AM
The rules are fine.

Q-Dat
11-09-2011, 11:55 AM
It amazes me that there is so much opposition to changing a rule that nobody can explain why we have it in the first place.

And just in case someone says that parting a Butt to cook it takes the amount of skill necessary down a level, there are a ton of things that have come into popularity in the last decade or so that do that. And they are all perfectly legal.

Plowboy
11-09-2011, 12:04 PM
I think it's important we get rid of it so that our rules are consistent across the board. Making special rules to keep cheaters from cheating isn't very effective if the rule is unenforceable. There are legitimate reasons for separating muscles of the butt that are well within the spirit of bbq and competitions. As far as I know (I've never seen a pork collar in person) pork collar is not part of the Picnic, Butt or Whole Shoulder and therefore is not a legal cut of meat.

There are a lot of things that could be deemed unenforceable. How much happens inside the tralier these days: LP tanks connected to cookers, parted pork, etc.? Do we need a pit official watching every move? I think throwing the baby out with the bathwater is a little rash. (To coin a pun.)

I say leave it.

As for seperate rules for how one category is treated versus another, parting pork isn't the only example. I can debone a chicken, but I can't turn in boneless ribs?

Lake Dogs
11-09-2011, 12:09 PM
As many a brisket are parted for very similar reasons, the rule for pork one way and brisket another makes no sense at all. I'm in the camp of handle/treat them the same.

Hopefully rules are enforceable, but sometimes we're simply left to the integrity of the individual. It happens. If it doesnt change; I'm good with it. If it does change; I'm good with it.

Plowboy
11-09-2011, 12:10 PM
It amazes me that there is so much opposition to changing a rule that nobody can explain why we have it in the first place.

And just in case someone says that parting a Butt to cook it takes the amount of skill necessary down a level, there are a ton of things that have come into popularity in the last decade or so that do that. And they are all perfectly legal.

The history has been explained in the past by those old timers that were around when it came about. The reason "no one" can explain it is because it is such a long standing KCBS rule that many of us weren't around.

The birth of the rule came about when people were taking a pork butt and cooking off a small part of it very fast. Think of how the category changes if we go from pork butt/picnic/whole shoulder to a money muscle the size of a tenderloin. That's the fear I have in changing the rule is that you open the category to dramatic change and away from what it is supposed to be.

Even further back, the KCBS pork shoulder category was just pork. Loin was often submitted. It then changed to pork shoulder and then to unparted pork shoulder.

ALX
11-09-2011, 12:11 PM
Same here. I'd love to see one. I searched a while back and didn't find anything. How bout a picture of a collar and a butt side by side?

This link shows the "pork collar" in relation to the whole "butt"....

http://curedmeats.blogspot.com/2007/10/coppa-butchery-how-to-harvest-one.html

Wrench_H
11-09-2011, 12:12 PM
I've only done 2 comps, so bare with my ignorance. We didn't turn in sliced money muscle, but rather a few chunks, and some smaller pulled pieces in the middle with some sauce. I'm planning to start turning in sliced MM. My thought is that I will just cook multiple butts. One for the MM and 1-3 more for pulled chunks. Is this what others do? If its this easy to get around, why have the rule anyway? Not that the ~$15-20 is going to break any team buying an extra butt, but it just seems like all this rule does is forces you spend that if you want different temps. And I'm with the OP, I don't see any logical explanation, although I'm sure there is or was one, for this rule that can't easily be worked around anyway.

YankeeBBQ
11-09-2011, 12:16 PM
This link shows the "pork collar" in relation to the whole "butt"....

http://curedmeats.blogspot.com/2007/10/coppa-butchery-how-to-harvest-one.html


Umm that is the money muscle I'm not sure this is correct info. Could be since I've never seen a pork collar or how it is butchered from a pig.

Alexa RnQ
11-09-2011, 12:17 PM
I say leave the rule, and abide by it with integrity.

It disgusts me that we have to turn ourselves inside out trying to craft a rule to weed out all the possible permutations of cheating, when it's so farking simple to just cook the pork correctly and pull it just before turn-in.

Jorge
11-09-2011, 12:21 PM
There are a lot of things that could be deemed unenforceable. How much happens inside the tralier these days: LP tanks connected to cookers, parted pork, etc.? Do we need a pit official watching every move? I think throwing the baby out with the bathwater is a little rash. (To coin a pun.)

I say leave it.

As for seperate rules for how one category is treated versus another, parting pork isn't the only example. I can debone a chicken, but I can't turn in boneless ribs?

I understand your point of view, and the reasoning behind it and that works fine from weekend to weekend.

Lets assume that not too far down the road cook 'X' wins $50k+ at a contest that generates some buzz outside of the normal BBQ circles, and the following weekend gets popped for violating rule 'Y'.

Do you see a potential problem for KCBS, in terms of future partnerships/sponsorship? I do. As a sanctioning organization, selling a service, KCBS has some liability and an obligation to address these kinds of issues. If we have a rule, that we can't or won't enforce then that liability increases. I understand the honor system and abide by it, but there are those that won't.

Three things in life that a lot of people will scrap about are politics, religion, and money and not always in that order. KCBS needs to get in front of the issue while there is still the opportunity. If we don't the first time a big player gets caught cheating we could see the beginning of the end for the money that's starting to roll into BBQ, and that benefits nobody.

ALX
11-09-2011, 12:21 PM
Umm that is the money muscle I'm not sure this is correct info. Could be since I've never seen a pork collar or how it is butchered from a pig.


The number 4 in diagram was what i was refering too...the actual pics in link are confusing....

Q-Dat
11-09-2011, 12:40 PM
The history has been explained in the past by those old timers that were around when it came about. The reason "no one" can explain it is because it is such a long standing KCBS rule that many of us weren't around.

The birth of the rule came about when people were taking a pork butt and cooking off a small part of it very fast. Think of how the category changes if we go from pork butt/picnic/whole shoulder to a money muscle the size of a tenderloin. That's the fear I have in changing the rule is that you open the category to dramatic change and away from what it is supposed to be.

Even further back, the KCBS pork shoulder category was just pork. Loin was often submitted. It then changed to pork shoulder and then to unparted pork shoulder.

OK so basically people were doing the equivalent of grilling Pork Steaks. I did know about the pork loin thing. Paul Kirk told us about that at his class. I think he also mentioned a time when Flank Steak could be turned in as an alternative to Brisket. That might have been someone else that told me that though.

I'm not saying that we should be able to hack a butt into pieces to cook it, I'm just saying that if there is a particular part of that butt that cooks faster(and we all know which part I mean) that there should be no rule infraction for pulling off just that part to let it finish.

I am a firm believer in any rule change within reason that makes competing more affordable. And this would cut down on meat costs for many of us by not having to cook multiple butts to get the end result we are looking for.

mikerobes
11-09-2011, 01:39 PM
I am a firm believer in any rule change within reason that makes competing more affordable. And this would cut down on meat costs for many of us by not having to cook multiple butts to get the end result we are looking for.[/QUOTE]

BINGO: I simply cook 3-4 butts, (my cooker is big enough), pull 1-2 early for the MM, unless I want to turn in Mushy Money muscle. Change this rule and I and many others save money and waste, because I throw away the non MM pork I pull early.

YankeeBBQ
11-09-2011, 01:44 PM
The history has been explained in the past by those old timers that were around when it came about. The reason "no one" can explain it is because it is such a long standing KCBS rule that many of us weren't around.

The birth of the rule came about when people were taking a pork butt and cooking off a small part of it very fast. Think of how the category changes if we go from pork butt/picnic/whole shoulder to a money muscle the size of a tenderloin. That's the fear I have in changing the rule is that you open the category to dramatic change and away from what it is supposed to be.

Even further back, the KCBS pork shoulder category was just pork. Loin was often submitted. It then changed to pork shoulder and then to unparted pork shoulder.

The original parting rule has been around forever, but the clarification/addition of not putting meat back on the cooker to reheat is only a couple of years old. I think that was actually something that was discussed on a thread here because a cook team was teaching it in their class. Then it was brought up in the rules meeting in Philly by Merl. Then it was brought up in the KCBS meeting by Mike Lake and the way he presented it really never discussed putting pork back in the cooker to reheat. He brought it up as separating the money muscle from the butt and then continuing to cook the rest of the butt. Nobody has ever been able to tell me why pulling your pork and separating the money muscle and glazing it in your cooker is not considered bbq.

Rookie'48
11-09-2011, 02:29 PM
The birth of the rule came about when people were taking a pork butt and cooking off a small part of it very fast.....Even further back, the KCBS pork shoulder category was just pork. Loin was often submitted. It then changed to pork shoulder and then to unparted pork shoulder.

Ok, that's the first time that anyone has given me an answer that makes sense on this. :thumb:

The original parting rule has been around forever, but the clarification/addition of not putting meat back on the cooker to reheat is only a couple of years old. I think that was actually something that was discussed on a thread here because a cook team was teaching it in their class. Then it was brought up in the rules meeting in Philly by Merl. Then it was brought up in the KCBS meeting by Mike Lake and the way he presented it really never discussed putting pork back in the cooker to reheat. He brought it up as separating the money muscle from the butt and then continuing to cook the rest of the butt. Nobody has ever been able to tell me why pulling your pork and separating the money muscle and glazing it in your cooker is not considered bbq.

So this would kinda be a pi$$ing match between different BoD members resulting in a cluster-fark for the rest of us? :shocked: :confused: :tape:

Plowboy
11-09-2011, 05:00 PM
And yet people are cooking two pork butts and getting what they need to get for their box everyday. You don't NEED to part to compete. If you do, relearn.

Plowboy
11-09-2011, 05:10 PM
I understand your point of view, and the reasoning behind it and that works fine from weekend to weekend.

Lets assume that not too far down the road cook 'X' wins $50k+ at a contest that generates some buzz outside of the normal BBQ circles, and the following weekend gets popped for violating rule 'Y'.

Do you see a potential problem for KCBS, in terms of future partnerships/sponsorship? I do. As a sanctioning organization, selling a service, KCBS has some liability and an obligation to address these kinds of issues. If we have a rule, that we can't or won't enforce then that liability increases. I understand the honor system and abide by it, but there are those that won't.

Three things in life that a lot of people will scrap about are politics, religion, and money and not always in that order. KCBS needs to get in front of the issue while there is still the opportunity. If we don't the first time a big player gets caught cheating we could see the beginning of the end for the money that's starting to roll into BBQ, and that benefits nobody.

Sorry, I'm totally not following you. I understand the issue of the team getting popped and the potential ripple, but what is your conclusion or solution? Are you suggesting anything not enforceable 100% of the time be thrown out so that impropriety doesn't exist by definition? Or are you suggesting KCBS be in the pits with the cooks to monitor every move for infraction?

What's the solution here?

Smokin' Gnome BBQ
11-09-2011, 06:01 PM
I may be wrong but I personally belive the reps should be a little more active in the pitts Im not saying checking everyones cookers but if reps were to spot check a couple at each comp wouldnt that put the fear into anyone who is thinking of cheating?

dmprantz
11-09-2011, 06:20 PM
if reps were to spot check a couple at each comp wouldnt that put the fear into anyone who is thinking of cheating?

This was discussed in the original Pork Collar thread back in January. Can a rep, or any one who is neither a butcher nor a vet identify a CT pork butt as being different from a regular pork butt? Especially after it's been on the cooker for hours. Even if a rep could, how are we going to know that what's on the cooker is what got inspected is what gets turned in? Are we going to say that no one can cook any food on site except for competition legal cuts? Are we going to have cameras at every site? This has nothing to do with the legality or not, just the realism and logistics of checking one's pit. And there's more...

dmp

Pickin' Porkers
11-09-2011, 06:27 PM
Go to whole shoulders and quit the penny ante stuff....let the teams prerpare them any way they wish..separated or not. The current rule cannot be enforced and whole shoulders take more talent.

boogiesnap
11-09-2011, 06:37 PM
has anyone considered levying a fine if found cheating?

something hefty...$2500?

that might dissuade teams from doing it, if there even any that do.

boogiesnap
11-09-2011, 06:48 PM
And yet people are cooking two pork butts and getting what they need to get for their box everyday. You don't NEED to part to compete. If you do, relearn.

this is that regarding the current rule. period. imho.

if you can't cook 2 butts to what you want, you're gonna be in trouble at awards no matter what.

swamprb
11-09-2011, 07:19 PM
WOW! This is gettin' testy since being moved from the For the Board thread!

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t310/swamprb/IMG_2011.jpg

Q-Dat
11-09-2011, 07:50 PM
If one person can give me a good example of something detrimental that could come from allowing butts to be parted then I will let it go.

I'm not an argumentative person, and I'm not looking to argue here. I just simply cannot see a legitimate reason to have the rule. Eliminating it would in turn eliminate alot of extra expense and unnecessary cooking of extra butts to get the same results anyway. Lets face it, when that money muscle is attached by a thread that butt HAS BEEN PARTED! It has simply been parted within the rules on a technicality. IMHO the rule is completely pointless. For me that is the bottom line. Nobody is giving a reason to keep the rule other than to say thats the rule and lets just leave it.

I welcome anyone to convince me that it is not a pointless rule

Smokin' Gnome BBQ
11-09-2011, 08:04 PM
This was discussed in the original Pork Collar thread back in January. Can a rep, or any one who is neither a butcher nor a vet identify a CT pork butt as being different from a regular pork butt? Especially after it's been on the cooker for hours. Even if a rep could, how are we going to know that what's on the cooker is what got inspected is what gets turned in? Are we going to say that no one can cook any food on site except for competition legal cuts? Are we going to have cameras at every site? This has nothing to do with the legality or not, just the realism and logistics of checking one's pit. And there's more...

dmp

I was refering to parting/pulling and returning to the cooker.

face it if people wanna cheat, they are gonna find a way to cheat.

Plowboy
11-09-2011, 11:10 PM
If one person can give me a good example of something detrimental that could come from allowing butts to be parted then I will let it go.

I'm not an argumentative person, and I'm not looking to argue here. I just simply cannot see a legitimate reason to have the rule. Eliminating it would in turn eliminate alot of extra expense and unnecessary cooking of extra butts to get the same results anyway. Lets face it, when that money muscle is attached by a thread that butt HAS BEEN PARTED! It has simply been parted within the rules on a technicality. IMHO the rule is completely pointless. For me that is the bottom line. Nobody is giving a reason to keep the rule other than to say thats the rule and lets just leave it.

I welcome anyone to convince me that it is not a pointless rule

I think there have been multiple reasons stated. Go back and read closer.

Actually, a change in the rule wouldn't make a difference to most teams as they are probably cooking 2 butts now and would cook 2 butts in the future. EXCEPT, they wouldn't cook all of both buts. They cut off the money muscle and cook just that. Is that a pork shoulder category at that point?

I say if you let pork be parted, then you might as well let the pork collar in because there will be people who won't be cooking pork butts anymore... just parts of them. So if you ain't cooking a whole pork butt, why not cook a FrankenButt (Collar)?

Q-Dat
11-10-2011, 12:54 AM
I think there have been multiple reasons stated. Go back and read closer.

Actually, a change in the rule wouldn't make a difference to most teams as they are probably cooking 2 butts now and would cook 2 butts in the future. EXCEPT, they wouldn't cook all of both buts. They cut off the money muscle and cook just that. Is that a pork shoulder category at that point?

I say if you let pork be parted, then you might as well let the pork collar in because there will be people who won't be cooking pork butts anymore... just parts of them. So if you ain't cooking a whole pork butt, why not cook a FrankenButt (Collar)?

I see what you are saying, and I agree that nobody should be allowed to cook a Money Muscle by itself. But I don't see the harm in separating it after it has reached its ideal doneness and continuing to cook the rest of the butt as long as it is still five lbs or more.

I guess I wasn't clear on my opinion. I definitely think the rules of the cut should stay intact. It should be a 5 lb or greater hunk of shoulder with nothing else attached. Even though that is exactly what is happening when someone leaves it attached by a thread. Then you have a whole mass of undercooked butt that can't be used for the comp. It just seems wasteful to cook all that extra meat that may not get eaten just to get a perfectly cooked Money Muscle when it could just be removed earlier than the rest of the mass of meat.

For the record I also cook two and will continue to do so no matter what the rules are. I do agree with you though that it should remain a large cut cooked intact.

CBQ
11-10-2011, 08:39 AM
A cook can still essentially do that legally now by leaving a 1" token A rule that would cover this is something along the lines of ... "Pork cannot be parted until fully cooked". While this is not enforceable, either is the current rule.

A good idea Chris. I have no interest in parting pork, but on those cold Spring and Fall days in New England, being able to just put the pork back in the cooker to warm it up would be nice just like we can with every other meat. The 35 degree temp at Lexington, MA last year comes to mind.

The parting rule doesn't really prevent people from cooking pork to a different temp for pulling and slicing. A lot of people just cook more butts and pull them at different temps to remain legal. The current rule is just increasing the amount of meat wasted at a cook with no discernable result.

I do agree that we should not be using pork collars.

dmprantz
11-10-2011, 08:41 AM
I almost put this into a new thread, but decided maybe it should go here? I understand there is a group of ppl on this forum that wants to keep the pork rule in place as is. This question doesn't apply to you. For the rest of you, candidates and non alike, how would you re-write it?

Would you keep the five lb minimum in effect? How would that affect cooked meats that have lost moisture and shrunk? How would that affect putting MM in the cooker for sauce to set? How would that even be enforced? Gonna weigh cooked meat? Several people say that they don't want a pork grilling contest, so how would you change the rule to prevent grilling (if that''s what you want) and allow MM removal and sauce setting? Those appear to be the big three issues. Is it possible to accommodate them all?

dmp

CBQ
11-10-2011, 08:57 AM
Nobody has ever been able to tell me why pulling your pork and separating the money muscle and glazing it in your cooker is not considered bbq.

Exactly.

Of course, thinking about the "fully cooked" rule that Chris proposed, what's fully cooked?

Personally, I don't think there would be anything wrong (i.e. not real BBQ) with slicing off a money muscle after a long cook and cooking the rest of the butt longer, just like people do with burnt ends on a brisket. It doesn't seem right to have people cut off raw money muscles and just do a fast cook on tiny pieces of meat though.

How about this:

Keep the five pound butt rule. Keep the no pork collars rule. Require the pork shoulder to be cooked whole until it's over 165 (safe to eat), and after that it's the cook's discretion when they cut, pull, or reheat it.

It would prevent people from cooking an army of money muscles, but still give the cook a lot of choices.

worthsmokin
11-10-2011, 09:21 AM
Keep the rule as stated. It will change the whole category if it isn't in effect. It is an issue of honesty and integrity as most rules and laws are. There is no way to police everything that goes on at a contest, much relies on the honor code.

If it is an issue of purchasing 3-4 butts for a contest to pull off early when the money muscle is hanging on by a ligament, learn how to cook. I cook 2 butts and and get my MM slices and chunks off either butt no problem.

Jorge
11-10-2011, 10:02 AM
Sorry, I'm totally not following you. I understand the issue of the team getting popped and the potential ripple, but what is your conclusion or solution? Are you suggesting anything not enforceable 100% of the time be thrown out so that impropriety doesn't exist by definition? Or are you suggesting KCBS be in the pits with the cooks to monitor every move for infraction?

What's the solution here?

I've cooked with you, know what your program used to be, and have no doubt that you can hold your own even if someone chooses to cheat. At the end of the day it's the teams in the back end of the top half that are losing out the most, to those willing to cheat. I think a review and possible change of the rules would benefit all, but most especially those teams that are struggling to step up to the next level.

The issue isn't huge today, but I believe it's growing and that KCBS has an ethical obligation to start looking at it ASAP instead of being in the position of sorting out what happened, after the fact AGAIN.

I may be wrong but I personally belive the reps should be a little more active in the pitts Im not saying checking everyones cookers but if reps were to spot check a couple at each comp wouldnt that put the fear into anyone who is thinking of cheating?

Better check cambros, coolers, fridges, drawers under beds.... I know I'm pointing out a flaw in my own proposed system. I recognize that those that will cheat WILL find a way. I just believe that we can do something to potentially level the field.

WOW! This is gettin' testy since being moved from the For the Board thread!

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t310/swamprb/IMG_2011.jpg

Play with your foodsaver, and you tell me if it's possible to get that to pass meat inspection. If not, I'll order another and demonstrate.

I think there have been multiple reasons stated. Go back and read closer.

Actually, a change in the rule wouldn't make a difference to most teams as they are probably cooking 2 butts now and would cook 2 butts in the future. EXCEPT, they wouldn't cook all of both buts. They cut off the money muscle and cook just that. Is that a pork shoulder category at that point?

I say if you let pork be parted, then you might as well let the pork collar in because there will be people who won't be cooking pork butts anymore... just parts of them. So if you ain't cooking a whole pork butt, why not cook a FrankenButt (Collar)?

People have cooked collar, and I don't think there is much question about that. People continue to part, illegally, and I don't think there is much question about that. As I've said, you are at the top of the food chain and can still compete with those that choose to cheat. The disservice is to the middle of the pack, who are also members.

I don't have all of the answers, but have laid out some ideas. We can do nothing and wait for more issues and try to apply more bandaids after the fact, or we can be proactive and take a look at the rules and come up with a solution and be in front of the issue for a change.

Q-Dat
11-10-2011, 11:57 AM
How about this:

Keep the five pound butt rule. Keep the no pork collars rule. Require the pork shoulder to be cooked whole until it's over 165 (safe to eat), and after that it's the cook's discretion when they cut, pull, or reheat it.

It would prevent people from cooking an army of money muscles, but still give the cook a lot of choices.

I like it. The internal temp part might be tricky but I like it!

dmprantz
11-10-2011, 12:23 PM
The above rule makes good sense to me and certainly helps some cook fewer butts, but I'm wondering this: It has already been mentioned several times that a cook can practically "part" the money muscle away from the rest of the hunk, leaving a token piece of connective tissue. Does that result in the "grilled pork" that so many people are affraid of? I'm sure some one with enough knowledege, time, and knife skills could debone and seperate every muscle from another, but leave enough token connective tissue to have it not be "parted," and then cut take out each muscle as it gets to where the cook wants. What I'm saying is, is the parting and 5lb rule really preventing what people want it to prevent, or just making it require more skill?

dmp

Jorge
11-10-2011, 01:54 PM
How about this:

Keep the five pound butt rule. Keep the no pork collars rule. Require the pork shoulder to be cooked whole until it's over 165 (safe to eat), and after that it's the cook's discretion when they cut, pull, or reheat it.

It would prevent people from cooking an army of money muscles, but still give the cook a lot of choices.

I like it. The internal temp part might be tricky but I like it!

Excellent, you two are now responsible for lining up the personnel to enforce that across the nation:thumb: What's the point of imposing a temp threshold, if nobody is there to enforce it?

bover
11-10-2011, 02:00 PM
I'm gonna get skewered for saying this, and I'm not sure I even remotely agree with it, but just for the sake of keeping everyone's heart rates up and the conversation going how about limiting pork entries to pulled and chunks only? No slices = no money muscle parting debate right? Discuss. :boxing:

ique
11-10-2011, 02:10 PM
Excellent, you two are now responsible for lining up the personnel to enforce that across the nation:thumb: What's the point of imposing a temp threshold, if nobody is there to enforce it?

Whats the point of a parting rule if no one is there to enforce it?

Jorge
11-10-2011, 02:10 PM
I'm gonna get skewered for saying this, and I'm not sure I even remotely agree with it, but just for the sake of keeping everyone's heart rates up and the conversation going how about limiting pork entries to pulled and chunks only? No slices = no money muscle parting debate right? Discuss. :boxing:

Tell me why, that benefits anyone?

We already define what can be cooked, and in some cases have defined what can be turned in from that product <chicken salad for example>. We have so many creative cooks now, that I'm not in favor of restricting what they are allowed to turn in.

Plowboy
11-10-2011, 02:30 PM
I've cooked with you, know what your program used to be, and have no doubt that you can hold your own even if someone chooses to cheat. At the end of the day it's the teams in the back end of the top half that are losing out the most, to those willing to cheat. I think a review and possible change of the rules would benefit all, but most especially those teams that are struggling to step up to the next level.

The issue isn't huge today, but I believe it's growing and that KCBS has an ethical obligation to start looking at it ASAP instead of being in the position of sorting out what happened, after the fact AGAIN.



Better check cambros, coolers, fridges, drawers under beds.... I know I'm pointing out a flaw in my own proposed system. I recognize that those that will cheat WILL find a way. I just believe that we can do something to potentially level the field.



Play with your foodsaver, and you tell me if it's possible to get that to pass meat inspection. If not, I'll order another and demonstrate.



People have cooked collar, and I don't think there is much question about that. People continue to part, illegally, and I don't think there is much question about that. As I've said, you are at the top of the food chain and can still compete with those that choose to cheat. The disservice is to the middle of the pack, who are also members.

I don't have all of the answers, but have laid out some ideas. We can do nothing and wait for more issues and try to apply more bandaids after the fact, or we can be proactive and take a look at the rules and come up with a solution and be in front of the issue for a change.

We'll take this one offline and discuss at some point.

Plowboy
11-10-2011, 02:31 PM
Whats the point of a parting rule if no one is there to enforce it?

I'll enforce it. Tell me where you are cooking next, Chris. I'm come watch over your shoulder. :becky:

Stoke&Smoke
11-10-2011, 02:42 PM
Go to whole shoulders and quit the penny ante stuff....let the teams prerpare them any way they wish..separated or not. The current rule cannot be enforced and whole shoulders take more talent.

While I don't nescessarily disagree, a whole shoulder can be a lot harder to find in some parts of the country than in others. I used to see them frequently at some stores in my area, but now almost never. Boston Butts, on the other hand, can be found all over in my area

Slamdunkpro
11-10-2011, 02:56 PM
Since there are two threads on this subject, I'll post in both:

After giving this some thought, if the purpose of the pork category is to cook a large piece of pork vs turning it into a pork grilling event Here's how I'd rewrite the rule:

Legal pork shall consist of bone in IMPS shoulder #403 and it's derivatives ( 403B, 403C, 404, 406, 406B, 406C, and 407) with a raw weight of at least 5lbs.where the animal has been broken no further rostral than Cervical vertebra C3 and no further caudal than thoracic vertebra T1 (the first rostral rib).

The pork entry must be cooked whole and intact with no butterflying, spatchcocking or other types of complete or partial separation. Processed pork (pulled, sliced, chunked etc) is not permitted to be in the competitor's cooker until 45 minutes prior to the official pork turn in time. Competitors found with processed pork in their cooker prior to the above time window will be DQ'd in the pork category.



The first paragraph defines what's legal with no loopholes
It's easy for the meat inspector - is there a bone in it? (Collars are boneless)
The second paragraph eliminates the ambiguities and angle shooting that goes on now.
Spot checking is easy - we should all know what an intact pork butt / shoulder looks like by now. Reps can spot check 10 cook sites in under 30 minutes
The 45 minute window is easy to enforce and gives the cooks the ability to heat final product / set sauce

Yes, 95% of compliance is still based on competitor integrity, but the rules need to be easy for the competitor to understand and for the event staff / reps to spot violations.

dmprantz
11-10-2011, 03:16 PM
Just to be clear so that I understand what you are saying, this allows sauced entries to be placed back in the cooker no earlier than 12:15 to reheat and/or set the sauce, and does away with all parting, both actual and practical (1" connective tissue). It doesn't help the cooks who are asking to put a butt sans-MM back in the cooker to finish unless they can do that in 45 minutes, and it sets a precident for reps to come by a cook site and open up every cooker there to verify that there is no processed pork on that cooker, likely while chicken and/or ribs are being cooked. Do I have that correct?

Slamdunkpro
11-10-2011, 03:28 PM
Just to be clear so that I understand what you are saying, this allows sauced entries to be placed back in the cooker no earlier than 12:15 to reheat and/or set the sauce, and does away with all parting, both actual and practical (1" connective tissue).
Yes, if pork turn in is at 1:00pm
It doesn't help the cooks who are asking to put a butt sans-MM back in the cooker to finish unless they can do that in 45 minutes,
I don't know about "help" but it levels the playing field for everyone and makes the rule quantifable and enforceable.

and it sets a precident for reps to come by a cook site and open up every cooker there to verify that there is no processed pork on that cooker, likely while chicken and/or ribs are being cooked. Do I have that correct?
Reps can do that now.

I'm trying to come up with verbiage that goes the other way - ie: it's OK to part at a certain point (MM and finish the rest of the butt) but haven't yet come up with a clear and enforceable rule.

dmprantz
11-10-2011, 03:35 PM
Thank you for clarifying. It does level the playing field as far as parting. I've not cooked in 2 million competitions like some others have, but I've never had a rep ask me to open my cooker, and I would not be happy with new policies that have them doing it routinely at every competition so close to turn ins....but that's me.

dmp

mobow
11-10-2011, 03:57 PM
I think with all the different ideas and opinions that are flying with this small community magnified by the entire BBQ community explains why the rules may live to see another day and maybe should. keith

swamprb
11-10-2011, 04:09 PM
I've cooked with you, know what your program used to be, and have no doubt that you can hold your own even if someone chooses to cheat. At the end of the day it's the teams in the back end of the top half that are losing out the most, to those willing to cheat. I think a review and possible change of the rules would benefit all, but most especially those teams that are struggling to step up to the next level.

The issue isn't huge today, but I believe it's growing and that KCBS has an ethical obligation to start looking at it ASAP instead of being in the position of sorting out what happened, after the fact AGAIN.



Better check cambros, coolers, fridges, drawers under beds.... I know I'm pointing out a flaw in my own proposed system. I recognize that those that will cheat WILL find a way. I just believe that we can do something to potentially level the field.



Play with your foodsaver, and you tell me if it's possible to get that to pass meat inspection. If not, I'll order another and demonstrate.



People have cooked collar, and I don't think there is much question about that. People continue to part, illegally, and I don't think there is much question about that. As I've said, you are at the top of the food chain and can still compete with those that choose to cheat. The disservice is to the middle of the pack, who are also members.

I don't have all of the answers, but have laid out some ideas. We can do nothing and wait for more issues and try to apply more bandaids after the fact, or we can be proactive and take a look at the rules and come up with a solution and be in front of the issue for a change.


http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t310/swamprb/IMG_3269.jpg

Done!

And not from SRF.

Slamdunkpro
11-10-2011, 04:45 PM
Thank you for clarifying. It does level the playing field as far as parting. I've not cooked in 2 million competitions like some others have, but I've never had a rep ask me to open my cooker, and I would not be happy with new policies that have them doing it routinely at every competition so close to turn ins....but that's me.

dmp

I'm not advocating that the Reps open every cooker at 12:00 noon or even any cooker, I'm just suggesting a rule that has a simple enforcement mechanism.

The other end would be:

Pork is defined as any part of the pig except the ribs weighing at least 5lbs raw. It must be placed in the cooker whole, unparted. After that we don't care what the cook does with it until they turn it in.

SmokinGuitarPlayer
11-10-2011, 04:47 PM
Personally , I would love to see a comp where the meat is supplied so everybody is on a level playing field. just my 2 cents.

Jorge
11-10-2011, 04:57 PM
Personally , I would love to see a comp where the meat is supplied so everybody is on a level playing field. just my 2 cents.

So you want blind draw poker? If you don't have the option to pick your meat then good luck to you.. As much as teams talk about hitting the right tables, you have to cook a great product first.

YankeeBBQ
11-10-2011, 05:00 PM
Personally , I would love to see a comp where the meat is supplied so everybody is on a level playing field. just my 2 cents.

Have you ever purchased a case of butts or briskets ? There is sometimes a huge difference from one butt to the next or one brisket to the next. On butts the money muscles differ in size and shape, on briskets the flats vary in thickness and fat content and sometimes you get a brisket with a big slice in it. I'd hate to be given ribs with a bunch of shiners. I would not like to compete in a contest where I can't control the quality of meat I'm allowed to cook. I don't think it would even the playing field it would just make it a bigger crap shoot.

Q-Dat
11-10-2011, 05:28 PM
Excellent, you two are now responsible for lining up the personnel to enforce that across the nation:thumb: What's the point of imposing a temp threshold, if nobody is there to enforce it?

Which is why I said the temp part would be tricky. What I mostly like about the idea is the direction.

ique
11-10-2011, 05:47 PM
I'm not advocating that the Reps open every cooker at 12:00 noon or even any cooker, I'm just suggesting a rule that has a simple enforcement mechanism.

The other end would be:

Pork is defined as any part of the pig except the ribs weighing at least 5lbs raw. It must be placed in the cooker whole, unparted. After that we don't care what the cook does with it until they turn it in.


Or just an occasional random spot check to put the idea out there

I think the pork rule there is pretty good :)

boogiesnap
11-10-2011, 05:59 PM
.../

kihrer
11-10-2011, 06:02 PM
I guess that depends on what "random" turns out to be. If random never seems to fall on the big name teams then you will have one more thing for people to bitch about. This is sure starting to sound a lot like NASCAR!

ique
11-10-2011, 06:30 PM
I guess that depends on what "random" turns out to be. If random never seems to fall on the big name teams then you will have one more thing for people to bitch about. This is sure starting to sound a lot like NASCAR!

Each contest pull a team number and a time out of a hat (or programed into the new cutting edge software) and spot check at that time.

The bigger the $ gets the more it will sound like Nascar or worse the NCAA

boogiesnap
11-10-2011, 06:34 PM
let's go at this a different direction....again.

there are some top teams with ALOT of skill watching this thread.

question.

would being able to grill a money muscle on its own produce a better product?

would stewing your pork in butter, sugars, etc., produce a better product?

yes? or is all this discussion actually fodder?

JD McGee
11-10-2011, 07:14 PM
I have no issues with the rules...they are what they are and I will abide by them. It would be cheaper for a lot of folks if allowed to part the money muscle and toss the rest back on the smoker for pulled and barky chunks. As it is I cook two butts...one for the MM...the other for pulled/chunks.

I guess when they start selling money muscles separate from the rest of the butt then we can argue the brisket case of being able to separate the flat from the point and cook them separately.

Cheaters are gonna cheat no matter what. As far as pork collars are concerned...never even looked for one in the pork butt or pork shoulder section...why would I?

swamprb
11-10-2011, 07:48 PM
As far as pork collars are concerned...never even looked for one in the pork butt or pork shoulder section...why would I?

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t310/swamprb/Butcher%20Shop%20Cafe/IMG_2056.jpg

We were told they were "close trim butts".

You gotta shop at Uwajimaya's if you want to see them in the case.

Pappy Q
11-10-2011, 07:54 PM
Everyone makes good points for both sides of the issue and no one seems to be changing the other sides opinions. My opinion, leave as is. Hell, I wouldn't mind seeing a limit to how much meat you are allowed to cook. You really want to see who the best cook is....limit it to a dozen pieces of chicken, 3 racks of ribs, 1 butt and 1 brisket. At one comp this year the GC was next to me and he cooked 36 pieces of chicken, 10 racks of ribs, 6 butts and 4 briskets.

KC_Bobby
11-10-2011, 08:10 PM
Regarding separating and returning meet to the cooker, I don't care either way.

What I do care about is that if a rule change is made it is clearly written and communicated to all members - judges, reps and cooks in a time manner that allows teams to adjust anything they feel needs to be adjusted
AND
That everyone plays by the same set of rules.

Pork collar - no go for same reasons others have mentioned or soon someone will be turning in prime rib for brisket.

JD McGee
11-10-2011, 08:25 PM
http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t310/swamprb/Butcher%20Shop%20Cafe/IMG_2056.jpg

We were told they were "close trim butts".

You gotta shop at Uwajimaya's if you want to see them in the case.

Is that what we got from Earth & Ocean last year? A bell is ringing in my head...hmmm...:cool:

Jorge
11-10-2011, 08:29 PM
Regarding separating and returning meet to the cooker, I don't care either way.

What I do care about is that if a rule change is made it is clearly written and communicated to all members - judges, reps and cooks in a time manner that allows teams to adjust anything they feel needs to be adjusted
AND
That everyone plays by the same set of rules.

Pork collar - no go for same reasons others have mentioned or soon someone will be turning in prime rib for brisket.

Some people are slicing, and doing other things, with collar now. That horse is out of the barn.

If you want everyone to play by the same set of rules, then we better get a set that we are willing and able to enforce.

ALX
11-10-2011, 09:08 PM
would being able to grill a money muscle on its own produce a better product?

or is all this discussion actually fodder?

Well....I make my own sausage and always remove the MM for later grill smoking when i get 6-10 of em....If practiced there are certainly ways make it "perfect" in tenderness etc...Just like on the whole butt...

We cook 2 butts and stick with rules for KCBS comps....

I couldnt see if we parted butt for comps helping us in the actual ability to cook and flavor meat....Grill/smoking money muscle as i do at home might speed things up etc...

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt85/69alex/marylandsnow003.jpg

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt85/69alex/moneymuscle010.jpg

dmprantz
11-10-2011, 09:43 PM
I'm not advocating that the Reps open every cooker at 12:00 noon or even any cooker, I'm just suggesting a rule that has a simple enforcement mechanism.


Thanks. I misunderstood what you meant originally, thinking that you were advocating 10 sites always get their cookers open. My bad. Not quite the rule I would choose, but I like where this is going. Rather than speaking in vague, arbitrary desires about how easy or hard it is to enforce current rules, I'd like to see wordings that are clearer and are bot easier to enforce, yet need less enforcement!

dmp

ClayHill
11-10-2011, 09:43 PM
I am a firm believer in any rule change within reason that makes competing more affordable. And this would cut down on meat costs for many of us by not having to cook multiple butts to get the end result we are looking for.
BINGO: I simply cook 3-4 butts, (my cooker is big enough), pull 1-2 early for the MM, unless I want to turn in Mushy Money muscle. Change this rule and I and many others save money and waste, because I throw away the non MM pork I pull early.[/quote]

If you dont mind boneless, getting an entire butt, including MM to a certian temp.(at the same time) can be done with some creative knife work and smoker placement......just sayin:becky:

BTW that hard muscle in the middle doesnt get done with the rest, but who needs it anyways...

Greendriver
11-11-2011, 11:52 AM
the parting rule is just dummer than snot. there will never be a way to get around relying on teams to abide by the rules without policing them and what I would do is to just tell everyone they can return their MM's or remainder of butts to the cooker to reheat / glaze / or finish cooking but they have to cook them whole.

Lake Dogs
11-11-2011, 06:40 PM
hakuna matata

Podge
11-12-2011, 07:40 AM
Have you ever purchased a case of butts or briskets ? There is sometimes a huge difference from one butt to the next or one brisket to the next. On butts the money muscles differ in size and shape, on briskets the flats vary in thickness and fat content and sometimes you get a brisket with a big slice in it. I'd hate to be given ribs with a bunch of shiners. I would not like to compete in a contest where I can't control the quality of meat I'm allowed to cook. I don't think it would even the playing field it would just make it a bigger crap shoot.

I'd quit if it ever came to where a contest had to supply the meat. Meat choice/selection is probably #1 most important thing in winning a contest.

Q-Dat
11-12-2011, 11:32 AM
Ya know I just realized that we probably better stop using the parted Brisket argument. They may decide to stop allowing that!

CivilWarBBQ
11-12-2011, 10:03 PM
My $.02:

Drop the pork collar rule.
Increase the minimum size rule to 7 pounds.
Leave the rest as is.

swamprb
11-12-2011, 10:53 PM
My $.02:

Drop the pork collar rule.
Increase the minimum size rule to 7 pounds.
Leave the rest as is.

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t310/swamprb/BSC%20Sausage/IMG_3314.jpg

Yeah baby!

Greendriver
11-13-2011, 08:36 AM
I'd quit if it ever came to where a contest had to supply the meat. Meat choice/selection is probably #1 most important thing in winning a contest.

well just let em purchase whatever briskets they want but kinda clip their wings a lil bit and tell em "no better than choice"

Q-Dat
11-13-2011, 02:07 PM
well just let em purchase whatever briskets they want but kinda clip their wings a lil bit and tell em "no better than choice"

Wouldn't bother me, but I'm willing to bet that alot of deep pockets would fight that one pretty hard.

Bunny
11-13-2011, 05:49 PM
I may be wrong but I personally belive the reps should be a little more active in the pitts Im not saying checking everyones cookers but if reps were to spot check a couple at each comp wouldnt that put the fear into anyone who is thinking of cheating?

And when would you suggest we do that?

I would prefer they get rid of the rule and let bbqers be the artists that they are. I tried to get rid of the rule at the last rule meeting, but to no avail. And they won't implement a new rule during the year anymore (at least that's what I've been hearing). New rules go into effect the next season.

Bunny
P.S. Yea, Jeff, I've been around a while but unfortunately my memory is lapsing! LOL The last 3 to 4 years the rules and advisories have been thrown at us in every direction. We are now going over a lot of the advisories and getting rid of the ones that are redundant.:eusa_clap

U2CANQUE
11-13-2011, 05:55 PM
The Pork Rule?

Do you believe that the current pork rule regarding the non-reheating of separated pork is important? If so, why? What about the pork collar prohibition?

Thanks!

The current pork rule to me does not make sense, without context.....I am answering without reading everyone's responses. It does not make sense to me that I can add the other categories back to my smoker, after doing whatever to it, but, that the pork does not allow that. I can add a pizza stone to my cambro hot and get the same result, without consequence. Do I understand that there may be some need to cook a entire butt together, yes, given a certain weight (which I have yet to have a butt weighed), yes, but, until someone tells me outright why there is no putting the butt back in after to set sauce, it does not make sense to me.....

Pork Collar.....if it is not part of the pork shoulder, pic nic butt.....then there is no question, wrong portion......

Now to go read responses.....:thumb:

Bunny
11-13-2011, 05:57 PM
This is Rich speaking history here:

It used to be the pork category was any cut of pork. In the early 90's it was changed to whole pork shoulder or Boston butt or the picnic ham at a minimum of 5 pounds.

People started separating the shoulder and then a rule was implemented that the 5 pound section that was inspected by the meat inspector had to be cooked whole bone in or bone out. Then it became a rule that you could not part it out and put it back on the smoker because cookers would cook it whole and then separate the loin muscle (money muscle) at slicing temp and return the rest back to the cooker. If it's been separated during the cooking process on the cooker, this, too is illegal.

Does this help?

Rich Tuttle

dmprantz
11-13-2011, 06:24 PM
Then it became a rule that you could not part it out and put it back on the smoker because cookers would cook it whole and then separate the loin muscle (money muscle) at slicing temp and return the rest back to the cooker.

If that really is the reason, then I'll say that in my opinion, it is one of the most ascinine things I've ever heard from KCBS. This rule has absolutely no affect short of causing some cooks to prepare more meat. Rather than cooking one butt and taking the pieces that you want off when you want them, they are cooking two butts to achieve the same affect. To repeat, the current rule is not curbing any behaviour, only making it more expensive to do so. There are ways to prevent people from doing it, but these rules aren't it, and if this truly is the intent, the rules are broken.

I'm not directing this at any particular person, and I could give a rat's ham who is able to do what with whole butts. My cooking practices wouldn't change a bit if this rule went away. The point is that the rule has no effect short of costing people more money if its intent is only what is stated above.

dmp

Bentley
11-13-2011, 06:57 PM
The Pork Rule?

Do you believe that the current pork rule regarding the non-reheating of separated pork is important? If so, why? What about the pork collar prohibition?

Thanks!

No. Never understood why it is OK to reheat the other 3 meats and not pork.

We can use the whole chicken, but only a portion of the cow and pig. Why did we not pick a part on the chicken to use? I somewhat understand the limitations on the pig and steer, as you have to have some guidelines.

Not familiar enough with pork collar to comment.

Smoke'n Ice
11-13-2011, 08:03 PM
I have cooked approximately 500 pounds of pork butt in the last 5 weeks and will be cooking another 2,000 pounds on Friday. There are several observations from cooking this many butts:
1. there are 4 each 2 packs butts per case from Sam's
2. Each case weights between 66 and 70 pounds
3. Each butt weights an average of 8 pounds with some more or less, but never less than 5 pounds
4. The money muscle is not created equal on all butts
5. There is a layer of fat that, when removed, will expose more of the MM
6. There is such a thing as a RUBBER butt
7. Some of the muscle would be excellent for slicing at 205 and some are mush at the same temperature
8. The health department has rules about holding, cooking and storing pork butts which are, the rules, virtually unenforceable
9. I drove from Plano to South Dallas today and the speed limit was 60. I may have exceeded this somewhat some/most of the time

My point is, there are rules made that are virtually unenforceable except by the people following them.

Do we cheat? yes
Do we get caught? Sometimes
Are the penalties sever? Depends
Do we still violate the rules? Sometimes, even after being caught the first time

I like Slamdunkpro’s definition and rule. It is not ambiguous or open to interpretation, and provides a clear and concise rule to follow.

Others have said that having different rules for each category is wrong. I will go back to FDA rules regarding temps on meats. Should all types of meat be cooked to 165*F prior to serving?
Even the best beef tenderloin suffers at that temp. My kids were taught that, when ordering beef, ask the waiter to "knock it horns off, wipe its ass, run it out and I will cut off what I want." They also know that chicken sushi is not good.

Point here is "separate rules for each category is not only good, but necessary." Are they enforceable? To an extent, but it depends on the integrity of the cook.

I would challenge each of you to consider that rules are an integrity issue and no matter what, cannot be enforced 100% of the time, and for that matter, 1% of the time.

Let’s focus on making the rules clear and concise and common sense with a very simple enforcement method for all rules. If you are caught cheating (breaking a rule), return any and all monies won, if any, in the last “X” number of years and be banned from competing, to include your team name and being a part of any competing team, for a minimum of one year. This ban would continue past the one year time if the monies are not returned.

Any time this rule is invoked, it must be reviewed by the rules committee and a full BOD vote taken regarding enforcement.

Any monies returned would become a part of the education budget. Makes you think, no matter your stature.

Q-Dat
11-13-2011, 08:36 PM
Then it became a rule that you could not part it out and put it back on the smoker because cookers would cook it whole and then separate the loin muscle (money muscle) at slicing temp and return the rest back to the cooker. If it's been separated during the cooking process on the cooker, this, too is illegal.

Does this help?

Rich Tuttle

I understand, I really do. I just don't understand why doing this was ever considered a bad thing or "Not BBQ"

Bunny
11-13-2011, 09:44 PM
I understand, I really do. I just don't understand why doing this was ever considered a bad thing or "Not BBQ"

Cookers make the rules. Email your suggestions to the Rule Committee and send it in for discussion at the Rules Meeting in January. The BOD has the final say.