PDA

View Full Version : My take on the Pork Rule


Butcher BBQ
02-25-2013, 06:36 AM
Pork: Pork is defined as Boston Butt, Picnic and/or Whole Shoulder, being one piece, weighing a minimum of five (5) pounds (bone in or bone out).

I have been reading and listening to everyone say they can part the pork out after inspection. Where does it say you can do that? If its not 5lbs its not a pork butt. If you piece it up into the MM and tubes it can't be 5lbs, so you admitting you are willing to cheat to win.

Please chime in and help me read the rule in a different way, cause I don't see it the way most are.

Hawg Father of Seoul
02-25-2013, 06:48 AM
No offense taken and no offense to you...

Do you submit burnt ends?

chickenchoker
02-25-2013, 07:12 AM
We don't plan on changing anything.... although pork was our weakest category this past season. I think what people are arguing is the fact that it doesn't say you cannot separate it like the rule used to read. So the burnt end comments and the grilling/ sausage making etc. will keep on being discussed. Without any reps actually policing these rules I don't think much will change.... we have witnessed things that we have questioned being legal but again without someone actually checking sites there is nothing to keep people from doing what they will do

Smoke'n Ice
02-25-2013, 07:39 AM
David, since it will not be prohibited by rule in 2014 after inspection, anything goes in all 4 meat categories. There will be nothing to prevent butchering any of the cuts of meat in any way the cook chooses before, during or after cooking.

This rule gives the appearance of acquiescing to the cooks that have been “bending” the rules in the pork category and lend an air of legality to their methods. A vast majority of the cooks do not do this and only wanted to have a change in holding and reheating, but, alas, the BOD, threw the baby out with the bath water.

mobow
02-25-2013, 07:46 AM
Pork: Pork is defined as Boston Butt, Picnic and/or Whole Shoulder, being one piece, weighing a minimum of five (5) pounds (bone in or bone out).

I have been reading and listening to everyone say they can part the pork out after inspection. Where does it say you can do that? If its not 5lbs its not a pork butt. If you piece it up into the MM and tubes it can't be 5lbs, so you admitting you are willing to cheat to win.

Please chime in and help me read the rule in a different way, cause I don't see it the way most are.

I agree and it will depend on what the BOD states the five pound statement means. So far it has been stated in a couple of ways. They, and we, have a year to talk about it. LOL. keith

Brisket does not have a weight rule so burnt ends does not relate to the pork rule well. keith

Hawg Father of Seoul
02-25-2013, 08:33 AM
I agree and it will depend on what the BOD states the five pound statement means. So far it has been stated in a couple of ways. They, and we, have a year to talk about it. LOL. keith

Brisket does not have a weight rule so burnt ends does not relate to the pork rule well. keith

The implication of my statement is EVEN IF one believes that the pork should be cooked first, there is nothing that prevents someone from "cooking it" and then grilling it. It was the intention of the board to allow pork to be separated to finish cooking.

If some one "cooked it" before separating it, any one should think twice before calling them a cheater or implying as much. Even if they interpret the rule as strictly as David does (which I can not).

Again, no offense taken or intended.

Nordy
02-25-2013, 08:33 AM
I'm with Butcher... A Butt is a Butt... it's not tubes, its not MM... it's a butt. 5 Lbs or more. Cook it...

Jorge
02-25-2013, 08:58 AM
Pork: Pork is defined as Boston Butt, Picnic and/or Whole Shoulder, being one piece, weighing a minimum of five (5) pounds (bone in or bone out).

I have been reading and listening to everyone say they can part the pork out after inspection. Where does it say you can do that? If its not 5lbs its not a pork butt. If you piece it up into the MM and tubes it can't be 5lbs, so you admitting you are willing to cheat to win.

Please chime in and help me read the rule in a different way, cause I don't see it the way most are.

I won't tell you what I think, but I will tell you why I think some people interpret the new rule to mean Pork can be legally separated after inspection.

The 2013 rule contains language that requires pork to be cooked whole, as well as prevents meat from being returned to the cooker once it's parted. Both items were removed from the 2014 rule.

Regardless of intent, I don't think it's unreasonable for a cook to interpret that parting is now legal since language that prohibited the practice has been removed.

Funtimebbq
02-25-2013, 09:07 AM
I don't believe the rule needed changing. One BOD member initially posted on the "ask the Board" thread that the rule was only changed to allow the meat to go back on the smoker (for warming and settign sauce) after being cooked whole. However, two other BODs posted on this site that anything goes after meat inspection.
So, maybe some BOD members thought one thing but actually approved something else. We'll see how this plays out over the year.

Benny

Ron_L
02-25-2013, 09:17 AM
Pork: Pork is defined as Boston Butt, Picnic and/or Whole Shoulder, being one piece, weighing a minimum of five (5) pounds (bone in or bone out).

I have been reading and listening to everyone say they can part the pork out after inspection. Where does it say you can do that? If its not 5lbs its not a pork butt. If you piece it up into the MM and tubes it can't be 5lbs, so you admitting you are willing to cheat to win.

Please chime in and help me read the rule in a different way, cause I don't see it the way most are.

I agree with what you typed, David, but there is also nothing in that rule that prevents cutting it up. It doesn't say that it has to stay in one piece, so that is why folks are interpreting it that way. It is too vague.



Do you submit burnt ends?

I don't think that is a good comparison. There is nothing in the brisket rule that says that a brisket has to meet a minimum weight requirement.

Wampus
02-25-2013, 09:27 AM
The big question in my mind is.....IF teams start parting out the MM or tubes and start winning, then are those that do not part out missing the boat?

In other words, if parting DOES offer a distinct advantage (and I'm not necessarily saying it does), who'll follow the crowd? Is being a "purist" only leaving points on the table?

Bubba
02-25-2013, 09:27 AM
If you know how to cook it pork it doesn't matter if you separate or not.

sweetracks
02-25-2013, 09:51 AM
I have no intention of changing the way we do our pork. It has been a strong category for us the past couple of years. If you cook it right and have the right flavor profile, you will score well. I think people will separate after inspection and try all sorts of things to try and gain an advantage, of course I'm sure there are cooks that already did this, or were on the brink of doing this legally. Cream always rises to the top..this will be no different. It will be that much sweeter to beat the teams that "bend" or loosely interpret the rules

DawgPhan
02-25-2013, 09:57 AM
So they got a chance to re-write a confusing and possibly ill-advised rule. But they didnt actually make the new rule clearer or less ill-advised.

I dont have a problem with rule changes, but it seems like this one was done to appease a certain group of cooks instead of rules changing to support to traditional bbq.

Hawg Father of Seoul
02-25-2013, 11:09 AM
I agree with what you typed, David, but there is also nothing in that rule that prevents cutting it up. It doesn't say that it has to stay in one piece, so that is why folks are interpreting it that way. It is too vague.



I don't think that is a good comparison. There is nothing in the brisket rule that says that a brisket has to meet a minimum weight requirement.


The implication of my statement is EVEN IF one believes that the pork should be cooked first, there is nothing that prevents someone from "cooking it" and then grilling it. It was the intention of the board to allow pork to be separated to finish cooking.

If some one "cooked it" before separating it, any one should think twice before calling them a cheater or implying as much. Even if they interpret the rule as strictly as David does (which I can not).

Again, no offense taken or intended.

RonL, do you disagree with my subsequent post?

Rookie'48
02-25-2013, 11:13 AM
It was the intention of the board to allow pork to be separated to finish cooking.


In reality, my intention was to allow re-heating of parts that had been cooked and rested so that they would comply with Rule 17 (g) and (h). These are the sections that address the proper temps that the meats should be for food safety.

If we follow the current rule, once the money muscle is parted from the rest of the butt neither piece can return to the cooker. This causes two problems right away: 1) you can't bring the rest of the butt up to pulling temp; and 2) if the MM gets cold you cannot re-heat it. And we haven't even mentioned pulling, saucing and re-heating yet.

Remember, we still have lots of time to re-word, re-work or modify any rules prior to the 2014 season :becky:. I sure wish that I had waited for the season to start before making that motion . . . at least then the the cabin fever wouldn't be so strong :grin: :mrgreen: :-D.

Rookie'48
02-25-2013, 11:16 AM
Pork: Pork is defined as Boston Butt, Picnic and/or Whole Shoulder, being one piece, weighing a minimum of five (5) pounds (bone in or bone out).

I have been reading and listening to everyone say they can part the pork out after inspection. Where does it say you can do that? If its not 5lbs its not a pork butt.


Thanx David, that's pretty much what I was trying for.

Hawg Father of Seoul
02-25-2013, 11:26 AM
In reality, my intention was to allow re-heating of parts that had been cooked and rested so that they would comply with Rule 17 (g) and (h). These are the sections that address the proper temps that the meats should be for food safety.

If we follow the current rule, once the money muscle is parted from the rest of the butt neither piece can return to the cooker. This causes two problems right away: 1) you can't bring the rest of the butt up to pulling temp; and 2) if the MM gets cold you cannot re-heat it. And we haven't even mentioned pulling, saucing and re-heating yet.

Remember, we still have lots of time to re-word, re-work or modify any rules prior to the 2014 season :becky:. I sure wish that I had waited for the season to start before making that motion . . . at least then the the cabin fever wouldn't be so strong :grin: :mrgreen: :-D.

I kind of thought that "to finish cooking" and your words that I made red meant the same thing.

As far as food safety goes... shouldn't open Pandora's box.

"And we haven't even mentioned pulling, saucing and re-heating yet." (this speaks exactly to the point I was trying to make)

Ron_L
02-25-2013, 12:17 PM
RonL, do you disagree with my subsequent post?

Nope. I agree on both points.

jrbBBQ
02-25-2013, 12:18 PM
I see what they were trying to do when the passed this rule, but everyone is throwing saying ALOT of "what-if's" I like the new rule for this reason. My pork boxes take the longest to build and that's because I have to wait to the last second (so everything stays as warm as possible) to pull, slice, chunk and arrange everything. With this, a person can now prep the meat after its cooked and hold it or reheat it in the cooker, or a person could now have the option of cooking one butt by removing the MM and finishing the rest. I'll continue to cook two butts because I have the cooker space and I like the option of the extra meat to choose from.

Muzzlebrake
02-25-2013, 12:21 PM
I think all the change did was bring pork more into alignment with the rules for the other meats. You can tear all the other meats into whatever shapes or sizes you want and now you can do the same with pork albeit after it has been inspected and proven to be a butt, shoulder or picnic that is at least 5 pounds.

If someone wants to part it up and cook it, have at it. I don't see it being any different than separating a brisket, making spares into St Louis, or muffin pan chicken. If anything I think it allows some more options to cooks, which isn't a bad thing.

Podge
02-25-2013, 12:29 PM
The best pork will still win regardless.

McEvoy AZ
02-25-2013, 12:35 PM
The big question in my mind is.....IF teams start parting out the MM or tubes and start winning, then are those that do not part out missing the boat?

In other words, if parting DOES offer a distinct advantage (and I'm not necessarily saying it does), who'll follow the crowd? Is being a "purist" only leaving points on the table?

Not to offend anyone, but I part mine in another sanctioning class during the cook not to have over cooked product and get great scores. This just happens to be legal in that sanctioning class. I do not do this in KCBS, but I am a team who will part most of it only leaving a small part attached. I can say that KCBS is very tuff to have the perfect MM and the erfect chunck or pulled at the same time.

Agail I follow the rules in KCBS when competing in a KCBS event, but just knowing it is easier the other way to have great pulled and MM it has to be a temptation for teams to seperate the pork butt, With the fact that there is no way to police this, unless KCBS starts doing a pre turn in meat check, I would say to have peice of mind that everyone is on the same playing field, then they would need to allow the parting.

I know this might not be popular in here, but I am for it. It just gives us all peice of mind that no one is breaking a rule that I follow causing some form of unfair advantage.

RX2006JE
02-25-2013, 12:50 PM
You can tear all the other meats into whatever shapes or sizes you want and now you can do the same with pork albeit after it has been inspected and proven to be a butt, shoulder or picnic that is at least 5 pounds.

If you trimmed at home which would be legal then if you parted out then how can you prove that it was 5lbs in the beginning or would you just have to bring say 5lbs of money muscle or tubes or whatever it is that you want to cook.

jbrink01
02-25-2013, 12:55 PM
If you trimmed at home which would be legal then if you parted out then how can you prove that it was 5lbs in the beginning or would you just have to bring say 5lbs of money muscle or tubes or whatever it is that you want to cook.

I trim at home, it is over 5#'s and I could finish the parting job in about 12 seconds at a comp now if I wanted to cheat (I don't).

Ron_L
02-25-2013, 01:18 PM
I trim at home, it is over 5#'s and I could finish the parting job in about 12 seconds at a comp now if I wanted to cheat (I don't).

But it's not cheating since the rule doesn't say that it has to be cooked whole :-D

WineMaster
02-25-2013, 01:37 PM
If stores started selling Money Muscles, Tubes, Horns from butts would they take out the must be 5 lbs rule to be more in line with Chicken.

Smokin' Gnome BBQ
02-25-2013, 02:02 PM
If stores started selling Money Muscles, Tubes, Horns from butts would they take out the must be 5 lbs rule to be more in line with Chicken.

a butcher shop near me already does, the cut the MM off and grind the rest into sausage...I couldnt belive it when I first them there.

landarc
02-25-2013, 02:15 PM
I thought the old rule was not at all vague, and not at all ill-advised. The new rule, which I recognize is a work in progress does need some more work, to make it more clear as to what is actually to be allowed. I don't see that as being a problem.

But, I thought the old rule worked fine too, and if you wanted to have medallions of money muscle, well, you had to cook at least two butts.

MuleTuf
02-25-2013, 02:19 PM
<<bbq forum poll>>
Do you agree with the 2014 pork rule that KCBS just made?
Votes Ratio
Yes 33 12%
No 130 49%
What Rule? 73 27%
Doesn't matter to me 30 11%
266 votes total
Does this matter?

DawgPhan
02-25-2013, 02:37 PM
I still chuckle at all the gnashing of teeth over need to cook 2 pork butts to get a money muscle.

Pork butts are cheap and we have never had this problem with the pork butts.

Scottie
02-25-2013, 02:48 PM
The push on this rule is for food safety. My pork is so hot coming out of the Cambo, it will give you third degree burns. If KCBS was so worried about food safety, a hard rule would have been implemented banning CBJ's from taking food out from the judging tent. Rules are being changed for a minority of cooks to allegedly re-heat their pork. I find the poll on the other forum as very interesting.

jbrink01
02-25-2013, 03:23 PM
Scottie - AMEN!!!!!!! SO FARKING WHAT, if some folks can't get what they want out of 1 or 2 butts. Learn to do it or buy more meat. This is like lowering test scores so "no child get's left behind". We know how that worked out.

Or, in the case of the St. Louis Fire department, lowering the standards for Captains tests for minorities. REALLY??? I'd rather have the smart ones (don't care what color) saving my arse.......doesn't KCBS want the best cooks? Nope, they want more cooks because that = $$. Hmmmm.

WineMaster
02-25-2013, 03:49 PM
Scottie - AMEN!!!!!!! SO FARKING WHAT, if some folks can't get what they want out of 1 or 2 butts. Learn to do it or buy more meat. This is like lowering test scores so "no child get's left behind". We know how that worked out.

Or, in the case of the St. Louis Fire department, lowering the standards for Captains tests for minorities. REALLY??? I'd rather have the smart ones (don't care what color) saving my arse.......doesn't KCBS want the best cooks? Nope, they want more cooks because that = $$. Hmmmm.

But without That

You dont get this,

Sponsored By:
Gateway BBQ Store
Blues Hog BBQ Company
Plowboys BBQ Company

So everyone wants BBQ to grow

jbrink01
02-25-2013, 03:57 PM
Great Point!!!!

RangerJ
02-25-2013, 04:05 PM
My brain hurts and I have my first 2013 KCBS cook this weekend...

SirPorkaLot
02-25-2013, 04:06 PM
It is just one more step towards pacifying those cooks who don't know how to BBQ.

KCBS continues to prove that they are seeking the largest audience and number of teams possible, without any regards to the traditions of what makes BBQ...BBQ.

I gave up my KCBS membership in 2011, and with the current trend, I doubt I will ever have one again.

However I will continue to support traditional bbq, it's history and it's methods...all while you folks go out there and roast, braise and grill your meat in KCBS competitions.

:loco:

RangerJ
02-25-2013, 04:13 PM
It is just one more step towards pacifying those cooks who don't know how to BBQ.

KCBS continues to prove that they are seeking the largest audience and number of teams possible, without any regards to the traditions of what makes BBQ...BBQ.

I gave up my KCBS membership in 2011, and with the current trend, I doubt I will ever have one again.

However I will continue to support traditional bbq, it's history and it's methods...all while you folks go out there and roast, braise and grill your meat in KCBS competitions.

:loco:

bold emphasis above mine which equate to absurd, bold stroke, all encompassing statments.

SirPorkaLot
02-25-2013, 04:19 PM
bold emphasis above mine which equate to absurd, bold stroke, all encompassing statments.


Yes...I am the master of absurd, bold, all encompassing statements :biggrin1:

It is my opinion that KCBS lost their way long ago, and they no longer represent true BBQ.

Bold or absurd - it is truth, as I see it.

Now am I suggesting that no one in KCBS can cook BBQ?
No..that is not what i said.

However if there are 1,000 cooks that are actual pitmasters, and 10,000 cooks who are not, but would love to give KCBS their money...who do you think KCBS is pandering to?

Again it is my opinion, that what is on the competition circuit these days is a long ways from BBQ.

Candied ribs, cupcake chicken & grilled pork is not bbq for example, at least not the way I see it..and this was the point of my post. :redface:

Pappy Q
02-25-2013, 04:27 PM
For me personally, I really don't care what the rule is...I just want it to be clear and definitive.

Smoke'n Ice
02-25-2013, 04:36 PM
Several posters have alluded to food safety as a concern for the rule change. This would only be a problem if the product were held for more than 3 hours and 59 minutes in the unsafe zone of 41 degrees F to 135 degrees F (numbers a lot of us live by day after day.) The time from turn in to judging is less than 30 minutes and most cooks spend 20 minutes prepping their box. If turn in for pork is 1:30 then the pork can be taken off the cooker and placed on a table at 10 am and still be within the servsafe guidelines when the judge eats his sample. Just saying, that is a non-issue on this subject.

For the purist out there that want the product to be hot when the judge samples it, go judge a contest and see how hot the product is after being opened, judged for appearance, passed around and sample placed on tray and this is times six boxes. It is then sampled one at a time. I would venture to say that by the time the judge actually tastes the product, it will be close to ambient temp.

deguerre
02-25-2013, 04:47 PM
Yes...I am the master of absurd, bold, all encompassing statements :biggrin1:

It is my opinion that KCBS lost their way long ago, and they no longer represent true BBQ.

Bold or absurd - it is truth, as I see it.

Now am I suggesting that no one in KCBS can cook BBQ?
No..that is not what i said.

However if there are 1,000 cooks that are actual pitmasters, and 10,000 cooks who are not, but would love to give KCBS their money...who do you think KCBS is pandering to?

Again it is my opinion, that what is on the competition circuit these days is a long ways from BBQ.

Candied ribs, cupcake chicken & grilled pork is not bbq for example, at least not the way I see it..and this was the point of my post. :redface:

Living in Memphis since 1976, I didn't even know about KCBS until joining this site, and I NEVER suspected chicken was BBQ...















:bolt:

RangerJ
02-25-2013, 04:59 PM
Yes...I am the master of absurd, bold, all encompassing statements :biggrin1:

It is my opinion that KCBS lost their way long ago, and they no longer represent true BBQ.

Bold or absurd - it is truth, as I see it.

Now am I suggesting that no one in KCBS can cook BBQ?
No..that is not what i said.

However if there are 1,000 cooks that are actual pitmasters, and 10,000 cooks who are not, but would love to give KCBS their money...who do you think KCBS is pandering to?

Again it is my opinion, that what is on the competition circuit these days is a long ways from BBQ.

Candied ribs, cupcake chicken & grilled pork is not bbq for example, at least not the way I see it..and this was the point of my post. :redface:

Then perhaps leave the "while you folks" comments out of your posts and direct it at KCBS.

I cook what needs to be cooked at competitions according to the rules provided, call it BBQ or not.

Meat Man
02-25-2013, 04:59 PM
Truthfully, I think someone but a bug in someones ear about wanting to set sauce on the money muscle. That's my feeling.

Butcher BBQ
02-25-2013, 04:59 PM
No offense taken and no offense to you...

Do you submit burnt ends?

All valid points, thanks for playing.

No I don't turn in burnt ends. I did once last year and got slammed for it at the final table in Vegas.

The_Kapn
02-25-2013, 05:11 PM
I "don't have a Dog in this fight" since we retired from competing.

But, the problem seems to be the wording of the rule.

I did rule making for many years with a lot higher stakes.

The process should be:
What is the desired outcome?
How do we write that in "plain English" to achieve that outcome?

Seems to me that if KCBS (or whatever "regulator") would follow that simple process, all of the confusion would go away.

You will never stop the bitchers, complainers, second guessers, and whiners on the Internet, but the intent and the application of the rule should be clear if it is properly written.
And this one is clearly not.

Good Luck Y'All 8)

TIM

Q-Dat
02-25-2013, 05:19 PM
So when can we expect some indisputable clarification in writing? 2015?

landarc
02-25-2013, 05:24 PM
Actually, I see what Dave did here, and I can appreciate that this is a first step. The old rule was controversial for some, although I think it was fine. But, by getting the vote to make this current rule, he has opened up discussion across all of the boards and venues, the feedback is coming in pretty clear and now, the board can address the issue without being tied to the idea of the old rule somehow being sacred.

I think this would be a good thing to do with all of the meats, let's start with chicken, and see if there is any traction for making some changes there as well.

I for one, though I am at best, a marginal participant, think Dave is to be thanked for finally getting the ball rolling.

Fat Freddy
02-25-2013, 05:38 PM
Whatever the rule is, pork will still continue being a disaster for me.:cry:

Hawg Father of Seoul
02-25-2013, 06:38 PM
Whatever the rule is, pork will still continue being a disaster for me.:cry:

It's those small shoulders on the pig in your avatar. Try one like this

http://www.leanvaluesires.com/Boars/BombsAway_s.jpg

Taking a serious look at breeding these monsters. (blood stock only)

txschutte
02-25-2013, 06:58 PM
I was lucky enough to sit down with Dave (Compton) on Saturday night and pick his brain about the new rule.

His primary response was "Don't go making MM and tubes your inspection meat yet. It ain't 2014, and the rule isn't complete."

KC_Bobby
02-25-2013, 10:05 PM
I don't really care about the rule change. Part of me says the rule change makes sense to make pork rules more like the other categories, but the other part of me says they put in the rule for a reason. I don't expect the rule change as written to change many outcomes. Those who currently score well in pork, will likely continue to do so.

I just don't understand those that insist:
1) The need to rewarm it to keep it safe. Like others have said, I can put ours in the cooler or cambro and take it out 5 hours later and it's steaming hot and requires cotton gloves to work.

2) Stating the need to part to complete their cooking method. Those who do either choose not to adhere to the current rules or are turning in what they consider subpar pork (yet people win/score well with what would be considered subpar pork all the time).

3) The need to part in order to set sauce? Why not put the entire pork butt back in the smoker if you to do so? I can think of a way to help the entire butt from drying out where that wouldn't be a concern.

Q-Dat
02-25-2013, 10:46 PM
Ya know....I always wondered why IBCA doesn't include pork. Maybe this long on going debate is why :D

Lake Dogs
02-26-2013, 06:44 AM
I haven't competed in quite a while and hope to get back in to it later this year. That said, I find the new wording sad and another step away from BBQ (traditional BBQ if you will) embracing grilling, etc. and catering to people who haven't a clue as to what BBQ IS and isn't.

If they wanted to help food safety, then word it as such, but without the no parting rule it sure seems like this is now allowed (and endorsed).

Call me crazy (you wont be the first), but I've been rather disappointed as a judge lately with all the MM's coming across the table and chopped pork and pork strings sauced into oblivion. Mind you they make for beautiful presentations, but the taste is almost completely of sauce and along the way we've begun to lose what constitutes BBQ itself.

White Dog BBQ
02-26-2013, 07:44 AM
I just don't understand those that insist:

3) The need to part in order to set sauce? Why not put the entire pork butt back in the smoker if you to do so? I can think of a way to help the entire butt from drying out where that wouldn't be a concern.

Have you never had a fully-cooked pork butt fall apart on you when you try to move it?

Personally, I think the best idea I saw was the idea someone posted that you be allowed to return parted pork to the cooker starting at 12:30. That's more than adequate time to set sauce, reheat, etc., but it is not enough to individual pieces. Hard to enforce? Yes, but not any harder than the current rule.

KC_Bobby
02-26-2013, 09:42 AM
Have you never had a fully-cooked pork butt fall apart on you when you try to move it?


No, not with the method I use. I cook pork to 200.

That said, our pork has pretty much sucked the past 2 years after 3 years of doing very well ... so I clearly haven't adjusted the right direction.

jbrink01
02-26-2013, 09:58 AM
I guess I still don't get it. It's possible to cook 2 butts and score well. I'm not God's gift but our pork was 13th TOY in 2011, and top 50 in 2012, oh, and 1st at the AR Invite in 2012. I didn't cheat, I didnt slop it up with sauce, and I had MM + Pulled in the box. I don't plan to change a thing unless I stumble upon something else that really WOWS me.

deguerre
02-26-2013, 10:06 AM
I haven't competed in quite a while and hope to get back in to it later this year. That said, I find the new wording sad and another step away from BBQ (traditional BBQ if you will) embracing grilling, etc. and catering to people who haven't a clue as to what BBQ IS and isn't.

If they wanted to help food safety, then word it as such, but without the no parting rule it sure seems like this is now allowed (and endorsed).

Call me crazy (you wont be the first), but I've been rather disappointed as a judge lately with all the MM's coming across the table and chopped pork and pork strings sauced into oblivion. Mind you they make for beautiful presentations, but the taste is almost completely of sauce and along the way we've begun to lose what constitutes BBQ itself.

I like my pork to taste like, well...pork. This is just my personal preference, but I'd like the option to always taste the pork without sauce. If you do have a sauce, that REALLY compliments the meat and not mask it, serve it on the side.

Jorge
02-26-2013, 10:11 AM
I like my pork to taste like, well...pork. This is just my personal preference, but I'd like the option to always taste the pork without sauce. If you do have a sauce, that REALLY compliments the meat and not mask it, serve it on the side.

How would you do that, without a DQ?

Pitmaster T
02-26-2013, 10:12 AM
I won't tell you what I think, but I will tell you why I think some people interpret the new rule to mean Pork can be legally separated after inspection.

The 2013 rule contains language that requires pork to be cooked whole, as well as prevents meat from being returned to the cooker once it's parted. Both items were removed from the 2014 rule.

Regardless of intent, I don't think it's unreasonable for a cook to interpret that parting is now legal since language that prohibited the practice has been removed.

VIDEO BELOW IN NEXT POST

Thanks Jorge. Allow me time for a serious response in this forum. Allow me to be constructive; but from a catering perspective.

The "Shake" is something I have been doing to do two reasons... one, increase the bark ratio, and two, allow for a large clientele to have a little miniature pork butt of their own (with a nice bark) usually served with veggies as the entree... and typically not as a sandwich. Plus they cook wicked fast. The Shake maybe a plus for someone who has nothing to lose.

Yes, I know its not a pork butt but a part of one. But these really come out GREAT.

So the way I read the rule as well, this dish sans the onions would work. Or not. No, not saying it will win, but ponder on the possibilities of choosing the perfect two out of 8 segments a typical but can offer?

Comments?

Pitmaster T
02-26-2013, 10:13 AM
The Shake - YouTube

deguerre
02-26-2013, 10:13 AM
How would you do that, without a DQ?

I wasn't even thinking along those lines George. Just a wishful statement for a possibility.

Pitmaster T
02-26-2013, 10:17 AM
By the way... this sux with briskets so don't try.

WineMaster
02-26-2013, 10:24 AM
If they are gonna change it up. I'd like to see them really Change it up.
Pork category would require Sliced, Pulled and chunks in the box. That would make it fun.
It would also widen the scoring gap in that category. But the person that cooks the best Pork would always come out on top.

Cayman1
02-26-2013, 11:32 AM
So if I could find a 10-12 lb. butt, if there is such, trim it to at least 5 lbs. prior to cooking, leaving the mm and tubes to be cooked, does this comply with the rule?

ique
02-26-2013, 12:03 PM
<<bbq forum poll>>
Do you agree with the 2014 pork rule that KCBS just made?
Votes Ratio
Yes 33 12%
No 130 49%
What Rule? 73 27%
Doesn't matter to me 30 11%
266 votes total
Does this matter?


Apparently Scottie and Dr. BBQ figured out the bbq forum poll hack.

Muzzlebrake
02-26-2013, 12:30 PM
I am really getting a kick out of all the people that are saying this is catering to people who know nothing and don't know how to cook. Some of the folks I have been talking to that are most excited by this change are very well established cooks with enough statues, barreltops and crowns to fill up a room.

The other thing I'm amused by is everyone worrying about something they aren't going to be doing. If you like what you are doing, stick to your guns. If you want to experiment and start doing something different, then go for it, the new rule allows you more flexibility.

Personally, I am not seeing a whole lot of advantage in cooking all the muscles separately either grilled or cooked slowly but I have not done a lot of experiments either. Most of us have adapted our processes to already accomplish what this rule change seeks to do. I still think that this just gives cooks some more leeway to be more creative, which i think is a good thing. I'm as worried about pork fatties as I am brisket burgers and chicken salad.

KC_Bobby
02-26-2013, 12:41 PM
I am really getting a kick out of all the people that are saying this is catering to people who know nothing and don't know how to cook. Some of the folks I have been talking to that are most excited by this change are very well established cooks with enough statues, barreltops and crowns to fill up a room.


Regionally or Nationally?

landarc
02-26-2013, 12:46 PM
"statues, barrel tops and crowns" means The Jack and The Royal. It can only mean that.

ique
02-26-2013, 12:51 PM
Regionally or Nationally?

What does it matter?

Wampus
02-26-2013, 01:01 PM
Has anyone actually tried to part out a butt and cook individual parts separately and see if there's any kind of advantage? My gut tells me that a piece of pork, no matter if attached or detached is going to need time to render and cook completely anyway, but if that's the case, then why the no parting rule in the first place? There's a lot of folks who are saying they're not changing anything. Surely there are also others that will.


I'm fairly new to BBQ and definitely new to competing, so take my comments as you will, but I have to wonder why all the fuss if it's not going to matter one way or the other?

Podge
02-26-2013, 01:12 PM
Has anyone actually tried to part out a butt and cook individual parts separately and see if there's any kind of advantage? My gut tells me that a piece of pork, no matter if attached or detached is going to need time to render and cook completely anyway, but if that's the case, then why the no parting rule in the first place? There's a lot of folks who are saying they're not changing anything. Surely there are also others that will.


I'm fairly new to BBQ and definitely new to competing, so take my comments as you will, but I have to wonder why all the fuss if it's not going to matter one way or the other?

By some people's rationale on here, you can separate a butt and cook the parts in a matter of a couple hours... If that's the case, I'm going to trim my ribs into one bone servings and I should be able to get those cooked in about an hour.

KC_Bobby
02-26-2013, 01:14 PM
What does it matter?

It doesn't. Just a question of curiosity. Based on what I've read here and heard in conversation, a number of cooks with barreltops, statues and crowns don't care one way or the other. However, most of the ones I've talked to are only from my neck of the woods.

Pitmaster T
02-26-2013, 01:28 PM
I trust this is not directed at me. I can only assume it is because I am the only one that mentioned "catering."

I cautiously prefaced my post with the understanding that it was from a catering "perspective" and did so mostly not to ridicule the competitor (which I have had success in both worlds), but offered the technique mostly because since it was not legal before, someone may want a starting point since I have been doing this for a while. I certainly did not insinuate that anyone did not know how to cook. Please inform me where I said this?

This particular dish... essentially a portioned butt.

I also said I had no idea if it would win... only that it was really good. It had never been tweaked to win a contest because it would not have been legal.

As far as competition I go way back as Rick Flair... several of us do... so far back we NEVER thought injecting would be legal. Not incidentally, wrapping a but super tight THEN injecting it is a technique caterers have used for years LONG before injections were legal... and now that's an acceptable technique in competition.

Simply put, for those that want to, the Shake IS a good starting point for those that want to experiement on portioned cuts from someone who knows the process... just like people used to come to me when I injected, because I had.... and near my neck of the woods it was not koshur.... and no one else had the balls to bend the rules.


I am really getting a kick out of all the people that are saying this is catering to people who know nothing and don't know how to cook. Some of the folks I have been talking to that are most excited by this change are very well established cooks with enough statues, barreltops and crowns to fill up a room.

The other thing I'm amused by is everyone worrying about something they aren't going to be doing. If you like what you are doing, stick to your guns. If you want to experiment and start doing something different, then go for it, the new rule allows you more flexibility.

Personally, I am not seeing a whole lot of advantage in cooking all the muscles separately either grilled or cooked slowly but I have not done a lot of experiments either. Most of us have adapted our processes to already accomplish what this rule change seeks to do. I still think that this just gives cooks some more leeway to be more creative, which i think is a good thing. I'm as worried about pork fatties as I am brisket burgers and chicken salad.

Pitmaster T
02-26-2013, 02:55 PM
Has anyone actually tried to part out a butt and cook individual parts separately and see if there's any kind of advantage? My gut tells me that a piece of pork, no matter if attached or detached is going to need time to render and cook completely anyway, but if that's the case, then why the no parting rule in the first place? There's a lot of folks who are saying they're not changing anything. Surely there are also others that will.


I'm fairly new to BBQ and definitely new to competing, so take my comments as you will, but I have to wonder why all the fuss if it's not going to matter one way or the other?

I was attempting to answer this question because as near as I know, even in catering, I am the only one that does... and all the while wish I had of done it before when I did compete... but then again, I rarely went into pork territory in those days unless I was "Rib Rangerin' it."

I used to for instance suck at chicken while I did well in ribs and brisket. So some people may just not turn anything in.. a better strategy is to turn SOMEthing in, LOL. You'd be surprised how well a lawrys seasoned chicken half can do. LOL

Didn't y'all have the same consensus when that KCBS chicken salad rule came out? We all pretty much said, some will do it, some will do as they were doing it. Then "the pillow" was released. LOL

boogiesnap
02-26-2013, 08:14 PM
personally, i don't like the new rule, didn't like the old one either really.

more to the point, i think the learning curve just steepened. i doubt paul is going to do a 4 page tutorial on how to turn in pork according to the new rule. and that has some scared given the caliber of cooks out there and what they might come up with.

Muzzlebrake
02-26-2013, 09:57 PM
Donnie, definitely not talking about you......it has been implied that this rule change was only going to help the cooks incapable cooking quality competition pork as a whole piece. I was trying to point out that I have spoken to some very good competition cooks that are at least curious to the possibilities this change allows.

Bobby, I had a good chance to talk to a bunch of folks from all over. I think you're right many of them could care less but I was surprised at some of the excited reactions.

jbrink01
02-27-2013, 06:51 AM
Sean,
I have only spoken to 1 cook about it, and he is a DOMINANT competitor. His opinion is that it will become a grilling contest. As I said before, I don't plan to change much about my turn in's but my cook timing will change greatly, as I can stagger my start times on the pit specific to the muscle groups, which will give me consistency in one muscle group that can be hit or miss. IMHO, if they are not going to police the existing rule, let's just change it to "Pork except Ribs" and let us really go nuts.........

Lake Dogs
02-27-2013, 07:15 AM
How would you do that, without a DQ?

Jorge,

More of an FYI really and NOT meant to hijack a KCBS specific thread, but some sanctioning bodies allow sauce presented on the side (in small cups), and some of those allow multiple sauces presented... It gives the judge the opportunity to decide how much sauce they prefer, how much compliments the meat, and in the multiples situation which one compliments the meat best.

ModelMaker
02-27-2013, 08:29 AM
You all just keep yammerin about this, after all you have almost a full year to figure it out.
But remember this, your only talking about the beginning and middle parts. The final part of all this is when you drop off the box at the tent. You really going to put tube muscles the size of a good male member sliced up? You gonna grind it up and send sausage in for the pork entry? Should we expect crosshatch grill marks on the MM slice?
The job of a CBJ is to judge whatever you present in the box.
So raise your hand if you really plan on sending in pork sausage meatballs, if I remember correctly you cooks don't step too far out the box.
Ed

Scottie
02-27-2013, 08:35 AM
Apparently Scottie and Dr. BBQ figured out the bbq forum poll hack.


I am secure enough in my cooking, that if I have to be the face of this ridiculous rule. So be it.

Smoke'n Ice
02-27-2013, 05:00 PM
This new rule excites me because next year I can legally remove the money muscle after inspection and cook it separately and still freeze the remainder of the butt and use it in my restaurant for cubanos, country style ribs and grind it up for breakfast sausage, it’ll reduce some of my comp cost. MM makes wonderful pulled, chunked and sliced pork turn in. How do I know, when I miss the temp, I just use it for the other items else turn it in sliced.

Meat Man
02-27-2013, 05:13 PM
Like it or not it makes for some really good BBQ!
http://i1090.photobucket.com/albums/i372/Wilsonclanslc/image-37_zpse13978d8.jpg
http://i1090.photobucket.com/albums/i372/Wilsonclanslc/image-37_zps8f548129.jpg
http://i1090.photobucket.com/albums/i372/Wilsonclanslc/image-37_zpsa9995415.jpg
Horn meat on the left, MM on the right, and tubes.
http://i1090.photobucket.com/albums/i372/Wilsonclanslc/image-37_zpse30f1447.jpg

boogiesnap
02-27-2013, 05:48 PM
oh boy.

that's some nice looking pork btw. horn might look a tad dry.

Lake Dogs
02-27-2013, 06:45 PM
oh boy.

that's some nice looking pork btw. horn might look a tad dry.

Yep, makes a great presentation, and good eatin' pork it is, but in this southern old timers' opinion, it's not BBQ... KCBS apparently will now allow it, and now it falls right in line with my opinion of KCBS's chicken.

Good eats; you bet. Takes good cooks; sure. BBQ; not. Next; ribeye steaks perhaps?

sdbbq1234
02-27-2013, 07:02 PM
Nothing against MeatMan (very nice butchering) but I don't think that looks good, at all. I would be hard pressed to have that served to me at a BBQ joint. That is not BBQ Pork IMHO.

It might taste like the best stuff on earth, but it ain't BBQ Pork.

That presented against a box of pulled pork, well, the pulled would most likely win.

After reading all the posts, I wonder how the folks that win ever got by not being able to separate. :mmph:

Don't change the dam rule. Heck, go backwards and make it more simple by saying "pulled pork". Get rid of the MM all together or pull it!

FLAME SUIT ON!!!

wallace

KC_Bobby
02-27-2013, 09:41 PM
I just don't understand why anyone feels they need to completely separate the butt to get that result (in pictures) as it's possible to do under the current rules and since everyone would have to purchase the entire butt anyway (5 lb rule) - why bother with the change?

I do think the meat in the picture looks like bbq to me - at least it looks like nearly every money muscle I've ever cooked except mine is cooked attached to the rest of the butt until I'm ready to slice the money muscle.

Maybe I've misunderstood this rule change and what people are doing/what they want to do.

Scottie
02-27-2013, 09:44 PM
The judges are not allowed to compare. That is why all CBJ's will have to be re-certified

Meat Man
02-27-2013, 10:07 PM
I've cooked hundreds of butts, but never cooked one this way, just thought I'd try it out. There are countless possibilities as to how one might part out a shoulder and cook it. I just went for the obvious muscles. Having never sliced horn meat before, I was really pleased how that turned out. Might just try to work that in for this year. One could just as easily pull the MM, pull the tubes or pull the horn meat. It may not look like BBQ to some, but trust me put it in a box and it would score very well

Rookie'48
02-27-2013, 11:33 PM
The judges are not allowed to compare. That is why all CBJ's will have to be re-certified

Huh???

You lost me on that one, Scottie. Judges are already instructed not to compare . . . why will they need re-certification?

Scottie
02-28-2013, 07:18 AM
I believe they will. They are going to get everything from pulled to sausage. Are the creative cooks that turn in sausage going to be hurt? This is a major rule change and for any cook to lose out because of what they turn in, because CBj's aren't aware of this new rule changes. Not all CBJ's are online and will not be aware of any rule changes

cpw
02-28-2013, 07:32 AM
I almost only compete in South Carolina BBQ Sanctioned events, and as far as I'm aware, they don't have any rules against parting the pork, weight limits, reheating and all of that, like the KCBS does. Every single contest I've cooked (and won awards at) we've always cooked whole butts, always turned in pulled, sliced, and chunked pork. And I'm willing to bet every other team that cooks SCBA does the same thing, or at least very similar.

My point being, is that just because the parting rule might go away in the KCBS, it doesn't necessarily mean that grilled or ground or whatever pork is going to start winning any contests.

DawgPhan
02-28-2013, 07:54 AM
Like it or not it makes for some really good BBQ!


Horn meat on the left, MM on the right, and tubes.
http://i1090.photobucket.com/albums/i372/Wilsonclanslc/image-37_zpse30f1447.jpg


I really hope that my pork boxes start landing on tables with boxes that look like that...I could use a new pair of shoes...

Meat Man
02-28-2013, 10:18 AM
If I cooked pork as well as you, I'd hope the same. Good luck with the new shoes. :-P

Podge
02-28-2013, 10:34 AM
I will have to say, those pics show some really great pork slices, tube and horn pieces!!! But it doesn't look like the definition of BBQ to me

kenthanson
02-28-2013, 11:01 AM
But as a judge you have to judge what they presented to be bbq, not what your pre concieved notions of bbq are, if that is presented and falls within the rules and you score it down because it's not what you think bbq is then you are being a poor judge.

MattCom
02-28-2013, 11:06 AM
And here I thought my rotisserie pork butt chucks were only good for gyros...
I just need KCBS to allow a pita and tzatziki sauce and the judges can enjoy my kids favorite meal! (jk):clap2:
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb301/Matto22/6D894503-64C5-48A2-B0D2-F3C3FD2A404A-388-00000098542BA024_zps3daa60d6.jpghttp://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb301/Matto22/368F0980-9EB1-49E7-A381-9939A3E2BF17-388-0000009823678A04_zps9ddc5f4f.jpg

DawgPhan
02-28-2013, 11:08 AM
I will have to say, those pics show some really great pork slices, tube and horn pieces!!! But it doesn't look like the definition of BBQ to me


I am sure it was all very good, but I dont think that sliced horn meat is going to be what changes pork boxes in GA.

Scottie
02-28-2013, 01:17 PM
I won 1st in Lexington,NC with slices and what I cook for every other contest I cook. Scored well in other Southern states as well. If they judge by what was presented and the meat is good, you should score accordingly. But is is shy i truly believe that KCBS should do a continuing education for all CBJ's. Especially for pork.

Fat Freddy
02-28-2013, 01:34 PM
I won 1st in Lexington,NC with slices and what I cook for every other contest I cook. Scored well in other Southern states as well. If they judge by what was presented and the meat is good, you should score accordingly. But is is shy i truly believe that KCBS should do a continuing education for all CBJ's. Especially for pork.

On this I agree with you Scottie. I have only judged a handful of contests but i can honestly say i have only had pulled only boxes maybe two or three times. The norm is sliced MM sometimes with pulled and chunked, sometimes just MM and pulled. But there is almost always sliced in the boxes.

Yet by reading some of the comments on here and also on what is or is not real BBQ or not makes me concerned that will all judges judge what is presented in all KCBS contests, in all areas? If not then there should be some sort of continuing education. This rule is evolving however I am not convinced that everyone take on the rule is evolving.

Lake Dogs
02-28-2013, 02:55 PM
Freddy, I agree with you and with Scottie (oh, he must really be rolling right now), but to date I haven't seen a judge count off because what presented didnt fall into his/her definition of BBQ (but this certainly opens the door wide for a very BROAD definition).

I was, however, more concerned that by changing this rule they've opened it up so wide that truly something that isn't by anyones definition remotely associated with BBQ comes across the table and must be judged as BBQ; heaven forbid it scores well, because it was a) appetizing to look at, and b) very tender and moist, and c) tasted great.

For example, a while back I used to charge judges for sanctioned chili cookoffs, and in the charge I had to help them define what is and isn't chili, and in it I gave multiple references to the difference between chili and say spaghetti sauce (as an example); just because you call spaghetti sauce chili doesn't make it chili. Same for BBQ.

Slamdunkpro
02-28-2013, 03:07 PM
Freddy, I agree with you and with Scottie (oh, he must really be rolling right now), but to date I haven't seen a judge admit to counting off because what presented didnt fall into his/her definition of BBQ (but this certainly opens the door wide for a very BROAD definition).

Fixed your post

I was, however, more concerned that by changing this rule they've opened it up so wide that truly something that isn't by anyones definition remotely associated with BBQ comes across the table and must be judged as BBQ; heaven forbid it scores well, because it was a) appetizing to look at, and b) very tender and moist, and c) tasted great.
I fear this as well.

Podge
02-28-2013, 03:29 PM
But as a judge you have to judge what they presented to be bbq, not what your pre concieved notions of bbq are, if that is presented and falls within the rules and you score it down because it's not what you think bbq is then you are being a poor judge.

As I've said before, and will again, That is why I don't Judge!!!! :razz:

I've always submitted what my idea of what BBQ should be, and haven't done too shabby with that approach.

Scottie
02-28-2013, 04:07 PM
.As I've said before, and will again, That is why I don't Judge!!!! :razz:

I've always submitted what my idea of what BBQ should be, and haven't done too shabby with that approach.


I completely agree with you. I do love the history. I also know that if something can be done different and better. Then you better do it. I am the first to say I am a sell out. I'll send you my results on butt tear down!! :shock:

CivilWarBBQ
02-28-2013, 04:34 PM
My point being, is that just because the parting rule might go away in the KCBS, it doesn't necessarily mean that grilled or ground or whatever pork is going to start winning any contests.

Exactly.

Chicken salad was ruled legal a while back too.

How many times has anyone seen chicken salad on a judging table since then?

-GF

Scottie
02-28-2013, 04:51 PM
Everyone know to make good chicken salad, you need to have pieces or chunks of veggies in there that would DQ it! :)

Alexa RnQ
02-28-2013, 06:00 PM
While chicken salad may have been declared legal, it wasn't as if anyone was tearing up the tables with shredded chicken.

Whereas judges have been rewarding sliced pork, disproportionately in some areas. Given that prior success, when a cook is given more latitude in that direction they're likely to take it.

sdbbq1234
02-28-2013, 07:03 PM
Yes, as a judge, I score on what is presented; I have no preconceived thoughts or ideas what is good during a competition. I can't!!!! It is against what I swore to do!! I stand by that 100%!

That being said, I have seen boxes where there is MM, tubes, sliced and pulled. To be honest, it made kinda a mess for all of us to get some of each in a decent amount of time. But, it works..... It did make for a "busy" looking box and presentation.

Bottom line, if if looks good, that's the way I score. Almost every time I have scored a box, my ratings were pretty much in line with the "majority" of the table.

Now, my personal preference is pulled pork. I just think it tastes good that way.

I also try to turn in MM and tubes in the competitions that I compete in along with pulled. In my mind, that is what will look good (if we get the dam box right), and they taste good too!!

And, back to my reason for posting to begin with: I wish they hadn't change the rule/wording or whatever the heck you want to call it. I just see it as getting too liberal on what can be done with the food.

If it keeps changing, will we be cooking/judging hot dogs? I could enter that for all three catagories.

BBQ'ing is BBQ'ing; grilling is grilling. Seems like the lines are blurring.

wallace

Scottie
02-28-2013, 08:36 PM
Blurring.... yes

Q-Dat
02-28-2013, 08:53 PM
All this and we still can't garnish with Kale.....:confused:

CivilWarBBQ
02-28-2013, 09:09 PM
+ 1 for Kale!!!

sdbbq1234
02-28-2013, 09:48 PM
Kale, no! Yuck!

wallace

kenthanson
02-28-2013, 10:53 PM
+ 1 for Kale!!!

All this and we still can't garnish with Kale.....:confused:

Curious as to why you want to garnish with kale?

Q-Dat
02-28-2013, 11:04 PM
Curious as to why you want to garnish with kale?

I've never actually tried, but I bet I could make a really nice looking box with Kale in less than 5 minutes.

G$
03-01-2013, 10:15 AM
All this and we still can't garnish with Kale.....:confused:

That was one thought I had.

The other was when are they going to implement the brisket weight rule? I think 10 pounds is reasonable. I would entertain even going up to 12.

MAP
03-01-2013, 10:23 AM
Even if we could garnish with Kale I would not. When that gets warmed by the meat in the box it gives off a not so plesant smell that would be penitrating your meat the whole time the box is closed.

Smoke'n Ice
03-01-2013, 04:18 PM
That is what you use the cilantro for, it covers up the smell :-)

Podge
03-01-2013, 06:45 PM
Damn!!!.. this thread went from Pork to Garnish in only 8 pages!!..

Q-Dat
03-01-2013, 07:08 PM
Damn!!!.. this thread went from Pork to Garnish in only 8 pages!!..

You're welcome! :D

Jorge
03-01-2013, 08:22 PM
Damn!!!.. this thread went from Pork to Garnish in only 8 pages!!..

O/U in banning pellet cookers is 11.5.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Smokin' Gnome BBQ
03-01-2013, 09:09 PM
O/U in banning pellet cookers is 11.5.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk??????


I dont understand..????????

TheJackal
03-01-2013, 09:27 PM
He's saying that in 3.5 more pages, the conversation that started about the pork rule and now has turned to garnish, will wind up being an thread about banning pellet cookers. [Over / Under on banning pellet cookers is 11.5 (pages)] I don't recall much pellet bashing at this site. Or maybe I just ignore them since one of my cookers is a Yoder YS640. :)

Q-Dat
03-02-2013, 12:03 AM
O/U in banning pellet cookers is 11.5.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not if I can derail it into a debate about butter bath chicken first! :rolleyes:

KC_Bobby
03-02-2013, 01:09 AM
Or the Texas crutch

Pappy Q
03-02-2013, 06:06 AM
Using a butter bath for cooking chicken on a pellet pooper should be banned from competitions. Oh and using the Texas crutch is for idiots who don't know the difference between TN whiskey and KY bourbon.


There, that should do it :wacko:

Muzzlebrake
03-02-2013, 08:26 AM
the Texas crutch is for idiots who don't know the difference between TN whiskey and KY bourbon.

Which as we all know is what uncouth hillbillies who don't know enough to triple distill their whiskey drink.

:rockon:

Funtimebbq
03-02-2013, 09:32 AM
Even if we could garnish with Kale I would not. When that gets warmed by the meat in the box it gives off a not so plesant smell that would be penitrating your meat the whole time the box is closed.

I laughed when I read that because according to Bob Compton the whole point of this rule change was because the pork was cold and unsafe for judges to eat.

Benny

Podge
03-02-2013, 10:06 AM
Using a butter bath for cooking chicken on a pellet pooper should be banned from competitions. Oh and using the Texas crutch is for idiots who don't know the difference between TN whiskey and KY bourbon.


There, that should do it :wacko:

I know the difference, but I also use enough foil at a contest that would build a small space ship.

JD McGee
03-02-2013, 10:10 AM
O/U in banning pellet cookers is 11.5.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lol...why wait! NO MORE PELLET POOPERS!!! Now...because we cook on pellet poopers this year I have to respectfully disagree with myself...:twitch:

Funtimebbq
03-02-2013, 05:29 PM
I laughed when I read that because according to Bob Compton the whole point of this rule change was because the pork was cold and unsafe for judges to eat.

Benny

Sorry, should have read, Dave Compton.