PDA

View Full Version : Rules & Reg Meeting Nov 18, Speak Up Now


Merl
10-15-2006, 01:45 PM
2006 Rules and Regulations Meeting
Saturday November 18, 2006
1:00 P.M. to 4:00 P.M.
Lenexa Community Center
13420 Oak, Lenexa, Ks 66215

November is the time for the annual celebrated KCBS event. No not the Banquet, No not the Royal, nor even the Jack. Its the 2006 Rules and Regulations Meeting.

The is the Membership meeting to make recommendations to the Board concerning changes, or modification of the existing Competition and Judging Rules and Regulations.

So if you can't attend how do you get your voice heard. Your comments can be included if you send them to KCBS. Donna McClure is the Chairperson and you can e-mail her at:

dmclure@kcbs.us ,
(official place to send suggestions)

This forum is a great place to begin discussion, and then send them to the Rules Committee. We look forward to hearing the ideas of the members. This is the time to express your voice and help improve our organization.

Jeff_in_KC
10-15-2006, 04:49 PM
I plan to attend this year once again so if you all have anything specific you want discussed, let's discuss it here first.

Sawdustguy
10-15-2006, 05:10 PM
Unfried chicken and how could a rep disqualify someone without knowing the facts.

Sawdustguy
10-16-2006, 07:35 AM
If I am lucky it may already be solved in the last Rep meeting. Since I do not have easy access to the rep meetings I was hoping Jeff could get a status on this. I believe that the breaded chicken issue has been taken care of with the help of Jim Minion.

BBQchef33
10-16-2006, 12:14 PM
From the excerpt in the last bullsheet, i thought that was allready taken care of and addressed at least the best that can be done after the fact.


wasnt it? ??

Pig Headed
10-16-2006, 02:02 PM
Eleminate the garnish.

Merl
10-16-2006, 02:35 PM
Correction:
Donna has asked that you send your suggestions for the Rules and Regulations Meeting to her personal e-mail at
pdtbbq@everest.kc.net

BrooklynQ
10-16-2006, 02:42 PM
Merl, is every suggestion Donna recieves brought before the rules commitee or does she look for trends and only bring in items that a few people have brought up?

Sawdustguy
10-16-2006, 02:49 PM
From the excerpt in the last bullsheet, i thought that was allready taken care of and addressed at least the best that can be done after the fact.


wasnt it? ??

Yes Phil, but it would be great to focus on "Rep education" so when they are faced with a similar situation they make their decision based on fact instead of speculation. Thats all. I am happy it has been resolved, but lets prevent it from happening again. Ultimately a Rep decision could cost you money. I just want to make sure they make the right decision through education.

Jeff_in_KC
10-16-2006, 03:14 PM
Merl, is every suggestion Donna recieves brought before the rules commitee or does she look for trends and only bring in items that a few people have brought up?

Rob, last year, they had the suggestion emails printed off and read them out loud at the meeting for discussion. I would guess that if they do it the same way, every suggestion will be read unless there's just way too many to cover.

Jeff_in_KC
10-16-2006, 03:16 PM
Eleminate the garnish.

It's optional now. I myself would oppose getting rid of it totally.

Merl
10-16-2006, 03:26 PM
Last year Jeff we were going to delete your comments, but then you showed up.
-----------------------------
Donna will put subjects together, then when a subject is being discussed, she will read all on topic.

At the end, she reads through the remaining e-mails. Unfortunately unless someone there wants to discuss it or make a motion, the ones at the end did not get much more than read.

So if you have a topic, its good to inform someone like Jeff who can bring it forward when it is read.

Yours in BBQ
Merl

Jeff_in_KC
10-16-2006, 03:28 PM
Last year Jeff we were going to delete your comments, but then you showed up.


Last year, I sat quietly, listened and took notes! LOL! I had no comments! :lol:

BBQchef33
10-16-2006, 03:32 PM
ok people, our mods have scrubbed this thread.. So lets try a different approach. We start with a little soap box time on my part.

If we can keep it productive, and we come up with some valid points worth discussion at the KCBS meeting, I would appreciate if members dont individually approach KCBS on behalf of us or The BBQ Brethren, instead document and discuss things here and I will compile them and send them thru the proper channels to KCBS along with copies to our more predominant members like Jim Minion, Rod and Merl.

Lets get the thread back on track and see if we can come up not only with our concerns, but offer solutions, and ideas in general to make things better..

a side note: A little pet peeve I have and I always used to tell my staff... that if your going to complain, dont bother unless(Just like Sawdust has done in the previous post).. you can offer a solution too. Otherwise, all you are is whiney and complaining. More credibility comes when the complaint comes with a fix. It may not be accepted, but at least its offered.

.


Thanks,
The Management. :wink: :mrgreen:

DeanC
10-16-2006, 04:00 PM
I remember reading a post on a different forum about a turn-in that came up missing, I can't remember whether it was chicken, ribs, etc. The cook was told that they didn't turn in the chicken, ribs, etc., when they actually did. Was that ever dealt with, I don't remember seeing the update? Someone suggested a receipt when you turned in the box, I thought that was a pretty good idea.

backyardchef
10-16-2006, 04:03 PM
I know of one instance where a pork entry was misplaced. It was handled quietly through appropriate channels and eventually things were settled by the KCBS. This was at a contest in PA a few years ago. Not sure if that's the one you were thinking of....

Plowboy
10-16-2006, 04:05 PM
Well, I really don't have suggestions for changes, but I do have an opinion on suggestions I've heard around forums and contests.

1) I think the garnish rules are fine as is. I WOULD NOT like to see KCBS go to no garnish. I've done a contest like this and didn't care for it. I also don't want it to go wide open where I have to be a cook and a damn artist to participate in a contest. Leave it alone.

2) I'm one of the, maybe few, people that supports the change in implementing the current scoring that occured a couple years ago. I think the results are positive. You are seeing a lot more variety in the teams that are getting calls. You don't see multiple 180's in a single category at a single contest... other than dessert. I recall a contest where the winner in every category was a 180 and the top four in pork were tied. We don't see that bunching up at the top like we used to. To those that want to allow half or quarter points, then why not go to a 40 point scale? Again, I don't like the idea of a change. That's me.

3) Judges should not have to pay to be a judge. If KCBS wants to enforce this, then they need to provide the judges. You can't force the contest organizer to collect money from judges and still meet their quota for number of judges. It puts too much pressure on the contest organizer. A change I would like to see is a minimum number of CBJ's per contest. Contest organizers could be rewarded for having CBJ's by having their contest sanction fee reduced by certain amounts if they hit 30%, 50%, 70%, and 100%. Use a carrot, not a stick. If judges are expected to pay to judge, then encourage CBJ's by at least reducing their judging fee. IF CONTESTS COLLECT FEES FROM JUDGES, I WANT MY ENTRY FEE REDUCED OR PRIZES INCREASED.

Just ramblings from an unarmed man. Peace out!!

Merl
10-16-2006, 05:15 PM
I am sorry, I did not put Donna's E-mail address correctly.

Send suggestions to Donna at

pdtbbq@everestkc.net

butts
10-16-2006, 06:13 PM
I would love to see some stats on where the judges come from and how many events they have judged. I 've heard many of times, "We have 100% certified judges". That's good so prove it, I'm not trying to release names of judges but maybe an id number and number of events judged and where they are from. Having 100% certified judges that are judging their first event is not the same and judges that have judged 10 events.

At the end of an event we get scores which also reveal our double blind numbers. Maybe our scores could also show us what judges gave us what results.

Jeff_in_KC
10-16-2006, 08:09 PM
I will compile them and send them thru the proper channels to KCBS along with copies to our more predominant members like Jim Minion, Rod and Merl.



Ummm... no offense meant to anyone but my $35 annual dues to KCBS spend just as well as anyone else's Pooh! :wink: If you mean KCBS board members, that's a whole other thing. :biggrin:

BrooklynQ
10-16-2006, 08:18 PM
I think that it should be a rule that the organizers are required to give preference to CBJ's over non-certified judges. I don't want to make it tougher on the organizer, God knows they have a lot to do. The rule should be something like CBJ's have until 10 days before an event to sign up as a judge to recieve the preferred spot. After that, it's up to the organizer.

Right now organizers can put whoever the want in as a judge.

BrooklynQ
10-16-2006, 08:20 PM
Ummm... no offense meant to anyone but my $35 annual dues to KCBS spend just as well as anyone else's Pooh! :wink: If you mean KCBS board members, that's a whole other thing. :biggrin:

I don't think he was trying to stop you or anyone here from sending in their comments. What I think Pooh meant that he didn't want ANY one of us claiming to represent the Brethren. Phil reserves that right for himself.

Jeff_in_KC
10-16-2006, 08:29 PM
A change I would like to see is a minimum number of CBJ's per contest. Contest organizers could be rewarded for having CBJ's by having their contest sanction fee reduced by certain amounts if they hit 30%, 50%, 70%, and 100%. Use a carrot, not a stick. If judges are expected to pay to judge, then encourage CBJ's by at least reducing their judging fee. IF CONTESTS COLLECT FEES FROM JUDGES, I WANT MY ENTRY FEE REDUCED OR PRIZES INCREASED.

I think that's a great idea, Todd but it might be a problem for folks running contests in areas where CBJs are few and far between.

Plowboy
10-16-2006, 08:40 PM
A change I would like to see is a minimum number of CBJ's per contest. Contest organizers could be rewarded for having CBJ's by having their contest sanction fee reduced by certain amounts if they hit 30%, 50%, 70%, and 100%. Use a carrot, not a stick. If judges are expected to pay to judge, then encourage CBJ's by at least reducing their judging fee. IF CONTESTS COLLECT FEES FROM JUDGES, I WANT MY ENTRY FEE REDUCED OR PRIZES INCREASED.I think that's a great idea, Todd but it might be a problem for folks running contests in areas where CBJs are few and far between.
A minimum would be tough, you're right. Reduced KCBS fees would be an incentive for those that can get CBJ's but not penalize those that can't. It also incents them to have CBJ classes to build a community of CBJ's in the area for future contests. Anne R at the National Pork Board and the Iowa BBQ Society does a great job of this. From what I know, you get 100% CBJ's at any KCBS contest in Iowa, because Anne has invested time in building a pool of judges. Iowa is getting more and more contests over recent years, too.

BrooklynQ
10-16-2006, 08:43 PM
I think the team of the year calculations need to be looked at.

Right now it is done like this...



For every KCBS sanctioned contest, teams earn the following points:
1st Place = 5 points
2nd Place = 4 points
3rd Place = 3 points
4th Place = 2 points
5th Place = 1 point
If a contest has 25 + teams, the points are doubled.
If a contest has 50 + teams, the points are tripled.



I think the doubling and trippiling of points should be dropped. In my opinion, every contest should count equally towards team of the year.


Some areas, like the North East, don't have that many big events. The current system gives an unfair advantage to teams in areas that can support larger contests.

Plowboy
10-16-2006, 08:45 PM
I think the team of the year calculations need to be looked at.

Right now it is done like this...



For every KCBS sanctioned contest, teams earn the following points:
1st Place = 5 points
2nd Place = 4 points
3rd Place = 3 points
4th Place = 2 points
5th Place = 1 point
If a contest has 25 + teams, the points are doubled.
If a contest has 50 + teams, the points are tripled.



I think the doubling and trippiling of points should be dropped. In my opinion, every contest should count equally towards team of the year.


Some areas, like the North East, don't have that many big events. The current system gives an unfair advantage to teams in areas that can support larger contests.

Also, to your point, some really small contests are super competitive. As I keep telling my wife... size doesn't matter. :icon_blush:

BrooklynQ
10-16-2006, 08:54 PM
There's a lot of little rules that seem to be in effect, if you're in the know. How big exactly is a "pool" of sauce. I've heard 1/2 dollar to as small as a nickel. Also, exploring the KCBS website, I can't find anything that tells me how state champions are determined.

Which leads me to my point, all KCBS rules and regulations should be published in a flyer and mailed to each member at a certain point each year, prior to them taking effect. Like say - rules for the next coming year are finalized by Feb 1 Booklets mailed out by Mar 1, all rules are published on the website by Mar 1 and the new rules take effect on Mar 1.

And as much as possible, nothing should be left to interuptiation. What exactly is a fine dice?

Jeff_in_KC
10-16-2006, 09:39 PM
I think the doubling and trippiling of points should be dropped. In my opinion, every contest should count equally towards team of the year.

Some areas, like the North East, don't have that many big events. The current system gives an unfair advantage to teams in areas that can support larger contests.

I wouldn't vote to make that change. They only count the five best contests for a team's score so it evens things out somewhat. The difference in competing in the Great American BBQ (206 teams) vs. Warsaw, Missouri (34 teams) is huge. We got calls in EVERY contest this year with the exception of the GAB. The competition was a LOT more fierce. Those winning it or scoring top five should be rewarded for the feat. plus, there are teams that come in from all over the country for contests like that. It isn't limited to local teams.

BrooklynQ
10-16-2006, 09:51 PM
Disagree Jeff. Let's say you win 1st place in 5 contests all with more than 25, but less then 50 teams. You're score for team of the year - 25 x 2 or 50. Why'd you only do contests that size? Because that's all that is available around you or those that you can afford to attend.

And let's say Dr. BBQ, name choosen at random - well not really I saw he was reading this thread - takes 1st place in 5 contests all with more than 50 teams. The good Doctor's score 25 x 3 or 75.

Who wins? The Doc because for whatever reason, location, finances etc he was able to participate in bigger events. He'd still win if he did 2 contests with more then 50, (30 points) , two with 25 to 50 (20 points) and one with less than 25 (5 points) totalling 55.

Up here in the North East, we still have events that attract less then 25 teams. Not many, but they're still out there. A lot will get bigger, but some are restricted by their site. BBQ still a foriegn bird up here.

Eliminating the size bonus would allow more non-pros to achieve team of the year status. It would also possibly attract some of the bigger names to the smaller events since there would be no bonus on TOY points.

Just my opinion cause I ain't gonna be seeing TOY anytime soon.

The_Kapn
10-16-2006, 09:53 PM
"Some areas, like the North East, don't have that many big events. The current system gives an unfair advantage to teams in areas that can support larger contests."

Rob, I hear what you are saying.
And, I imagine the same situation exists on the West Coast.

I see two problems with getting any relief for your area.
#1--As the number of teams rises, the difficulty in winning increases dramatically. Therefore, the reward increases to reflect that.
I doubt that you can get by that, unfortunately.
#2--A bit of a "chicken and egg" challenge here. Rather than dilute the current awards system, the undeserved regions need to pump up the contests as competitive BBQ catches on. And it is, especially in your region.
Teams in these regions need to travel if they wish to compete for TOTY.
The top teams (the contenders) currently travel huge distances to compete in events where the rewards are substantial. Any event that is a triple points event, a State Championship/qualifier, and has a $35 to $50 K purse draws all the heavy hitters. I have seen this in person :redface:

As your region develops and you get some of these types of events, your teams will not have to travel so much.
But, they then will have the pleasure of cooking against the Triggs, Lotta Bulls, BoneSmokers, PelletHeads, Music City Pig Pals, etc. That will be a lot of fun for y'all :lol:

All I am trying to say is your suggestion may not get a whole lot of support, but give it a shot by all means.

Good luck.

TIM

Jeff_in_KC
10-16-2006, 10:03 PM
Disagree Jeff. Let's say you win 1st place in 5 contests all with more than 25, but less then 50 teams. You're score for team of the year - 25 x 2 or 50. Why'd you only do contests that size? Because that's all that is available around you or those that you can afford to attend.

And let's say Dr. BBQ, name choosen at random - well not really I saw he was reading this thread - takes 1st place in 5 contests all with more than 50 teams. The good Doctor's score 25 x 3 or 75.

Who wins? The Doc because for whatever reason, location, finances etc he was able to participate in bigger events. He'd still win if he did 2 contests with more then 50, (30 points) , two with 25 to 50 (20 points) and one with less than 25 (5 points) totalling 55.

Up here in the North East, we still have events that attract less then 25 teams. Not many, but they're still out there. A lot will get bigger, but some are restricted by their site. BBQ still a foriegn bird up here.

Eliminating the size bonus would allow more non-pros to achieve team of the year status. It would also possibly attract some of the bigger names to the smaller events since there would be no bonus on TOY points.

Just my opinion cause I ain't gonna be seeing TOY anytime soon.

Rob, I'm just a nobody with 8 team of the year points for overall (a lot better in the categories) but we traveled to Michigan for a contest this year. Many "nobodies" traveled to KC for the GAB and Royal. If you wanna play, you gotta pay I guess. Or be like Stan and become a MoFo! :wink: :lol: I think Tim made a valid point... that until BBQ competition becomes big time in the northeast, that's a hurdle you'll have to overcome.

However, as Tim also said... if that's your belief, by all means, suggest it!

BrooklynQ
10-16-2006, 10:06 PM
Tim,
I don't know that many of the really big names in BBQ, but most of the big teams up here seem more concerned with getting to the Jack and Royal than with the size of the purse.

I'm not saying that thier only concern, the prize pool is definitely a big part of the decision factor, but woudn't it be better all around if no one had to travel great distances to compete?

Wouldn't it be better for the sport if the big boys played in the little sandboxes as well as on the beach? (I'm feeling very metaphoric right now and I haven't even had a drink!) It would increase the competition level in the smaller events and raise the bar on everyone's performance.

A lot of new teams are intimidated by cooking at large events - remember how many people thought Jeff was crazy for cooking at the royal his first time out.

The big events will still draw the big names. Let the money be the reward not the bump in TOTY points.

BrooklynQ
10-16-2006, 10:13 PM
God, I never even thought about this until I looked at the KCBS site tonight.

I'm going home.

The_Kapn
10-16-2006, 10:17 PM
"A lot of new teams are intimidated by cooking at large events - remember how many people thought Jeff was crazy for cooking at the royal his first time out.

The big events will still draw the big names. Let the money be the reward not the bump in TOTY points."

Rob,
I understand every thing you are saying.
The regional rewards and the "travel thing" is the reason for regional sanctioning bodies.
Y'all have NEBS, we have FBA, Texas has a couple of their own.
More are cropping up all the time.

KCBS is national--gotta think outside your home turf on this one.
If a team wants national recognition, compete at the national level.
May have to travel--just the way it is.

TIM

BrooklynQ
10-16-2006, 10:22 PM
KCBS is national--gotta think outside your home turf on this one.
If a team wants national recognition, compete at the national level.
May have to travel--just the way it is.

I don't really agree with that. In many ways KCBS is still a local organization. It is the national umbrella, but it's still not a national organization. It's still focused primarily on the needs/events of the people in the middle of the country.

BBQchef33
10-16-2006, 10:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff_in_KC
Ummm... no offense meant to anyone but my $35 annual dues to KCBS spend just as well as anyone else's Pooh! :wink: If you mean KCBS board members, that's a whole other thing. :biggrin:

Originally posted by BrooklynQ
I don't think he was trying to stop you or anyone here from sending in their comments. What I think Pooh meant that he didn't want ANY one of us claiming to represent the Brethren. Phil reserves that right for himself.

Thanks Rob.. your correct.


I would appreciate if members don't individually approach KCBS on behalf of us or The BBQ Brethren, instead document and discuss things here and I will compile them and send them thru the proper channels to KCBS


I am not addressing someone sending in their own stuff to KCBS on their own. What I am trying to ensure is that no one goes in or send in anything claiming to represent OUR GROUP. What anyone does on their own is their business, but anything sent or brought to the floor on behalf of The BBQ Brethren, I will send in thru the proper channels, with followup, whether it be an email, letter, or representative who can personally attend.

Plowboy
10-16-2006, 10:33 PM
The real solution for this is to go the Nascar route where you have the Busch Series and the NEXTEL Series. Some cooks will carry over, but the money and prestige is in the NEXTEL.

Maybe have TOY in classes based on number of contests: under 5, 5-12, 13+. Just thinking out of the box here.

...some of use would be in the Truck Series.

kcpellethead
10-17-2006, 11:04 AM
First, let me apologize. My post in this thread was wrong. I won't make excuses for it. I hope folks were not so offended that they won't offer suggestions to making KCBS better for all of us.

Next, great discussion. The TOTY stuff is very interesting. The current system was created many years ago and some think that it's very out of date. However, I can see the changes made being very different than the opinions I have read here. The current system is based on it being harder to win bigger events, which I believe is true. When two teams max out on points for TOTY and a tie breaker system must be used to determine the champion, it's probably time to revamp the system.

Again, I apologize for my outburst. Those of you that know me, also know I'm not like that. As a KCBS board member, it's important to me that I be approachable. All I ask in return, is that folks be a part of the solution, as Phil said.

Rod

ique
10-17-2006, 01:42 PM
Next, great discussion. The TOTY stuff is very interesting.

I agree that large events should carry greater weight than smaller ones in the team of the year calculations. I do think that the current system is too heavily weighted towards the large contests though. If you dont live in the KC area or travel nationally its almost impossible to compete in KCBS TOTY.

Also it seems to me that the brackets are too broad. There is certainly a difference between a 28 team event and a 48 team event. Adding more brackets and reducing the weighting may even things out and minimize the chance of ties.

What NEBS does is use the actual scores for TOTY calculations, for instance getting a 178 in ribs is an excellent TOTY score and it does not matter if the contest was 15 or 50 teams.

Paola Greg
10-17-2006, 02:06 PM
Concerning TOY points. Currently a team must finish in the top 5 to get points for overall or a category. There are so many teams in many of the contests, I think the system should be changed to points for the top 10 in a contest.

Currently, a team could theoretically finish in 6th place in 30 contests, and receive NO points, whereas a team could finish 1st in one contest and receive 5,10,or 15 points, and I ask which team is the most deserving of an award?

I think the system should at least be changed from the current of 54321 points for 1st thru 5th place, to 10987654321 for 1st thru 10 place. However, I still think the number of teams entered makes sense, and the points should be doubled for over 25 teams, and tripled for over 50 teams.

As far as the ties in teams this year and the current tie-breaker being used, whereas the team with the most points in their sixth highest finish wins, that seems OK, in my opinion.

Jeff_in_KC
10-17-2006, 02:40 PM
Excellent suggestion, Chris! If something was drawn up nicely for that, I could probably support that idea unless someone came up with some legitimate reasons why it wouldn't work.

butts
10-17-2006, 03:08 PM
Maybe the TOY points system should take into account what teams competed in certain events. I've been to comps this year that had 50 teams and were must less competitive than some with only 25 teams. If every team had a ranking then you could determine the quality of the competition and apply "bonus" points where they should be applied. That combined with the size of the event may be more accurite way to determine the TOY....just a thought.

DeanC
10-17-2006, 04:35 PM
Currently, a team could theoretically finish in 6th place in 30 contests, and receive NO points, whereas a team could finish 1st in one contest and receive 5,10,or 15 points, and I ask which team is the most deserving of an award?

Excellent point.

MoKanMeathead
10-18-2006, 07:55 AM
I am with Greg, I would like to see the points expanded to the top ten teams....or maybe give points to the top 20 percent. A 25 team contest would have points for the top 5 and 1st would get 5 points. An 80 team contest would give points to the top 16 and 1st place would get 16 points. This would provide for more points for the bigger contests and recognize more teams in those larger contests. It would also help to reduce all of the ties that always seem to occur.

It would not help those teams in areas that there simply are not a bunch of large contests.

Rickwieser
10-18-2006, 12:20 PM
I worry more about fixing the judging system. And having more CBJs at a contest. Since team of the year only applies to a few teams that can cook every weekend or have big sponsors I doesnt apply to 95% of us that compete. Now for my rant.
Due to the low CBJs at contests and untrained judges the old scoring system should come back into play with percentage points example(8.5, 8.75,7.25 etc.)This system was scrubbed due to too many 180s and an antiquated system used by kcbs(dos) to score at a contest that was unable at the time to utilize decimals or partial points. This new system was passed through with a group of about 40 people who showed up for a meeting. Not the entire kcbs body.
Reasons to change.
1. judges that are not certified do not know how to judge properly. That is why the kcbs sponsors classes and charges for the class. It is to the advantage of kcbs to have more judges certified at a contest.
2. In the short training before a contest how many judges know how to mark down a entry but how do you mark up and entry also. going one direction(down)and starting at 9 eliminates confusion due to lack of training. And what is average. come on. Talk about subjective. Average compared to what. By going down only as was done in the past it helps to solidify a reasoning behind a score. Decimals and quarter, half, or partial points take out the 180 problem in most every instance.
3.I like Todds idea of reducing the contest fee to the sponsor if they have X amount of cbjs. The amount of money raised by paid training classes would more than likely exceed the amount KCBS would lose to the sponsor as a incentive to have more CBJS. Incentive to KCBS is more members and more training class fees. Incentive to sponsor lower kcbs fees.
I know for a fact that cbjs are turned away at some contests to allow the sponsors buddies or cronies to judge. Oh I should have called them celebrity judges as I was once told thats what they are. I want trained judges that paid there fee to kcbs and are members (Pd member) to be the ones judging my entries. Not the mayor or fire dept that is there for a free meal.
4. How do you justify charging a cbj a fee to judge and then when you dont have enough judges you take a bunch of bubbas out of the audience to judge and they dont pay. Talk about unfair. Every dime should be refunded to the people to pd if all judges do not pay. this is why charging judges does not work. What a deterrent to good judges not to judge.
5. People involved with the production of or organization of an event cannot participate in raffles or other games of chance due to a conflict of interest. Period. Not that anyone would cheat but it doesnt look right.
6. Garnish. Its optional. Leave it at that. If you eliminate garnish eliminate the appearance score all together
Climbing down off the soapbox.
I welcome your discussion of these changes to kcbs.

Smoker
10-18-2006, 12:48 PM
"KCBS is national--gotta think outside your home turf on this one.
If a team wants national recognition, compete at the national level.
May have to travel--just the way it is."

<stands on soap box>

KCBS is not national. They may accept your check from anywhere in the country but they are STILL too focused locally. Thats why I am not renewing my membership.

My suggestion Pooh, is that they break the country up into different areas and each area is represented on the board. Areas that have been neglected should get major attention from Kansas(like affirmative action really) to increase awareness, prize money and the number of contests in said area. That way, the KCBS will actually grow.

<gets off soap box and walks away>

Yakfishingfool
10-18-2006, 01:04 PM
OK read through quickly but want to add my two cents....Garnish...I think, especially after the e.coli debacle, that this should be eliminated. The garnish adds a layer of intricacy that, in my opinion, takes from the meat and focuses on a lot of green stuff.
Want green stuff for looks? Make two options, green turn in box, or a KCBS approved greenery pack made of cleanable material. Sold by KCBS, used at KCBS events. I seem to recall the instructions in my jusdge training as saying "ignore" the green stuff. Well, it's time to lose it. It's been associated with health issues and creates an unsafe environment that could open many competitions to additional liabilities. How??? The leaf is fractured in the plating process and the warm enviroment as well as liquid environment allows easy motility of bacteria.

My two cents at least, Scott

Yakfishingfool
10-18-2006, 01:07 PM
Smoker, as chair of the largest Nurse Practitioner state organization, we have faced similar issues. We have regions that have over 600 members and regions with less than one hundred. We chose to handle it as follows. Each region gets one vote.
If the KCBS broke the country into regions and used a regional representative, voted in by the region to serve as a Director to the board, all regions would be represented and all regions would be represented equally. It would be the repsonsibility of the Regional Rep to understand his regions preferred voting choices. Scott

Jeff_in_KC
10-18-2006, 02:27 PM
Just my opinion, Scott, but tainted MEAT has been a culprit in food-borne illness MUCH more often than tainted lettuce. I don't think that's an issue at all. If you don't want garnish, say it but don't blame it on e. coli.

I happen to believe the meat looks better in a "green frame". It's like my Mona Lisa example before... put the Mona Lisa in a plain ol' black frame and while that doesn't change the painting itself, it will detract from the overall looks. Add an ornate, extravagant frame and it makes the painting look better. I think the same goes with the meat. While they aren't judging the greenery, the greenery can give the illusion that the meat looks better. I'm all for that. Plus it keeps it from sliding around in the box and looking like crap by the time the volunteers at the turn-in table and the table captains get done slinging it AROUND.

MoKanMeathead
10-18-2006, 04:26 PM
I could live without lettuce in the boxes! To use Jeff's Mona Lisa example, if everyone had the same plain ol' black frame the judges would be judging everyone's "Mona Lisa" the same. I think that is a good thing. I know, garnigh is optional - but until it is eliminated people will still use it because they do not want their "Mona Lisa" judged with a plain ol' black frame when everyone else is using an ornate, extravagant frame.

The_Kapn
10-18-2006, 04:34 PM
We compete KCBS--garnish optional, and FBA--garnish prohibited.

Either way is fine with me.
We have learned to create good presentations either way.
Now, to get our tenderness consistant... :redface:

TIM

River City Smokehouse
10-18-2006, 04:44 PM
Plus it keeps it from sliding around in the box and looking like crap by the time the volunteers at the turn-in table and the table captains get done slinging it AROUND.

I think that the garnish has benefits such as this that people are forgetting about. I will say that life has taught me that the grass is not always greener on the other side of the fence. With all the hype on getting rid of the greenery just might yield the outcome a lot of people won't like any better and then you're stuck. Maybe some folks should focus on increasing their garnishing abilities and just get on 'wit' it, YO!:cool:

Rockaway BeachBQ
10-18-2006, 05:08 PM
My 2 cents on the main points being discussed here.

First garnishing should continue as is, and competitors should educate themselves a little on food styling. Many competitors think garnish means fill every nook and cranny with a sprig a parsley. However rules need to be clarified as to how to score poorly garnished and messy turn in boxes. I had a box of pulled pork at Ribfest that weighed close to 10 lbs. and had sauce all over the lid because they could not close it. I actually called the Rep over to see if this would be considered pooling (he said it was fine). But those sort of things are not covered in the little flyer at all. I have also seen boxes with black fingerprints on them, how should they be scored?

As for TOTY scoring. Doubling and tripling the points for bigger contests really means that small contests and new contests will suffer as teams continue to compete in the bigger contests for improved points. I think weighting the scores is fine but it should be done on a much smaller scale of say a 25% bonus for contests over 25 teams and 50% for those over 50. However the NEBS system also has some merit as well.

Jeff_in_KC
10-18-2006, 06:57 PM
I could live without lettuce in the boxes! To use Jeff's Mona Lisa example, if everyone had the same plain ol' black frame the judges would be judging everyone's "Mona Lisa" the same. I think that is a good thing. I know, garnigh is optional - but until it is eliminated people will still use it because they do not want their "Mona Lisa" judged with a plain ol' black frame when everyone else is using an ornate, extravagant frame.

I couldn't live without the lettuce, Wayne... what the fark would I use to hold all my parsley carpeted putting green together with? :lol:

By the way, I think this thread is going to be of some value. Good job, bros!

Jeff_in_KC
10-18-2006, 07:06 PM
I went back and did a search on my report from last year to give you an idea what was discussed and what may or may not be raised again this year. For what it's worth, here's the report ("KCBS" and "rules" are in red cuz those were my search keywords):

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OK guys... here it is. Rod, please fill in any blanks that I may create with my post...

The way I understand it, the following items that were accepted via majority vote of the 35-40 present at this meeting will now be presented to the entire board at KCBS for consideration:

1. It was suggested via email that KCBS require 8 separate and identifiable pieces in a box rather than just six. Most in attendance were in agreement that this was not a good idea because sometimes, it's hard enough to find 6 good pieces. Most cooks there said they'd be happy to give the table captains and other volunteers a half tray of samples when they went to turn in their entry and just leave boxes at six. There was some discussion of going to ten inch boxes but I don't think that garnered much support.

2. An email from a judge suggested going from "garnish optional" to "garnish prohibited". It was motioned to accept this and seconded just so we could vote it down and move on without getting into a debate that likely would have gone on into the evening! It was overwhelmingly in favor of keeping garnish.

3. We then went over all 25 rules in the KCBS cooks manual. In regards to rule #1, there was a lot of debate about what constitutes a legal entry in a contest. The complaint was that some contests were apparently bringing in "chicken cookers" to turn in nothing but chicken but thereby getting the required number of teams to make the event a qualifier or in some cases a triple points contest. It was felt this was skewing the team of the year point standings and some teams were reportedly "strong-arming" contest organizers to be sure there were enough teams to make it triple points. To be honest, there was so much debate, I can't recall what, if anything got settled.

4. There was a debate on what should be required on chicken. Paul Kirk moved that KCBS adopt a rule stating that only whole or half chickens or cornish game hens were legal. This was overwhelmingly voted down by the group.

5. It was suggested that the description of a "9" score be changed from "excellent" to "perfect". Again, this was not accepted.

6. Rule 5-B stating the conditions for reheating food came into question. Some wanterd to eliminate it completely to prohibit all re-heating of food. This was rejected. However, it was approved to suggest to the board that they add the word "or" between 5A and 5B.

7. Rule 21 - Marking and sculpting - In regards to marking, it was suggested that it be specifically defined or eliminated if it could not be defined. It was finally decided to suggest that KCBS remove the word "sculpting" altogether and keep "marking". Personally, I believe the words need further definition but apparently if the board agrees, next year, you'd be able to arrange your pulled pork in a smiley face in your tray! :mrgreen: Or like one guy there said... a team member of theirs got them disqualified in pork because he made a "volcano" outof the meat and coming out of the center, he filled with sauce like it was lava! hahaha! They got DQ'd for sculpting AND puddling of sauce!

8. Brother Rod motioned that KCBS change the definition of ribs to include having a bone attached to the meat (bone-in). Must be turned in one bone per piece. It was unanimous in favor of this. There was a question about what if it was overcooked and the bone came out of the meat when picked up from the box. This rule would not DQ that.

9. It was suggested that the mention of sausage in rule 3 because KCBS doesn't address beans, desserts, side dishes, sauces, etc. so why sausage? It was voted to accept this.

10. In regards to rule #22, it was suggested to remove the first five words ("To simplify the judging process...") and just say "No side sauce containers...". This was accepted.

11. There was a big debate on removing 6 as the starting point for judges. This one went on and on. Some felt they should start at 9 and go down. Others felt there should be no designation, just the 2 through 9 range. It was decided (I think anyway) to not suggest to the board that anything be changed and to give the current new system at least a second year to work before the KCBS jumps into another chance.

12. The next thing was interesting because I recall us discussing here the merits of allowing chopped, pulled or diced brisket to be turned in and who was teaching in his class that this should be considered a sign of an overcooked brisket. It was interesting that this came up and the CBJ trainer in question was there today! :wink: I wonder what he was thinking but it was approved that it be suggested to the board to SPECIFICALLY say in the rules that this kind of brisket prep is legal.

13. I almost forgot this because I didn't start writing notes immediately. I was busy socializing! :mrgreen: Anyway, an email brought up the issue of having seen many cooks licking fingers during turn-in time. It was suggested that something be addressed on this. To be honest, I think most people were grossed out by the thought and from what I recall, nothing was made official as a stance by the cooks.

Rod then took over the judging part after the rules part was completed. The following were some of the things that came up. I think I missed some because I was sampling the grub on hand!

1. There was a suggestion that all judges be given a laminated card at the contests that summariazed the rules and KCBS guidelines for them. Didn't seem to be too much support for this idea.

2. It was suggested that to help cooks understand the standards being taught in CBJ classes that the KCBS publish a flyer with standards on them and make them available at all contests along with the cooks manual and to possibly add them to the CD played at cooks meetings and be sure cooks at the meetings were versed in what the standards taught would be. This went over well and might be something I'd expect to see in 2006.

3. A suggestion came in to disallow the use of or possession of plastic untensils by the judges at the judging table. Someone made a point that what if a smoker with nicotine stained fingers grabbed a pile of pulled pork and then someone else had to reach in, it might not be too appetizing. I don't recall the ending on this but I think most were in favor of keeping the untensils. The specific email said it was particularly a problem in the 816 and 913 area codes (the KC area!). I personally didn't see why this was even an issue.

4. An email suggested giving all judges (not just certified ones) a number so they could be tracked and identified in case there was a problem or a pattern of a really flaky judge (my paraphrase on the flaky judge part). This was met with little enthusiasm.

5. Who is allowed in judging tents came up. One contest rep said there was distracting issues when a judge showed up with a baby in the judging area. The age issue was rejected because many teens are very helpful in removing trash, etc. in the judging area. The officially suggested change was to say that only judges, reps and support staff will be allowed in the judging area.

6. Also voted to request that language be added that says "No other activities other than judging will take place in the judging area during judging hours. This came about because someone was upset that at Boone County, they were raffling off the leftover BBQ turn-ins and the judges seemed distracted by this, checking their ticket numbers. I thought it was in poor taste to make another buck off team turn-ins but then again, I don't know the situation. Maybe it was for charity?

7. Finally (and imagine this) it was discussed about allowing judges in the contest area! haha! And neither Rod nor I raised the question! The official suggestion to KCBS will be that judges are not allowed in the contest area after the judges meeting takes place but beforehand is OK. When they say in the contest area, they mean actually where the meat is being prepped and cooked, not necessarily where friends and family are being entertained. It was voted to put this on the CD that's played at cooks meetings so the cooks would be aware of the rule. Interesting.

That's all I got. Rod, if you can think of anything else the Brothers might need to know about, please fill in the blanks I left. I'm sure I misheard something or forgot something but again, everywhere I say it was approved, that means it was voted that these issues be presented to the KCBS Board for consideration for 2006. There was a lot of good discussion and ideas tossed around.

Afterwards, ten of us went to a local bar to grab some dinner and drink some beer. Rod and I were both there so we're calling it a mini bash. Maybe an ultra mini bash. :wink: Had lots of fun, bought some new brisket rub made by Kyle with Orgasmic Slabs (which farkin' rocks!) and learned 4-5 more helpful things to file away for 2006 to hopefully help take my team to another level.

Yakfishingfool
10-18-2006, 07:18 PM
2. An email from a judge suggested going from "garnish optional" to "garnish prohibited". It was motioned to accept this and seconded just so we could vote it down and move on without getting into a debate that likely would have gone on into the evening! It was overwhelmingly in favor of keeping garnish.

Why? If we want an artisitic presentation to add to the meat why not let the kids draw on the box. We're judging meat, not green stuff. It's like asking Farrah Fawcet in her hey day and rosanne barr to model a swim suit. Just judge the suit....kind of distracting isn't it?

thanks for posting all the stuff. It's really good reading.

The_Kapn
10-18-2006, 07:19 PM
I couldn't live without the lettuce, Wayne... what the fark would I use to hold all my parsley carpeted putting green together with? :lol:

By the way, I think this thread is going to be of some value. Good job, bros!

Point #1--Jeff, ya need to get out more :lol: :lol:

Point #2--AMEN, finally!

TIM

The_Kapn
10-18-2006, 07:40 PM
The garnish issue is so hot it is like a political discussion right now.

I am really ambivalent on the subject--as neutral as you can be.
I can see and appreciate the pros and cons of both sides.
We cook under both rules and understand them both---results are the same for Chad and me--Dead Ass Middle (DAM) :redface:

For the "naked" boosters--that is an uphill battle against an entrenched rule. Right or wrong, it is gonna take a lot of time if you want it changed.

"Naked" entries are starting to score and place better, as I follow the results.

Keep on constructively making input to get it changed if that is what you want.
Write up your thoughts and get them to KCBS. Keep at it!

But, if you want to compete in KCBS, for now, learn to effectively use the allowable garnishes or just go naked.

TIM

(I learned some garnish tricks last weekend with Kevin that I will gladly sell with a small royalty to him. :lol: )

2Fat
10-18-2006, 07:48 PM
1. judges that are not certified do not know how to judge properly. That is why the kcbs sponsors classes and charges for the class. It is to the advantage of kcbs to have more judges certified at a contest.
2. In the short training before a contest how many judges know how to mark down a entry but how do you mark up and entry also. going one direction(down)and starting at 9 eliminates confusion due to lack of training. And what is average. come on. Talk about subjective. Average compared to what. By going down only as was done in the past it helps to solidify a reasoning behind a score. Decimals and quarter, half, or partial points take out the 180 problem in most every instance.
.
this I can agree with! Although think that a lightly trained judge that is concerned about doing a good job is at least as good as the judges that show up with their coolers looking for a weeks worth of grub!
This year judged more than cooked so got kinda of an eyeopener in the tents! Most of what I saw was that people had their minds made up on what was considered "good" bbq b4 sitting down---don't think that what the cook presented is often judged as such-of course judging is the best contest cooking lesson there is---imo anyway
Back to the Makers

Buzz

Plowboy
10-18-2006, 09:13 PM
Okay, to change the subject a bit... had enough of garnish, scoring, and CBJ's.. sheesh...

At Blue Springs this year, Jeanie's Got Wood and D. Don's Pit Crew went around to some of the teams with a side bet. Everyone threw $5 (or was it $10?) into the kitty. The team that placed the worst of all the teams in the kitty would take the money and a traveling trophy, I think. Well, one of the organizers came by as we were doing the deal and said that anything like this had to go through the content organizer to get approved. What?

Also, we did Buck A Bone at Blue Springs. They wanted a 20% cut off of our sauce sales, too. Even Craig Kidwell had to give 20% of what was collected for Kookers Kare. Buck A Bone goes to charity, so I guess that's a good thing in the end, but Buck A Bone meant more than just BBQ. Seemed to push the envelope to me.

MoKanMeathead
10-19-2006, 08:11 AM
Todd, I didn't know that the Blue Springs organizers were concerned about the side bet thing - they shouldn't have been. As for the buck-a-bone, it does go to charity and Pam Buck gave ALL of the money that was raised for Kookers Kare to Kookers Kare!

I liked the discussions about garnish, scoring, etc., and any other KCBS rules stuff.

Plowboy
10-19-2006, 08:31 AM
Todd, I didn't know that the Blue Springs organizers were concerned about the side bet thing - they shouldn't have been. As for the buck-a-bone, it does go to charity and Pam Buck gave ALL of the money that was raised for Kookers Kare to Kookers Kare!

I liked the discussions about garnish, scoring, etc., and any other KCBS rules stuff.
Wayne, thanks for setting me straight. When I spoke with Craig at the contest, he said that Pam wanted the Kookers Kare raffle to use Buck A Bone tickets. I didn't know that she let KK have all of the proceeds. That's cool.

Just odd to me that an organizer wants a cut if I sell a T-Shirt or container of rub. All of the talk here about how contests are run locally got me thinking about it. We just raised our sauce and rub prices 20% so we still got our cut and Pam got her's.

Plowboy
10-19-2006, 08:33 AM
I went back and did a search on my report from last year to give you an idea what was discussed and what may or may not be raised again this year.

Jeff, this was a good read. I've never been to a rules meeting. Hearing about all of the wild stuff that comes up makes me want to go this year. Thanks for sharing.

MoKanMeathead
11-17-2006, 12:58 PM
So...any brothers going to the rules meeting tomorrow in Lenexa, KS?

Merl
11-17-2006, 03:04 PM
Wayne, will see you in Lenexa. I hope Jeff is going, he takes great notes!
Merl

lunchlady
11-17-2006, 03:28 PM
Each region gets one vote.
If the KCBS broke the country into regions and used a regional representative, voted in by the region to serve as a Director to the board, all regions would be represented and all regions would be represented equally.

Linda Mullane wants to represent, yo! She is getting a vote from me.

lunchlady

Jeff_in_KC
11-17-2006, 03:37 PM
Wayne, will see you in Lenexa. I hope Jeff is going, he takes great notes!
Merl

I'll be there, Merl. Wayne and I are riding over together. I guess I could be convinced to take notes again! :lol: Depends on how vmany beers I have before the meeting. :wink:

Plowboy
11-17-2006, 04:06 PM
So...any brothers going to the rules meeting tomorrow in Lenexa, KS?

I'm waiting to see what the wife has planned for the weekend. If Randy is interested, then we'll probably go. Haven't talked to him about it.

Jeff_in_KC
11-18-2006, 10:50 PM
Just got home a bit ago. After the meeting, we all hooked up at a local watering hole and watered! :lol:

There were between 45 and 50 people in attendance, ranging from cooks to judges to reps. Anyway, here's what was discussed. Each item for discussion was either voted down or voted to send the recommendation to the KCBS Bord for further consideration:

Discussion:
Pre-marinated, pre-cooked or uninspected meat being turned in. How should this be handled if caught?
Motion:
To impose the strictest sanctions on teams (which is banning from KCBS competitions for two years).
Vote:
It was voted in favor of recommending this to the KCBS Board.


Discussion:
Should a book of photos be put together to be given to judges, available to cooks and online at the KCBS Web site that shows photos of what you are NOT allowed to do. It was decided that this would leave too many open doors in the event someone is DQed for something not in the book.
Motion:
It was decided this was not an issue that needed further discussion or vote.
Vote:
None.


Discussion:
It was suggested that along with meat inspections, contest volunteers would check cookers to be sure that illegal fuel was not being used and that the smoker was clean. Several people had seen moldy and really nasty smokers at contests. There was a lot of debate about what constituted "clean" and how the definition could vary among contest reps. To help alleviate what really can be a problem, it was suggested that the Board add the words "and cooking devices" to the "cleanliness of the cooking site" rule.
Motion:
To add "and cooking devices" to the "cleanliness of the cooking site" rule.
Vote:
It was voted in favor of recommending this to the KCBS Board.


Discussion:
Pets at contests. Someone had a dog from another team that was running loose come up and hike its leg on their smoker. Understandably this pissed them off. No pun intended. Can you just say no pets PERIOD at contests? I suggested that retired people who travel around the country cannot just leave their pets somewhere else. So no pets in the cooking areas, right? OK, define cooking area. If you bring an RV and your dog is inside and ytou prep your food in the RV, you have a pet in the cooking area.
Motion:
No motion.
Vote:
no vote. It was basically just decided to not make a recommendation to the board on this issue.


Discussion:
HEEEEEERE we go! The garnish issue. :roll: After a lot of debate about various garnish types including why not allow red tipped lettuce, a suggestion was raised to just allow green leaves of lettuce (NOT green leaf lettuce). This would eliminate parsley. I was against that because I like my putting green parsley bed! :lol:
Motion:
To make ONLY green leafy lettuce allowable in turn-in boxes.
Vote:
Heavily voted down. Will not recommend to the board we do away with parsley and cilantro.

Discussion:
In regards to judges rule #1: No fraternizing with teams after the judges' meeting on turn-in morning: Someone wanted to change it to no fraternizing with teams all day of the turn-in day until after the last turn-in. The concern was if a contest was short on judges and they went out to the teams and got someone visiting to judge, that this would break the rule. It was pointed out that technically, while fraternizing with the team, that person was NOT a judge and only became one after being asked and accepting. At this point, they have to leave the team area until after judging.
Motion:
To change the rule to read no fraternizing with teams by judges the entire day of turn-ins until after the last turn-in.
Vote:
It was voted in favor of recommending this to the KCBS Board.


Discussion:
Hold onto your seats! This is were it gets reeeeeally interesting! It was suggested that KCBS outlaw pellet cookers from sanctioned contests. This opened a big ol' can of worms. The main argument for the motion was that pellet cookers take away some of the challenge of getting it right and working to keep your fire right. The word "purist" came out!
Motion:
To disallow pellet cookers at KCBS sanctioned contests.
Vote:
It was voted in favor of recommending this to the KCBS Board... by like 30-something to 8.


Discussion:
In what I took as an "oh yeah, well if you can suggest we ban pellet cookers, how about we do this:" kinda thing, it was suggested next that KCBS ban the use of all fire augmentation materials to include the BBQ Guru, farking CHARCOAL briquettes and any non-wood based materials.
Motion:
To add ban fire augmentation materials such as the Guru and charcoal.
Vote:
This was rejected and will not be suggested to the board.


Discussion:
In the "While We're At It" category, it was immediately suggested that ALL thermostatically controlled smokers using ANY type of themostat to regulate the fires be banned from KCBS competitions.
Motion:
To ban themostatically controlled fires.
Vote:
It was voted in favor of recommending this to the KCBS Board.


Discussion:
The scoring system. Is it really broken? Should we go back to starting at 9 and scoring down from there? Or should we go WAY back to when there was NO starting point designated. Several folks who had been cooking that long were very strongly against this.
Motion:
To suggest to the Board that we start at 9 instead of 6.
Vote:
It was voted down and will not be suggested to the Board. It was agreed that it isn't broken so don't fix it.


Discussion:
Accountability of judges who score a team really low on something when other judges score it higher. How can this be done? Comments on score cards? And who will see to it that it is done? Puts a lot of extra pressure on reps and table captains. Many judges just won't do it.
Motion:
To add a scoring comment card that was optional for judges to complete and turn in with their cards.
Vote:
This was voted down HOWEVER upon further discussion that broke out, it was determined and mutually agreed upon to suggest to the board that they select a handful of contests in 2007 and implement a trial program where judges could voluntarily fill out "comment cards" to be given to the cooks. Then gauge the success or failure afterwards to determine if something permanent could be implemented in 2008.


Discussion:
Judges taking home loads of BBQ. What is this doing to the integrity of the judging? It was suggested that judges are more interested in what they get to take home in a doggie bag than doing an honest and fair job for the teams. I gave my North Kansas City example where the lady beside me and her husband at the next table conferred between categories to find out how much BBQ they were each able to stuff in their coolers. Will this anger some judges? Yes, maybe. They'll get over it.
Motion:
To ban judges bringing in coolers, baggies etc. and the removal of BBQ from the judging area.
Vote:
It was overwhelmingly voted in favor of suggesting this to the KCBS Board.


Discussion:
Smoking and use of any type of tobacco by judges. It was pointed out that smoking could still be done between categories under current rules. Some said this detracted from their ability to accurately taste the meat. Others said if they're already a smoker, it's not going to make a difference if they don't smoke at all during judging.
Motion:
To suggest to the Board that smoking or use of chewing tobacco is prohibited from the time of the first turn-in until the last turn-in has been judged.
Vote:
This was voted in favor of suggesting to the Board that KCBS adopt this policy change.


Discussion:
Changing the name of Kansas City BBQ Society to something more national instead of so regional. Would it get more interest in KCBS? Would it create more interest in other areas of the contry? Should the KCBS Board be given the right to make the decision or should paying, voting members be allowed to decide via a vote?
Motion:
To suggest to the board that since we have had great growth to leave the name as is.
Vote:
It was voted in favor of suggesting that the name Kansas City BBQ Society remain intact.


Another item that was discussed was whether to make anyone who competes in a KCBS event have at least one member in KCBS and their team be registered in KCBS. There was a lot of debate and good and valid points mentioned on both sides but no vote was ever taken.

That about sums up the meeting this year. Remember, all we did today was vote as a bunch of cooks, CBJs and reps on what we should or should not suggest the Board considers next month at their December Board Meeting. Nothing that was decided today is now any kind of rule. We merely suggest to the board and get our voices heard.

BBQchef33
11-18-2006, 11:00 PM
First EXCELLENT Write up there Jeff...


I'll give everyone ONE GUESS which of them is my favorite. :) :eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap

Plowboy
11-18-2006, 11:31 PM
Jeff,

Thanks so much for the write up! First rate.

I'm shocked about the Pellet issue, but we'll see what happens there. I'd be surprised if the board voted it in. Randy and I can live with it either way. We've cooked successfully for five years with a stick burner. Only four of our contests this year was on pellets. Guess we'll hold off on selling that Kingfisher. (Sorry Kung Fu)

Two items confused me. Banning Gurus was not voted in, but then Thermostatically (is that a word?) controlled fires was banned. Doesn't that include Guru's and any forced air systems?

Thanks again, Jeff.

Merl
11-18-2006, 11:34 PM
Jeff, great report, a few good items discussed. It was great to see you, wanted to meet you after the meeting, but had to depart. I think a few items will be taken into next years competition.

I would like to know the opinion of the Brethren on these issues.
yours in bbq
Merl

Plowboy
11-18-2006, 11:43 PM
Jeff, great report, a few good items discussed. It was great to see you, wanted to meet you after the meeting, but had to depart. I think a few items will be taken into next years competition.

I would like to know the opinion of the Brethren on these issues.
yours in bbq
Merl
Merl,

Can you clarify the Guru question above? What was discussed?

I don't agree with the pellet decision, but its like voting. You can't complain if you don't go to cast your vote.

I think the decision not to let judges take food home is strange, too. I was just telling my wife about Jeff's report and that apparently judging has changed since I last judged three years ago. I never saw a judge with a cooler. Everyone took a clam shell fairly full with them, but there was always more food left over than what people took home. Sounds to me like judges need a little more focus on judging and not their own food entitlement. However, banning judges from taking food home seems like a drastic first step. But, as long as judging doesn't worsen, I could care less. I can't judge anymore with my Lapband, but wouldn't do it for the food if I did. I've actually been thinking about volunteering as a table captain, so I can still be involved in judging without eating.

Thanks...

Todd

MilitantSquatter
11-18-2006, 11:55 PM
Great report Jeff....

Merl - Here are my thoughts on a few areas

Bans are good for intentionally breaking rules. But how can they truly be enforced ? Do contest organizers get a list of all banned teams or individuals ? What's to prevent a guy from changing the team name at the next contest ? Will anyone remember. Going from contest to contest is difficult to manage.
To me, Pellet Cookers and Thermostat controls of any type fall into the same category and should be treated as such. I don't think either will be banned. It's too late. There will be too much pushback, outside influences, long term relationships that will affect potentially influence the final decision by the board.
I'm on the fence about taking home of food by judges. It would be waasted but at the same time it's purpose is to be judged, not to be leftover dinner for the next evening.
KCBS Name change - if you're looking out 10+ years, which any organization should be with long term growth goals, then yes a name change now makes good business sense. Still, KCBS, needs to do a better job at breaking away from being a KC based. I think there needs to be representation on the board by region. Kind of like the US House or Reps or Senate.Although it wasn't voted on but discussed, I agree any team entering a KCBS sanctioned contest, needs to have at least one member with a member #or to take it a step further so #'s aren't used without the member present I think team names should be registered and be required. It will bring in additional revenue.

jgh1204
11-19-2006, 01:14 AM
Aren't pellet cookers electonically controlled?

I believe ICBS, which is the norm in Texas, bans pellet burners.

drbbq
11-19-2006, 06:46 AM
Great report Jeff. Thanks.

My thoughts:

I'll take any bets from guys who think pellet cookers will be outlawed.

The strong meat rule is nice but there's just no way to enforce it. As long as we allow teams to also cook for a catering job or cook to sell or cook dinner for a sponsor there will be meat in the cooler and on the cooker that is illegal and there's no way to watch them 100% of the time to make sure they turn the right meat in.

The name change seems to be vaguely referenced lately to soften us up. Why not just tell the members what the story here really is? What name or names are being considered?
Why change? Growth is outrageous now. What will this accomplish?
I've heard rumblings that this will allow KCBS to acquire great sponsorship. Why? We can't figure out a way to give away the large sum of money that's in the bank now so why do we need more?

Frankly I thought the name "Kansas City Barbeque Society" was a problem in the past but I happen to think that problem has solved itself by the name morphing to "KCBS". The growth is clearly not in Kansas City so how can we consider the name to be a problem?

One last thing, it's ridiculous to hold this meeting in November when many teams are still cooking. Now the recommendations will be considered at the December board meeting which is held in a restaurant with drinks flowing. I know from experience that the December meeting is rushed because it's also a party. I once heard Paul Kirk try to enforce a 5 minute cap on any conversation at that meeting so the dinner could commence. I'm not kidding.

And he calls me Dr. BBQuitter.

Paola Greg
11-19-2006, 08:05 AM
Thanks for the report Jeff.


Concerning using pellet cookers and thermostatic fire control devices: First, I don't have either and am not considering using either in the foreseeable future. With that said, I say real bbq is cooked by those using them, and strongly disagree that they should be banned. Matter of fact I think it's ridiculous that those in support of banning them think some kind of unfair advantage is obtained by those using them, or that it is not 'pure' bbq...

I will express my position on these matters to the board.

And as far as having a chance to change,,,,,I'd say the odds of winning the lottery are better........

Pig Headed
11-19-2006, 08:28 AM
As a CBJ, I disagree on the "No taking food home" argument, and here's why:

I understand that if a team puts 7 or more pieces in the turn in box, that anything over 6 goes to the table captain and or volunteers and this is fine, I always try to put in at least 7 pieces when I cook.

Just what do you expect us to do with what's left over on my judging "plate"? I usually take 2 bites out of each entry. I'm a big guy, but I couldn't eat more and be able to judge everything submitted to me.
Am I supposed to turn in the ribs with 2 bites out of it, or the small piles of pulled pork that I just picked through with my fingers that I may have licked, or do I just throw it away. If I'm supposed to just throw it away, what's the harm of my taking it home. Isn't that a lot less wasteful? I personally think that anyone who would eat the leftovers off my "plate" is being disgusting, not to mention highly unsanitary.

Just my opinion.

Jeff_in_KC
11-19-2006, 09:02 AM
As a CBJ, I disagree on the "No taking food home" argument, and here's why:

I understand that if a team puts 7 or more pieces in the turn in box, that anything over 6 goes to the table captain and or volunteers and this is fine, I always try to put in at least 7 pieces when I cook.

Just what do you expect us to do with what's left over on my judging "plate"? I usually take 2 bites out of each entry. I'm a big guy, but I couldn't eat more and be able to judge everything submitted to me.
Am I supposed to turn in the ribs with 2 bites out of it, or the small piles of pulled pork that I just picked through with my fingers that I may have licked, or do I just throw it away. If I'm supposed to just throw it away, what's the harm of my taking it home. Isn't that a lot less wasteful? I personally think that anyone who would eat the leftovers off my "plate" is being disgusting, not to mention highly unsanitary.

Just my opinion.

Ron, I don't know what you have seen but personally, I've seen the judging opportunity become more about what you get to take home than it is judging the meat fairly for the cooks who have put so much time, effort and money into it. And it was fairly well proven at this meeting when at least one CBJ in attendance said he might not judge if that became the rule. And at least one cook and/or rep said they had judges say they weren't going to judge a particular contest again if they couldn't take food home when the contest banned it. What does that tell you? To me, it says "I'm here for a free meal and to eat BBQ". It tells me that doing a good job is secondary and that filling their cooler is a priority.

My opinion is strongly in favor of banning it. As a judge, if you want to drop by my camp after the judging when I'm cleaning up and get some Q, fine! We take it home and give it to the neighbors most of the time anyway. You're welcome to some. But don't do me a disservice by half ass judging my entry just so you can take it home with you. Ed Roith told me this past summer that he's called judges on the carpet because he's seen them put down a score it it doesn't even appear there has been more than a tiny nibble out of the meat! Those judges need to be farking escorted out of the judging area by the back of the neck in my opinion. And when I say "you", I'm not meaning you in particular, Ron. I mean judges as a whole.

MilitantSquatter
11-19-2006, 09:12 AM
Not passing judgement, but here's a pic of what BQ, Smoker and I saw when judging a contest earlier this year. There were several of them floating around. Ziploc bags, aluminum foil, knives to cut up the leftovers etc.

Thought this might help visualize the issue for those cooks who have not judged.

Photo coutesy of White Trash BBQ

Solidkick
11-19-2006, 09:15 AM
Thank you Jeffie for serving as the Brethren's personal secretary, I think all of us appreciate you for this.

Just my opinion, but if it came down to ruling out pellet cookers, I just see another sanctioning body developing that would allow them. There's too many in use now to just cast them aside. It's too late to change for KCBS.

As far as bringing meat to cook for sponsors, I know that we always pack our comp meat separate from our meat that we plan to cook for sponsors. It means an extra cooler or two, but our integrity means more than taking a chance of being called a cheater. I could see where it could happen though....


Let me think awhile on some of the other issues....

bbqbull
11-19-2006, 09:46 AM
Jeff and Merl, Thanks for taking time out of you busy day to attend the meeting. My biggest concern is the pellet cooker issue. I do not own one but have considered getting one someday. Thats neither here nor there. But there are several counties here in Michigan that are under a wood moving ban due to quartine. This is due to some bug called the Emerald Ash Borer. When I did the contest in G.Rapids this year I had to have a friend drive 180 miles to procure wood for our pit. He went to one of the free areas......if you will... to get us wood. If you get caught moving wood out of the quarinteen area its now a big felony. Up to, I believe its fine can get ya 1 yrs in prison and a quarter million dollar fine here.
Now there were 4? KCBS Sanctioned contest here this year. I wouldnt have been able to bring my pit and compete. Just checked the updated statement from www.Mich.gov (http://www.Mich.gov). 52 counties are affected bye this ban and the little bugs are spreading.
If folks cant bring wood for their pits to contests then they wont come.

Just my 2 cents here and again thanks for your great article.

Mike

scottyd
11-19-2006, 09:47 AM
Jeff, Wow nice report, I have to say thank you for a great job done We owe you allot for your support of bbq and your reporting. My friend you have done all of us on this forum and all who read this a great service thank you for taking your time to help a brother out.

scottyd
11-19-2006, 09:49 AM
Jeff, thanks for giving a great report and helping all of us here on the forum out. you have gone the extra mile to help a brother out, I wish there was away to say thanks other than just to say thanks.

Scotty d

Pig Headed
11-19-2006, 11:13 AM
I don't know what other teams do, but the 2 comps. that I've cooked in, we gave whatever was left over after turn in to the public. So it's not a matter of just wanting to take home free food. I just don't know what else you would do with food left on your "plate" except take it home or throw it away. What's the difference. I don't know how many of the cooks have judged, but you can't possibly eat everything taht'e submitted to you. I'm more into competeing than judging, but some judges travel a long way and spend good money on gas and lodging, so I don't see what's wrong with the practice. I'm not saying go nuts and shovel every morsel in site into a cooler, but I think I've made my point.

drbbq
11-19-2006, 11:44 AM
If all the judges simply took what was left AFTER A THOROUGH JUDGING OF THE SAMPLE I don't think there would be a problem. But I know there are judges who only eat off of one side of the rib or thigh so they can let their wife or husband try it later and that's where the problem is. I would like them to bite both sides.
There's also the big grabbers that always take a big portion or even two pieces. Do they score you down if they only get a small portion and up if they can take two?

IMNSHO the judges like this have ruined it for everyone else and now it must stop. I believe that if they can't take it home some judges will do a better job of evaluating the samples because they won't be thinking about what part they should save.
When I judge I eat what I want and toss the rest. The reality is in food service and food tasting some food gets tossed. Sorry but that's the way it is.

Plowboy
11-19-2006, 01:11 PM
Aren't pellet cookers electonically controlled?

I believe ICBS, which is the norm in Texas, bans pellet burners.

Very much so. Feeds fuel and air based on an electronic control.

Plowboy
11-19-2006, 01:25 PM
The strong meat rule is nice but there's just no way to enforce it. As long as we allow teams to also cook for a catering job or cook to sell or cook dinner for a sponsor there will be meat in the cooler and on the cooker that is illegal and there's no way to watch them 100% of the time to make sure they turn the right meat in.

You are right that there is no way to enforce it, but I don't see what the problem is. If I cook two dozen baby backs knowing that I'll be able to sell them after the comp, who cares which ones I pick for my comp entry as long as they've all been cooked in a qualifying pit and kept to the proper temp according to the rules? EDIT: AND INSPECTED.

I'll admit that we turned in butts that we had planned to sell at a contest. We had a cooker issue at the last minute and used butts that had come off a few hours earlier. They were at or above the 145 degree mark per the rules. They were part of our inspected meats. So what's the problem? At some comps you may have strange weather to deal with. Your strategy may be to start a brisket a few hours earlier than you would normally so you have one done ahead of time if the second brisket isn't getting done on time for turn in. That's strategy, not cheating.

I think the real issue is that some people don't have the money or capacity to cook a large quantity. They see a team having several pieces of meat to choose from being a disadvantage for them. I'm sure this statement will cause a stir with some of you. Sorry about that, but that's how I see it.

I think the existing rules around this are fine: turn in only inspected meat & keep it at or above 145 until you turn it in. What you do with it afterwards is up to you.

Jeff_in_KC
11-19-2006, 02:03 PM
I just don't know what else you would do with food left on your "plate" except take it home or throw it away. What's the difference.

You throw it away. It's not like you're tossing out a whole brisket or anything. The difference is if it's thrown away, you can guarantee the judges are there for the proper reasons.

I don't know how many of the cooks have judged, but you can't possibly eat everything taht'e submitted to you. I'm more into competeing than judging, but some judges travel a long way and spend good money on gas and lodging, so I don't see what's wrong with the practice.

You know, I am ALSO more into cooking than judging but the argument that judges spend a lot of time and money to judge holds zero sympathy with me. Let's compare and see who spends more money to be involved in this "sport"... the cooks or the judges. Let's see who has most at stake. Well at least teams have a chance to win cash and prizes, right, you say? That's right. Teams do. Nowhere in the CBJ training or guidelines does it say a judge is going to be compensated for their time in any way, including barbeque to take home. Let's get one thing straight... it ain't about the judges. It's about the judges doing everything they can to make a contest fair and equitable. Same thing goes in pro/college sports - the officials are not there to make an impact on the game nor are they supposed to effect the outcome on the field. When a BBQ judge is only thinking about what they can take home to the family for later, it detracts from their ability to fairly judge the quality or lack thereof of the product we present for judging. I used to be more middle of the road on this until I sat in a judging area and judged myself. What really pissed me off besides the stashing of all the food many of them could hoard was the incredible looks I got for throwing my left overs away after each category! For crissakes did these people wanna eat off MY plate too? It ain't a buffet, people.

drbbq
11-19-2006, 02:55 PM
Aren't pellet cookers electonically controlled?

I believe ICBS, which is the norm in Texas, bans pellet burners.

I'm not sure what ICBS is but the IBCA (International Barbecue Cookers Association) is the largest sanctioning group in Texas and they do allow pellet cookers.

drbbq
11-19-2006, 03:01 PM
You are right that there is no way to enforce it, but I don't see what the problem is. If I cook two dozen baby backs knowing that I'll be able to sell them after the comp, who cares which ones I pick for my comp entry as long as they've all been cooked in a qualifying pit and kept to the proper temp according to the rules? EDIT: AND INSPECTED.

I'll admit that we turned in butts that we had planned to sell at a contest. We had a cooker issue at the last minute and used butts that had come off a few hours earlier. They were at or above the 145 degree mark per the rules. They were part of our inspected meats. So what's the problem? At some comps you may have strange weather to deal with. Your strategy may be to start a brisket a few hours earlier than you would normally so you have one done ahead of time if the second brisket isn't getting done on time for turn in. That's strategy, not cheating.

I think the real issue is that some people don't have the money or capacity to cook a large quantity. They see a team having several pieces of meat to choose from being a disadvantage for them. I'm sure this statement will cause a stir with some of you. Sorry about that, but that's how I see it.

I think the existing rules around this are fine: turn in only inspected meat & keep it at or above 145 until you turn it in. What you do with it afterwards is up to you.

I don't see any problem with what you did. My concern is meat that's been seasoned or marinated or precooked or cooked on gas. Any and all of this is allowed within your cooksite. I have a big regriferator in my trailer. I often have other meat in there at inspection time. I too have it all inspected if it's raw and unseasoned, just in case. But if I have some pork chops marinating right next to my butts like I did the other day, it's perfectly legal and none of the meat inspectors business. Same if it's chicken or ribs or??

Paola Greg
11-19-2006, 03:36 PM
A KCBS judge takes this oath prior to judging a contest.

"I do solemnly swear to objectively and subjectively evaluate each barbecue meat that is presented to my eyes, my nose, my hands and my palate.
I accept my duty to be an official KCBS certified judge, so that truth, justice, excellence in barbecue and the American way of life may be strengthened and preserved forever."


It's too bad that there are those that feel some judges lie under oath, and are in reality only judging contests for a free meal and for some cold take home bbq..........It's even sadder if in fact that there are judges with this attitude.


I'm guessing that 90% of judges do it because they love the opportunity to judge and taste the best bbq there is, to support the sport and be an important part of it, and that a little take home from a contest is a small fringe benefit of their efforts........

ggriffi
11-19-2006, 04:58 PM
Jeff,

Thanks for posting all of this. One that I liked was the idea of the comment cards from the judges. I think this would be very helpful. Perhaps they could take the teams that finished in the bottom 5 or maybe 10 and give comments to those teams In our only comp so far, we scored poorly in three categories and dead last among the full teams that competed and I would have liked to have known why. Don't get me wrong, I wasn't mad (and we did make some mistakes) but I just wanted to have their input on what they didn't like and how I could improve.

g

jgh1204
11-19-2006, 05:08 PM
I'm not sure what ICBS is but the IBCA (International Barbecue Cookers Association) is the largest sanctioning group in Texas and they do allow pellet cookers.

Uh, that was a typo. :oops: :biggrin:

Jeff_in_KC
11-19-2006, 07:02 PM
A KCBS judge takes this oath prior to judging a contest.

"I do solemnly swear to objectively and subjectively evaluate each barbecue meat that is presented to my eyes, my nose, my hands and my palate.
I accept my duty to be an official KCBS certified judge, so that truth, justice, excellence in barbecue and the American way of life may be strengthened and preserved forever."


It's too bad that there are those that feel some judges lie under oath, and are in reality only judging contests for a free meal and for some cold take home bbq..........It's even sadder if in fact that there are judges with this attitude.


I'm guessing that 90% of judges do it because they love the opportunity to judge and taste the best bbq there is, to support the sport and be an important part of it, and that a little take home from a contest is a small fringe benefit of their efforts........

Greg, you may be right... it may be that 90% of the judges are doing it correctly. But then 10% of them are ruining it for the other 90%. I don't know about you but I'd hate to get my product judged by those 10%.

I guarantee you this though... these same judges who stuff it all in coolers will stuff my product into a cooler to scarf down at home even if they score it a 3. Go figure... :roll:

The_Kapn
11-19-2006, 07:29 PM
To me this matters:

KCBS needs to get off the fence on the garnish issue!

It is optional, and judges are told that clearly--at least by the local Reps down here.
New judges understand and comply.
A few of the older judges have opened up and judge the boxes fairly.
Other "seasoned" judges say things similar to--"The cook is just too lazy to garnish" and kill the scores.
I understand old habits die hard, I got some of those myself.

But, KCBS needs to require garnish or prohibit it--pick a rule!

I do not care!
I do not care what is best, or prettiest, or shows "whatever skill" :twisted:
It does not matter!

If required, I have learned how to do garnish right (finally).
If prohibited, we know how to do that also.

The current rule is screwed up because it leaves too much in the minds of the judges. You will never change the minds of the old timers--ain't gonna happen!

The current crap is unfair to everyone!
And, yes--this is going to the rules committee from me.
Worded better, for sure.

Just my current rant here!

TIM

Plowboy
11-19-2006, 09:14 PM
I don't see any problem with what you did. My concern is meat that's been seasoned or marinated or precooked or cooked on gas. Any and all of this is allowed within your cooksite. I have a big regriferator in my trailer. I often have other meat in there at inspection time. I too have it all inspected if it's raw and unseasoned, just in case. But if I have some pork chops marinating right next to my butts like I did the other day, it's perfectly legal and none of the meat inspectors business. Same if it's chicken or ribs or??

Thanks for clarifying, Ray. Glad we agree.

Plowboy
11-19-2006, 09:16 PM
I guarantee you this though... these same judges who stuff it all in coolers will stuff my product into a cooler to scarf down at home even if they score it a 3. Go figure... :roll:

Boy do you have that right, Jeff!!!

MoKanMeathead
11-20-2006, 08:21 AM
To me this matters:

KCBS needs to get off the fence on the garnish issue!


But, KCBS needs to require garnish or prohibit it--pick a rule!


TIM

Tim, I aagree 100% and this was discussed at the meeting. We need to either require it or ban it!. One other thing that was voted on at the meeting was to ban garnish al together and it passed by a large margin! Carolyn also mentioned that the no garnish recommendation also passed by large margins at EVERY rules meeting (or townhall meeting) that they have had. I hope the BOD hears this!!

oh..and I agree that pellet cookers won't be banned..and don't REALLY care if you cook on tham - I did twice last year (and got RGC on one). However, if you allow pellet themostatically controlled pits then why ban gas or electric cookers?

kcpellethead
11-20-2006, 09:38 AM
Great report Jeff. Thanks.

My thoughts:

I'll take any bets from guys who think pellet cookers will be outlawed.

The strong meat rule is nice but there's just no way to enforce it. As long as we allow teams to also cook for a catering job or cook to sell or cook dinner for a sponsor there will be meat in the cooler and on the cooker that is illegal and there's no way to watch them 100% of the time to make sure they turn the right meat in.

The name change seems to be vaguely referenced lately to soften us up. Why not just tell the members what the story here really is? What name or names are being considered?
Why change? Growth is outrageous now. What will this accomplish?
I've heard rumblings that this will allow KCBS to acquire great sponsorship. Why? We can't figure out a way to give away the large sum of money that's in the bank now so why do we need more?

Frankly I thought the name "Kansas City Barbeque Society" was a problem in the past but I happen to think that problem has solved itself by the name morphing to "KCBS". The growth is clearly not in Kansas City so how can we consider the name to be a problem?

One last thing, it's ridiculous to hold this meeting in November when many teams are still cooking. Now the recommendations will be considered at the December board meeting which is held in a restaurant with drinks flowing. I know from experience that the December meeting is rushed because it's also a party. I once heard Paul Kirk try to enforce a 5 minute cap on any conversation at that meeting so the dinner could commence. I'm not kidding.

And he calls me Dr. BBQuitter.

Ray - FYI,the December meeting is a normal meeting, probably at the KCBS office. No drinks. No rush. No Paul Kirk. I agree that the rules meeting should be at a better time. Unfortunately, the committee chairperson did not want to change it because "it's always been that way." I predict we see a significant change for next year.

Tim - KCBS is off the fence about garnish. We are allowed to use it. I think that "garnish is optional" thing came into play so that teams that normally cooked in contests sanctioned by other organizations wanted to come play, they would feel less intimidated . . .or, if I team happened to freeze their lettuce in the brand new refrigerator they used for the first time at the Jack Daniel's in 2002 . . . . :-)

I'm not going to touch the pellet cooker issue . . .not here anyway. Those of you that want to do away with all this stuff are forgetting one thing . . . . Mike Davis and his traditional offset style cooker. No pellets, no draft fans, no augers, no electricity. Do I hear a motion to ban him?

Rod

Jeff_in_KC
11-20-2006, 09:56 AM
Tim, I aagree 100% and this was discussed at the meeting. We need to either require it or ban it!. One other thing that was voted on at the meeting was to ban garnish al together and it passed by a large margin! Carolyn also mentioned that the no garnish recommendation also passed by large margins at EVERY rules meeting (or townhall meeting) that they have had. I hope the BOD hears this!!

oh..and I agree that pellet cookers won't be banned..and don't REALLY care if you cook on tham - I did twice last year (and got RGC on one). However, if you allow pellet themostatically controlled pits then why ban gas or electric cookers?

Wayne, I don't recall that banning garnish was passed... are you sure? I think it was at a couple of the other "town hall" meetings that it passed. Either way, I don't expect to see anything change. Rod's explanation here of why it is optional makes perfect sense to me. I prefer to use it even though I fill the hell outta my boxes and little of it is seen relative to the entire box. It's not that the garnish looks good itself but rather that the garnish, if done attractively, can actually make the meat look better. I mean where do you stop on this? We worry about appearance instead of just throwing the meat in the box in whatever manner. Why not take the time to frame it nicely to enhance the apprearance of the meat? and that doesn't make it a salad contest. You're just doing something to enhance the appearance. If they outlaw it, I want green boxes... or SOMETHING other than plain ol' white.

drbbq
11-20-2006, 10:07 AM
Ray - FYI,the December meeting is a normal meeting, probably at the KCBS office. No drinks. No rush. No Paul Kirk.

Rod

That's great news but it's also new. My story is true.

I would like to make a motion to ban Mike Davis.

Jeff_in_KC
11-20-2006, 10:10 AM
I would like to make a motion to ban Weber Kettles. I'm tired of hauling mine around.

Oh yeah and I wanna ban refrigerators and RVs! :lol:

Plowboy
11-20-2006, 10:18 AM
I would like to make a motion to ban Weber Kettles. I'm tired of hauling mine around.

Oh yeah and I wanna ban refrigerators and RVs! :lol:

I wondered when someone would say that.

Sorry Rod, no Pod trailers. :wink:

Plowboy
11-20-2006, 10:18 AM
I would like to make a motion to ban Mike Davis.

LMAO - I second, Ray.

The_Kapn
11-20-2006, 11:22 AM
"Tim - KCBS is off the fence about garnish. We are allowed to use it. I think that "garnish is optional" thing came into play so that teams that normally cooked in contests sanctioned by other organizations wanted to come play, they would feel less intimidated . . .or, if I team happened to freeze their lettuce in the brand new refrigerator they used for the first time at the Jack Daniel's in 2002 . . . . :-)"

Rod,

I agree, KCBS as a sanctioning body is clear, garnish is optional.
Now, it the BOD would just come judge every event it would be a level playing field. :twisted:
Many Judges, primarily the older ones, have not bought into the rule and never will .
Even new competitors support the use of lettuce, as stated on this forum.
So, it is NOT a level playing field for all teams.

As I said, I do not care, one way or the other.
But, until the BOD finds a way to make the judges be objective--they need to make a decision to require or prohibit.

And, I assume the last part about the Jack was a joke :lol:
If something like that really played a part in the decision making process, "we have a problem here, Houston".:lol:

With all due respect,

TIM

Plowboy
11-20-2006, 12:09 PM
Many Judges, primarily the older ones, have not bought into the rule and never will .

Kapn, What does this mean? How has their buy in affected scores in your opinion? I don't follow.

--they need to make a decision to allow or prohibit.

Do you mean "Require" instead of "Allow"? It is "Allowed" right now.

Are we talking lettace as well as parsley/cilantro or just the parsley/cilantro?

The_Kapn
11-20-2006, 03:31 PM
Kapn, What does this mean? How has their buy in affected scores in your opinion? I don't follow.



Do you mean "Require" instead of "Allow"? It is "Allowed" right now.

Are we talking lettace as well as parsley/cilantro or just the parsley/cilantro?

Word corrected to "Required", thanks.

If the judge feels that garnish is "more attractive", they will have a hard time scoring a "well built" meat only box high. Because, in their mind, it is not what they like. Just human nature.

It is the same reason "experienced" judges are having such a hard time adjusting to the "6 is average" scoring system.

"Paradigms" are hard to break!

TIM

Plowboy
11-20-2006, 03:46 PM
Word corrected to "Required", thanks.

If the judge feels that garnish is "more attractive", they will have a hard time scoring a "well built" meat only box high. Because, in their mind, it is not what they like. Just human nature.

It is the same reason "experienced" judges are having such a hard time adjusting to the "6 is average" scoring system.

"Paradigms" are hard to break!

TIM

I think the bigger issue is that some cooks are more creative with their garnish and that it is hard for judges to block THAT out. This is always my fear with presentation. In five years of KCBS as a judge and cook, I've only seen one box that was meat only... kinda... it was chicken wrapped in foil. :shock: I kid you not! Well built or not, judges just don't get entries without garnish at KCBS contests. It IS required by DeFacto... right or wrong.

Unless you don't want garnish... and some don't... there doesn't seem to be a problem, IMHO. I did a non-KCBS contest this summer with a no-garnish rule. It was harder for sure. Can't hide your blemishes.

Bigmista
11-20-2006, 07:36 PM
I did an IBCA contest this summer. Absolutely, no garnish allowed. It was fun and challenging. I got 2nd in brisket. I just did a KCBS contest a coupla weeks ago. With garnish. I got 2nd in Brisket.

I don't care what the rules are as long as the same rules apply to everyone. I'd prefer not dealing with the lettuce and focusing on the meat. Just my opinon.