PDA

View Full Version : Discussion on sliceing pork and putting it back in the cooker


YankeeBBQ
07-15-2009, 09:51 PM
The topic of slicing or pulling pork and putting it back in the cooker was discussed at the KCBS board meeting tonight. Of course the way it was brought up was actually a little disingenuous in my opinion. Mike Lake said that people were asking about partially cooking their pork then slicing part of it off and putting it back in the cooker to finish cooking. I don't think that's what most people were doing. I think people were fully cooking their pork pulling some and slicing some applying sauce and putting it back into the cooker for a short period of time so it would get to the judges hot.

The way Mike stated it everyone on the board was against it. I think if it was presented in a factual manner the outcome may have been different. Oh well no big deal. Just make sure your sauce is nice and hot when you apply it and I'm sure it will do the same thing (first place pork in Wildwood)

Jeff_in_KC
07-15-2009, 10:03 PM
With my track record in pork recently, I'm not gonna complain about it however, I don't see why there SHOULD be a problem with say removing the muscle you are targeting when it gets to slicing temp and putting the rest back in to take up to pulling temp. Hell, if you want a lot of the money muscle for your presentation and you only cook two butts, you're in a bind. I mean seriously, it makes it MORE difficult, not less to do this because you not only have to be right on in catching the slicing temp just right, you also have to be right on with the pulling btemp so it doesn't turn to mush.

HoDeDo
07-15-2009, 10:45 PM
I agree Steve. It's an interesting topic.... I think the rule is there to keep folks from parting while cooking. Or some would say substituting a tenderloin for a "money muscle".

There are no other rules with any of the other meats about parting... and no rules about not being able to finish/hold in a cooker.

I guess we need to get more specific, and state that you cannot cook the meat "further" - so if you have taken it to 190 and sliced.... putting it in a 190 degree cooker to keep warm or "finish" with sauce, would not be cooking any further...

If you can't put the meat back over a heat source, how do they expect you to keep it above 140 degrees for safety sake? I think most folks would slice and put back in a warm cooker to keep from turning in meat that is not warm enough to serve.

Oh well, I am sure we will find more out if the real question, about "finishing" comes up. My meat is not parted until after it is cooked.

Rick's Tropical Delight
07-16-2009, 05:34 AM
this raises another question for me. what is the prefered "legal" method of heating the sauce?

Double D's BBQ
07-16-2009, 06:04 AM
There are no legalities regarding sauce, only meat. Feel free to use your gas burners to heat your sauce as long as they are not attached to your pit.

Double D's BBQ
07-16-2009, 06:11 AM
I don't quite understand why their is a distinction between parting a pork muscle and parting a brisket muscle. The point on a brisket requires further cooking after separating it from the flat. Why is this legal and not the removal of the money muscle before it is over cooked. Perhaps this is a question better left no asked to the board.

Just another thought then, if brisket flats can be cooked from a raw state without the point then can pork butts be cooked without the money muscle from a raw state as long as the butt exceeds five lbs in weight? I think I just answered my own question as I was typing though. I assume then that the money muscle would have to exceed or equal 5 lbs of weight then if cooked separately.

I guess it appears that the only way to get a properly cooked legal money muscle then is to cook the entire butt to the desired internal temp of the money muscle and then have separate butts for pulled pork.

Lakeside Smoker
07-16-2009, 06:34 AM
What if I take my charcoal basket out of the cooker before the pork goes in?

Skip
07-16-2009, 06:42 AM
Mike Lake incorrectly stated the discussion. If it truly was the discussion started here. No one questioned whether putting half a butt back in to bring to pulling temp was illegal. We all know that is. What was either brilliant strategy or a complete oversight in doing so is that this issue probably won't be brought up again and if it is someone will cry "we already addressed that" and move on.

IMO the rule is there so that more preferred or higher quality pieces are not substituted for the shoulder. Or that people don't butcher out the preferred pieces in a shoulder i.e. money muscle and just cook it alone. That is strictly my interpretation of the rule. I see it as a friendly rule to keep the competition on an equal playing field. Unfortunately we will never be able to accurately interpret this rule unless we define cooking. Many could say that once a shoulder is pulled at "commonly accepted" temperature for doneness that the cooking side is done. Anything beyond that would be considered maintaining temp. Others could say that any introduction of heat is considered cooking and all meats should maintain enough heat after cooking to meet the HD requirement. Still others may find a gray area in between. The problem with the commonly accepted temperature is that someone could push the limit and pull at around 190 for slicing, pull the muscles they want and then return their meat to a 200+ cooker to boost the rest to pulling temp. Then again those who state any heat is cooking will have to wrangle with the use of cambros and "other" heat sources like cooked briskets. I've seen my cambro hold heat for days. Then there is the use of sauce. What if your sauce imparts heat, is that cooking too?

So the question at hand is do we trust in the integrity of teams to not purposefully cheat or do we bring this to the board as it has been questioned here. I think we are overthinking this rule and its intention but there is merit in what others say to the contrary. Maybe the fact that the use of specific muscle groups has become common practice and its use almost a necessity does lend itself to a need for interpretation. Not because people are trying to cheat but that the cook style now requires a more thought out definition of the rule. I think it would be a mistake to redefine the rule but I'm not a board member.

Buster Dog BBQ
07-16-2009, 07:06 AM
I don't quite understand why their is a distinction between parting a pork muscle and parting a brisket muscle. The point on a brisket requires further cooking after separating it from the flat. Why is this legal and not the removal of the money muscle before it is over cooked. Perhaps this is a question better left no asked to the board.

Just another thought then, if brisket flats can be cooked from a raw state without the point then can pork butts be cooked without the money muscle from a raw state as long as the butt exceeds five lbs in weight? I think I just answered my own question as I was typing though. I assume then that the money muscle would have to exceed or equal 5 lbs of weight then if cooked separately.

I guess it appears that the only way to get a properly cooked legal money muscle then is to cook the entire butt to the desired internal temp of the money muscle and then have separate butts for pulled pork.

Because someone could sub a pork tenderloin and turn that in sliced. There really isnt another beef product you can sub for the point.

Brew-B-Q
07-16-2009, 07:30 AM
this raises another question for me. what is the prefered "legal" method of heating the sauce?

I did a double take last weekend as I was heating up some sauce in my new microwave. I think you can do whatever you want to heat the sauce, as long as there isn't any meat in it.

Jacked UP BBQ
07-16-2009, 07:40 AM
Talk about wording it so you can get the answer you want. I am glad they had the discussion, still doesn't make my interpreation illegal!!!!!!!!

Double D's BBQ
07-16-2009, 07:41 AM
:shock:Because someone could sub a pork tenderloin and turn that in sliced. There really isnt another beef product you can sub for the point.

And that would be grounds for not only DQ but a permanent ban for life from all KCBS contests. The inconsistency of the issue is what is important here. With brisket you remove the point when the flat is to its desired temperature remove the excess fat, apply more rub and then throw it back on the cooker for a couple more hours. Don't see any difference between removing the money mucscle for slicing and then throwing the remaider of the butt back on the cooker until it's internal temp raises 20 degrees or so for pulling.

I don't even want to go down the road of substituting higher quality meats as that is blatantly dishonest and leaves no room for interpretation. I guess if someone wants to win that badly they could chop up some prime rib for burnt ends and some judges may or may not pick up on it. It just seems to me that if parting and recooking is good for one form of meat it ought to be good for another. Its blatant discrimination. Where is Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson when we need them!:shock::-D

goodsmokebbq
07-16-2009, 07:45 AM
The topic of slicing or pulling pork and putting it back in the cooker was discussed at the KCBS board meeting tonight. Of course the way it was brought up was actually a little disingenuous in my opinion. Mike Lake said that people were asking about partially cooking their pork then slicing part of it off and putting it back in the cooker to finish cooking. I don't think that's what most people were doing. I think people were fully cooking their pork pulling some and slicing some applying sauce and putting it back into the cooker for a short period of time so it would get to the judges hot.

The way Mike stated it everyone on the board was against it. I think if it was presented in a factual manner the outcome may have been different. Oh well no big deal. Just make sure your sauce is nice and hot when you apply it and I'm sure it will do the same thing (first place pork in Wildwood)

It's too bad the issue wasn't properly presented. We just want our food nice and hot (and SAFE) for the judges. Why can't we restate the rule that after a certain temp the butt is cooked and we can do whatever we want. The way people butterfly their butts the money muscle IS being cooked by itself, who are we kidding here. 2 cents...

Ford
07-16-2009, 07:47 AM
Quit sh)t disturbing. We all know the rule and it's clear. Pork is cooked whole and that's it. May not be what you like but it's the rule and it's for everybody. Brisket has no such rule and you can cook flats or whole packers so it's your choice.

Pork can't go back in the cooker once parted even to rewarm. Simple rule and if you don't like it submit a request for the next rules meeting to change it.

goodsmokebbq
07-16-2009, 07:48 AM
What if I take my charcoal basket out of the cooker before the pork goes in?


Excellent question! Now it is just a warm cambro.

Jacked UP BBQ
07-16-2009, 07:50 AM
^^^^^^^^clear, as you see it!!

Jacked UP BBQ
07-16-2009, 07:50 AM
Quit sh)t disturbing. We all know the rule and it's clear. Pork is cooked whole and that's it. May not be what you like but it's the rule and it's for everybody. Brisket has no such rule and you can cook flats or whole packers so it's your choice.

Pork can't go back in the cooker once parted even to rewarm. Simple rule and if you don't like it submit a request for the next rules meeting to change it.


Clear is one thing it is not.

KC_Bobby
07-16-2009, 08:12 AM
Quit sh)t disturbing. We all know the rule and it's clear. Pork is cooked whole and that's it. May not be what you like but it's the rule and it's for everybody.

Exactly. Many teams around the country are winning without putting it back in the smoker (regardless of term cooking-warming). I'm really puzzled why some feel they need to put it back in there anyway.

Since we're all doing the same no one is handicapped by not putting it back in there.

Skip
07-16-2009, 08:21 AM
Pork can't go back in the cooker once parted even to rewarm. Simple rule and if you don't like it submit a request for the next rules meeting to change it.

I respect your opinion, I truly do, but thats what it is...an opinion. Others here have a different opinion and that should be respected too.

.....PORK: Pork is defined as Boston Butt, Picnic and/or
Whole Shoulder, weighing a minimum of five (5) pounds.
Pork shall be cooked (bone in or bone out) and shall not be
parted......

i) Must be held at 140° F or above OR
ii) Cooked meat shall be cooled as follows:
(1) Within 2 hours from 140° F to 70° F and
(2) Within 4 hours from 70° F to 41° F or less
(3) Meat that is cooked, properly cooled,
and later reheated for hot holding and serving
shall be reheated so that all parts of the food
reach a temperature of at least 165° F for a
minimum of 15 seconds.

Here is a definition of warming, not cooking. So doesn't this state that there is a point when cooking is done and the need for the parting rule exits. Or would the expectation be that the shoulder is still intact? Again these would be opinions or interpretations.

Jorge
07-16-2009, 08:32 AM
I think there is enough room for interpretation that I probably wouldn't summon a rep over it. I might talk to a team about it.

The way I read the rule, placing a portion of a butt back in a cooker that is hot is parting. If the cooker is cooler than the meat I've got not problem. I know of more than one team that actually use FECs as an electric cambro. No problem with that.

I'd just like a little clarification from the BoD so that this doesn't become an issue at a contest. I've heard that various reps don't always agree on what is, and isn't legal. In my mind, THAT is the biggest issue. I'd hate to see anybody get burned, over an issue that can easily be clarified for all.

VGuilford
07-16-2009, 08:32 AM
I don't understand what the big deal is all about, maybe I'm just slow.:?: When you get butts from Sams theres 2 in a package. Pick one for slicing and one for pulling. We're not sure where the money muscle is anyway, we just slice some up. Pull the one for slicing and hold it in a cooler for when the other one is ready to be pulled, thats what we do.
I can see why the rule is in place. If you were allowed to cut up a butt for the money mucsle it would be easy to use a loin in its place.

Skip
07-16-2009, 08:40 AM
Exactly. Many teams around the country are winning without putting it back in the smoker (regardless of term cooking-warming). I'm really puzzled why some feel they need to put it back in there anyway.

Since we're all doing the same no one is handicapped by not putting it back in there.


Teams win without saucing their ribs and going dry. Everyone doesn't. Teams win cooking only flats. Everybody doesn't. Some win with salty rubs. Everyone doesn't. There are many ways we all differ. The rule, in my opinion, is meant to designate the piece of meat and the way it is cooked. By cooked I mean brought to an acceptable temperature and pulled. Now your definition may differ on cooking and there in lies the quandary.

I actually haven't used the rewarming method myself. I have seen it done and have considered but have never had the time. :lol::lol::lol: I just think that there is too much thought going into a friendly rule.

SmokeInDaEye
07-16-2009, 09:03 AM
I don't quite understand why their is a distinction between parting a pork muscle and parting a brisket muscle. The point on a brisket requires further cooking after separating it from the flat. Why is this legal and not the removal of the money muscle before it is over cooked. Perhaps this is a question better left no asked to the board.

Keep in mind that not being able to part a brisket would mean no burnt ends. Either way, according to the rules, brisket can be whole, a flat or point so parting is legal any way you slice it.

pigmaker23
07-16-2009, 09:15 AM
I guess our cooking four butts is overkill, two 4 slicing and two for pulling:-P



I don't understand what the big deal is all about, maybe I'm just slow.:?: When you get butts from Sams theres 2 in a package. Pick one for slicing and one for pulling. We're not sure where the money muscle is anyway, we just slice some up. Pull the one for slicing and hold it in a cooler for when the other one is ready to be pulled, thats what we do.
I can see why the rule is in place. If you were allowed to cut up a butt for the money mucsle it would be easy to use a loin in its place.

goodsmokebbq
07-16-2009, 09:26 AM
I don't understand what the big deal is all about, maybe I'm just slow.:?: When you get butts from Sams theres 2 in a package. Pick one for slicing and one for pulling. We're not sure where the money muscle is anyway, we just slice some up. Pull the one for slicing and hold it in a cooler for when the other one is ready to be pulled, thats what we do.
I can see why the rule is in place. If you were allowed to cut up a butt for the money mucsle it would be easy to use a loin in its place.

Most people that cook the money muscle follow the rule by butterflying the butt to such an extent that the muscle is only attached by a tiny portion of meat. How is this different than cooking it by itself? Is the rule really still relavant?

Besides my Berkshire pork comes in single packages :-P:-P

HoDeDo
07-16-2009, 09:41 AM
It is my understanding that they require it to be attached, because at some point in the past, someone (I have no idea who) may have used tenderloin in addition to butt (or at least the judges thought it was not part of a shoulder).... and cooking a tenderloin, and a parted money muscle was very hard to decern the difference between... so it was done to ensure that folks are using a pork shoulder.

No issues with that on a brisket, ribs, or chicken. Someone from the board can jump in and correct me, but that was my understanding...





I don't quite understand why their is a distinction between parting a pork muscle and parting a brisket muscle. The point on a brisket requires further cooking after separating it from the flat. Why is this legal and not the removal of the money muscle before it is over cooked. Perhaps this is a question better left no asked to the board.

Just another thought then, if brisket flats can be cooked from a raw state without the point then can pork butts be cooked without the money muscle from a raw state as long as the butt exceeds five lbs in weight? I think I just answered my own question as I was typing though. I assume then that the money muscle would have to exceed or equal 5 lbs of weight then if cooked separately.

I guess it appears that the only way to get a properly cooked legal money muscle then is to cook the entire butt to the desired internal temp of the money muscle and then have separate butts for pulled pork.

Scottie
07-16-2009, 10:06 AM
Why is this so hard? You can't part it at all. The rule says that pretty clear. Don't know why some folks are having such a hard time with this and making such a big stink. the board addressed it. It is considered illegal to part your butt. You can't do it to re-heat, you can't do it to cook it from a raw state.

BBQ_Mayor
07-16-2009, 10:35 AM
I agree with Scottie. It's a rule and we need to follow them. You need to find a way you can cook your pork without parting it. Period.

big brother smoke
07-16-2009, 10:41 AM
Why is this so hard? You can't part it at all. The rule says that pretty clear. Don't know why some folks are having such a hard time with this and making such a big stink. the board addressed it. It is considered illegal to part your butt. You can't do it to re-heat, you can't do it to cook it from a raw state.


Must refrain!:twisted:

HandsomeSwede
07-16-2009, 10:48 AM
So, I guess I have a question to ask at the cook's meeting at Troy? Hasn't anyone ever inquired about this with a KCBS rep at a contest? Probably not since the "rewarming" folks may not want to hear the answer.

Jacked UP BBQ
07-16-2009, 10:51 AM
So, I guess I have a question to ask at the cook's meeting at Troy? Hasn't anyone ever inquired about this with a KCBS rep at a contest? Probably not since the "rewarming" folks may not want to hear the answer.


Been there done that. Reps had no problem with REHEATING.

Jorge
07-16-2009, 11:37 AM
So, I guess I have a question to ask at the cook's meeting at Troy? Hasn't anyone ever inquired about this with a KCBS rep at a contest? Probably not since the "rewarming" folks may not want to hear the answer.

The question has been asked, and the answer seems to depend on the rep that is asked. That's my biggest issue. If it's legal one place, it should be legal everywhere. I'd just like some consistency, since there seems to be none at this time.

OtisT
07-16-2009, 12:22 PM
There are no legalities regarding sauce, only meat. Feel free to use your gas burners to heat your sauce as long as they are not attached to your pit.

I was told by the KCBS rep at Shannon,IL last weekend that sauce could NOT be heated with a gas burner.

Double D's BBQ
07-16-2009, 02:04 PM
I was told by the KCBS rep at Shannon,IL last weekend that sauce could NOT be heated with a gas burner.

Sounds like the rep needs to be re-educated. There are no rules relating to the heating of sauce only meat.

Now I would agree with the rep if the gas burner was attached to the pit and the sauce and the meat were inside the pit. You have to make sure you narrowly define the circumstances. Heating sauce in a pot on a burner where the gas doesn't not get inside or heat the pit in any way is not illegal.

Ask him next time to reference the rule.

Let me throw this out there. I've seen teams trying to carmelize sauce on their meat by placing the meat inside a pan with sauce that was heated by propane. I would think there that you might be running into some type of trouble. Much more than heating sauce directly in a pan over a gas fired burner.

Jacked UP BBQ
07-16-2009, 02:14 PM
Let's say my 8lb butt is in the cooker and over cooks and falls apart on the shelf. I guess I am DQ'd.

Scottie
07-16-2009, 02:44 PM
Sounds like the rep needs to be re-educated. There are no rules relating to the heating of sauce only meat.

Now I would agree with the rep if the gas burner was attached to the pit and the sauce and the meat were inside the pit. You have to make sure you narrowly define the circumstances. Heating sauce in a pot on a burner where the gas doesn't not get inside or heat the pit in any way is not illegal.

Ask him next time to reference the rule.

Let me throw this out there. I've seen teams trying to carmelize sauce on their meat by placing the meat inside a pan with sauce that was heated by propane. I would think there that you might be running into some type of trouble. Much more than heating sauce directly in a pan over a gas fired burner.



You do know whose contest it is in Shannon, right? He's the one that educates or at least did educate for KCBS, until he became the President...

goodsmokebbq
07-16-2009, 02:54 PM
Let me throw this out there. I've seen teams trying to carmelize sauce on their meat by placing the meat inside a pan with sauce that was heated by propane. I would think there that you might be running into some type of trouble. Much more than heating sauce directly in a pan over a gas fired burner.

Now we are getting into a very fun area. To me the hot pan or hot sauce or hot cambro is a heat source and as per the rule would be cooking and illegal. Others see this as OK, but reheating bad? How come heating your pork through a secondary method is OK but direct is not? Heating is heating.

Skip
07-16-2009, 03:03 PM
Why is this so hard? You can't part it at all.

Exactly. You can never part the shoulder. EVER. So we should all be DQ'ed for breaking it to put in the box.

The rule says that pretty clear.

What rule are you reading? The one I read doesn't speak clearly at all. Can you break it down for all of us so we can see how it is so clear to you?

Don't know why some folks are having such a hard time with this and making such a big stink. the board addressed it.

Oh come now. Do you really feel that question posed to the BOD was the one we are currently discussing here? or discussed previously in the seperating brisket thread?

It is considered illegal to part your butt. You can't do it to re-heat, you can't do it to cook it from a raw state.

So all the work on a pork butt must be done just minutes before the turn in so that you don't part yet still maintain the temperature at 140 degrees F? Have you never broken down your pork butt, coolered it and then gone back to assemble the box? By re-heat you are changing what is being stated here anyway. Temperature maintenance is not re-heating its maintaining a temp above 140. What if my pork is still 160 when I am done saucing and put it in my cooker which is steadily falling in temp toward 140. Am I cooking parted?

I agree with Scottie. It's a rule and we need to follow them. You need to find a way you can cook your pork without parting it. Period.

See thats the point. These people DO cook their pork without parting it. They just part it AFTER it is cooked and keep it warm in the cooker. No one is trying to disregard a rule. Unfortunately some are so head strong they can't listen to others when they make a reasonable point. If you take the rule by the letter you can't even break up the butt to put it in the box. Thats parting isn't it? It doesn't say it can not be cooked parted it says it shall not be parted PERIOD. The rule is vague even without this discussion.


So, I guess I have a question to ask at the cook's meeting at Troy? Hasn't anyone ever inquired about this with a KCBS rep at a contest? Probably not since the "rewarming" folks may not want to hear the answer.

Yes it has been answered by a rep and I welcome you to ask at Troy but you will be singing a different tune here on Monday.

Brew-B-Q
07-16-2009, 03:09 PM
While we're at it, let's talk about a contest where it's cold and windy. Is keeping meat in a vehicle, RV, etc powered by gas / propane / heat illegal? At this rate we'll have to pay $1,000 to enter a contest since we'll need a dedicated bbq cop for each team.

Jorge
07-16-2009, 03:17 PM
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]



See thats the point. These people DO cook their pork without parting it. They just part it AFTER it is cooked and keep it warm in the cooker. Even Jorge says he has seen people use an FEC to do the same. No one is trying to disregard a rule. Unfortunately some are so head strong they can't listen to others when they make a reasonable point. If you take the rule by the letter you can't even break up the butt to put it in the box. Thats parting isn't it? It doesn't say it can not be cooked parted it says it shall not be parted PERIOD. The rule is vague even without this discussion.



Whoa! That is not what I said. What I said is that some people use a FE as a electric cambro. You inferred something that I did not say.

Scottie
07-16-2009, 03:18 PM
OK, this is for SKip... I spoke with Mike Lake, who is the President of KCBS this past weekend. He said flat out that you can not slice a pork but up and then return it to the smoker. That is considered parting.... Whether you want to believe it or not, I don't care. but that came directly from the President's mouth. Whether that is to re-heat or to cook it further, you can't do it. It is a specific rule for butts...

And if that is the case out in Troy this weekend, let me know. I will gladly let the Board know that they have to have more training...

Scottie
07-16-2009, 03:19 PM
Whoa! That is not what I said. What I said is that some people use a FE as a electric cambro. You inferred something that I did not say.


I think he might be having problems with this whole thing...

Skip
07-16-2009, 03:20 PM
Whoa! That is not what I said. What I said is that some people use a FE as a electric cambro. You inferred something that I did not say.

Then I apologize and will edit it now. What your statement said to me was that you have seen people use their cooker as a cambro. Sorry if I misrepresented you in anyway. Not my intention.

Can you clarify what it is that you meant to say with your comment about the FEC as a cambro?

Jacked UP BBQ
07-16-2009, 03:31 PM
I don't think they need more training. I believe they need better descriptive writing skills. The rule is written with no specifics. They have a thought and cannot get it onto paper. Do they read what the rules actually states on paper? Not what it is suppose to mean. maybe everyone that knows what the rule is SUPPOSE to mean should re write it for them with some description.

Skip
07-16-2009, 03:39 PM
Whether that is to re-heat or to cook it further, you can't do it. It is a specific rule for butts...


No one is asking to re-heat or cook. Maintain temperature. Thats what I've been saying all along. Maintain HD temperature. Also its for all cuts the butt shoulder or picnic.

If the president can make all the interpretations of a rule then why have a board? If it was so clear why was the question stated to the board the way it was? Again...

PORK: Pork is defined as Boston Butt, Picnic and/or
Whole Shoulder, weighing a minimum of five (5) pounds.
Pork shall be cooked (bone in or bone out) and shall not be
parted.

By interpretation any meat that is cooked can be parted. Even though the compound sentence doesn't lend itself to either. Someone just learning English would see that as the meat could not be parted at all at anytime. Imagine putting a whole shoulder in a styrofoam box.

Skip
07-16-2009, 04:00 PM
I think he might be having problems with this whole thing...


That was uncalled for but be cute all you want. Fact is you still haven't answered one question I posed to you. Most have seen that. The rest know it now. For the record I have no problem understanding you and your point...I just disagree with it. Not because I want to cheat or even use this method but because I think it is rather vague. I also think there are people making their own interpretations and trying to drive them down the throats of others. I have never faired well with the bully tactic of making a statement and then that person joking about how foolish stupid uniformed or naive the other person is who has a different take or interpretation. All too often this tactic is used to illicit a response from those who like to take sides without even understanding the discussion. Responses like "Its the rules listen and learn stupid".

Why is it so hard to actually listen to the other side? A few agree with your interpretation others do not. A casual conversation with one member of a board does not answer a question. It only gives you the decision of one member of the board.

Jorge
07-16-2009, 06:48 PM
Skip you asked for a clarification about mt FE/cambro statement via PM. I'll answer publically in case anybody else misunderstood me.

I know of several cooks that use a FE as a cambro. I have NO idea whether or not they place parted pork in there or not. Since I don't know, I'm not making that leap.

Jorge
07-16-2009, 06:52 PM
Without pointing any fingers.....

This thread WILL remain civil. No warnings, no debate. We did this the last time the subject came up.

Smoke'n Ice
07-16-2009, 07:07 PM
In Tulsa this past weekend, one team shopped another for "parting" their pork. Problem was, when the rep investigated, they had pictures of their process as well as the product on the cooker whne the rep looked and it was not separated, it was butterflied.

Prior to the start of the contest, I asked the reps their interpetation of the rule. Their statment was, we will not come and look how you are doing your meat unless there is a reason to do so, we have too many other things to do.

I don't think you need to worry about the rep, worry about the guy next to you who thinks the only way he can win is to shop you. Where in the Hell did we go wrong?

Mack

Juggy D Beerman
07-16-2009, 09:48 PM
My first KCBS contest was the 1989 Royal. Back then, there were two divisions; Professional and Amateur. Professional was defined as anyone who received monies/income from any BBQ related product. If anyone is interested, I will post more details on the two different divisions and how KCBS contests worked during that era. For this post, I am discussing how the pork category rules evolved.

Before 1993, pork was defined as any cut of pork OTHER than pork ribs. It should also be noted that at this point in time, country style ribs were allowed to be submitted as a pork rib entry as long as they were loin cut ribs. This meant that cuts from the loin and tenderloin were allowed were legal pork entries. Pork chops and pork steaks as well as country style ribs from the shoulder were also allowed as legal entries for pork.

In 1993, the BoD made several big changes to the few rules they had at that time. One rule eliminated the professional and amateur categories. The second big rule change was defining the rib entry as being spare or back ribs only. Country style ribs were no longer allowed. A third rule change renamed the poultry category to chicken (only). Turkey and cornish hens were no longer allowed. It would be more than ten years before cornish hens were deemed a legal entry for chicken.

The last change probably caused the most controversy. The pork category was now restricted to pork shoulder only. There were a lot of teams whose strategies and cooking methods had to change. Some of these teams wanted to cook pork steaks and economy style ribs that were cut from the shoulder. This is how the stipulation of not parting the butt until after cooking came into play.

Fast forwarding to today..... As for my unqualified opinion, the way the rule is written, if you want to remove the money muscle from the cooked butt and return the butt back to the cooker to reach a higher temperature, you have not only violated the rule by the legal interpretation, you have violated it in the original intent for why it was written.

Lager,

Juggy

Skip
07-16-2009, 11:44 PM
Fast forwarding to today..... As for my unqualified opinion, the way the rule is written, if you want to remove the money muscle from the cooked butt and return the butt back to the cooker to reach a higher temperature, you have not only violated the rule by the legal interpretation, you have violated it in the original intent for why it was written.

Lager,

Juggy
Thank you for the story. Very interesting read and a good bit of history.

Now lets address the difference in your post and the discussion here. No one is looking to cook the food further. Many are saucing and returning to a cooker to keep it warm. No different then putting it in a cambro to keep warm. But if parting and putting on a dead cooker is wrong then putting in the cambro parted is wrong to. leaving competitors a few minute window between breaking down a butt and bringing it to the judges still at proper temp.

Unfortunately through all of this the words cook re heat keep warm and the like are being used interchangeable. That is a problem. Each has its own meaning and its use hear can mean the difference between legal and illegal.

CaptTable
07-17-2009, 05:44 AM
Earlier in this post, I, as a rep, gave my interpretation as to whether I felt pulling the pork, saucing, then putting back on the cooker to keep warm was legal or illegal. I said that I considered it legal. Though I still THINK it should be legal, in the future I will, as instructed, consider such an action as illegal. I'm sorry if my interpretation added to the confusion and I have to whole-heartedly agree with the poster that we reps need to make sure we are all on the same page.

Phillip

Stoke&Smoke
07-17-2009, 09:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double D's BBQ http://www.bbq-brethren.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.bbq-brethren.com/forum/showthread.php?p=974403#post974403)
Sounds like the rep needs to be re-educated. There are no rules relating to the heating of sauce only meat.

Now I would agree with the rep if the gas burner was attached to the pit and the sauce and the meat were inside the pit. You have to make sure you narrowly define the circumstances. Heating sauce in a pot on a burner where the gas doesn't not get inside or heat the pit in any way is not illegal.

Ask him next time to reference the rule.

Let me throw this out there. I've seen teams trying to carmelize sauce on their meat by placing the meat inside a pan with sauce that was heated by propane. I would think there that you might be running into some type of trouble. Much more than heating sauce directly in a pan over a gas fired burner.



You do know whose contest it is in Shannon, right? He's the one that educates or at least did educate for KCBS, until he became the President...

Request for clarification here at the risk a skewing off topic slightly.

Are we saying then that heating sauce over anything but a wood fire is not allowed? No slight to Mike, or any other rep, but I had always understood that there wasn't a restriction on heating or cooking sauce over something other than a wood based heat, as long as the sauce wasn't on the meat. I think a lot of cooks are under the same impression.

As to reheating meat, the rules include the procedure that is expected to be followed. I just don't get why you would have to. Isn't part of the challenge of competetive que getting your meats done on time?

And if I get cold meat when judging, it will probably be judged down because I don't think taste or texture would be as good as the same product heated. Technically, I would think it might even be a DQ, because the rules say if it's refrigerated, it needs to be reheated to 165 for 15 seconds, and then it's supposed to remain over 140 until served. While I understand that it can lose heat between the cooks hand and the judges table, I don't understand how it can go from 165 to below ambient temp (read ice cold) in that time

SmokinOkie
07-17-2009, 10:43 AM
The last change probably caused the most controversy. The pork category was now restricted to pork shoulder only. There were a lot of teams whose strategies and cooking methods had to change. Some of these teams wanted to cook pork steaks and economy style ribs that were cut from the shoulder. This is how the stipulation of not parting the butt until after cooking came into play.

Juggy

Part II. According to Head Country II, they were involved in the change. They use to trim out the triangular shape piece on it's own, cook it hot and fast, that's where the whole "parting" part of the issue came up.

Alexa RnQ
07-17-2009, 11:17 AM
Have you never broken down your pork butt, coolered it and then gone back to assemble the box?
Nope.

Isn't part of the challenge of competetive que getting your meats done on time?
Yup.

Double D's BBQ
07-17-2009, 12:11 PM
You do know whose contest it is in Shannon, right? He's the one that educates or at least did educate for KCBS, until he became the President...

No Scottie, I had no idea who the rep was that was being referrenced nor should it matter. I don't believe in the infallibility of kings or Presidents for that matter especially ones that hail from ChicagoLand!:-D

Show me the rule that says you can't heat sauce on a gas burner. What's next we can't boil water either?

Skip
07-17-2009, 01:25 PM
Earlier in this post, I, as a rep, gave my interpretation as to whether I felt pulling the pork, saucing, then putting back on the cooker to keep warm was legal or illegal. I said that I considered it legal. Though I still THINK it should be legal, in the future I will, as instructed, consider such an action as illegal. I'm sorry if my interpretation added to the confusion and I have to whole-heartedly agree with the poster that we reps need to make sure we are all on the same page.

Phillip


Phillip who told you to consider it illegal?

Greg60525
07-17-2009, 11:19 PM
I guess I'll take my shot at this topic of parting butts/shoulders.

First, here's the definition of the word "parted":

Separated or divided into parts.
Being or kept apart; separated.
Is butterflying separating............I don't know? But clearly, part of the meat (money muscle, for example) is separated from where it was attached. It may not be completely separated.
If the rule was written to keep someone from substituting a different cut or piece of meat for the money muscle, for example, then the intent of the rule would not be violated by butterflying because the meat is still attached, perhaps marginally, but still attached. It really hinges on what the judges definition of parted means.

If any part of the butt is completely separated then that clearly meets the definition of parted and is therefore quite clearly: IILEGAL.

Holding a completely parted butt in a hot Cambro or cooler, in my opinion would be illegal. We tend to hold our butts and briskets in them so they continue to tenderize..........a.k.a cooking. Especially, if there is a large mass of meat in there...........gets quite hot for a long time. Cooking is a time/temp relationship. I would imagine that you could cook at 120°F for a very long time........and get fungus to grow on it at the same time!

Anyway, there's my contribution to a controversial subject.

QN
07-18-2009, 06:51 AM
Phillip who told you to consider it illegal?
The Board...
The Board discussed the issue of preparing pork (slicing, pulling, parting etc.) after it has been cooked and putting it back in the smoker with sauce to re-heat. The Board stated this is a violation of the rules.

Rick's Tropical Delight
07-18-2009, 07:00 AM
these issues should be clarified on the rule sheet. i write construction specificaitons for a living and i take every written word literally. there is really no other way to interpret written rules. if it's not in writing, it didn't and won't happen.

so, heating and mixing sauce in a foil pan over a propane burner, turning off the heat, and rolling pork pieces in it just prior to putting in the box...
legal or illegal? i'm still not sure. are you saying if i heat the sauce in a foil pan in an egg and place the pork pieces in the sauce in the foil pan in the egg, that would be illegal? i'm so cornfused...........

Double D's BBQ
07-18-2009, 07:21 AM
At first glance it appears that both instances could be viewed as being legal or illegal depending on specifics and who is interpreting it. In scenario #1 you are heating sauce only over a gas source. Meat is added after gas is turned off. Should be legal but I guess it depends on how hot the sauce is and could this be deemed cooking (raising the internal temp of the meat after it is placed in the sauce in the pan) after removing from smoker and parting of the pork.

Scenario #2 oddly enough may give you the biggest problem based on how its interpreted since you mention pieces, hence, parting and putting back on the cooker after parting.

Crazy isn't it.:roll:

I say when in doubt describe your cooking techique to the KCBS rep at the cooks meeting and ask for an interpretation of it from the Rep before the cooking begins just to be safe.

Rick's Tropical Delight
07-18-2009, 07:31 AM
I say when in doubt describe your cooking techique to the KCBS rep at the cooks meeting and ask for an interpretation of it from the Rep before the cooking begins just to be safe.

excellent suggestion and i will do exactly that next time. thanks!

i'm flexible and i can do this any number of ways. one thing i will not do is add cold sauce.

ssbbqguy
07-18-2009, 07:35 AM
You can not reheat the meat(pork) is all that needs said. I listened the other night to the board and still did not like the reps not being on the same page. The rule is clear if the reps. would unify.I judged at the Royal last year, had a tenderloin slipped in for the money muscle, and the reps pow-wowed and said legal. Legal my butt. I've cooked long enough to know the difference. (smoke rings do not go all the way around on butts, even cut up)The problrm is the reps. not being on the same page. To those turning cold pork, work on your timing.Steve

Double D's BBQ
07-18-2009, 07:42 AM
As I said before there should be zero tolerance for substituting a tenderloin for a money muscle. Absolutely no gray area here as far as I'm concerned. Disqualification is too light of a penalty in that case and a lifetime ban from all further competitions of the team and indidviduals involved would be more appropriate. Don't understand the need for a pow-wow or how it could be possibly deemed legal unless of course it was determined it was a money muscle after all.

Double D's BBQ
07-18-2009, 07:53 AM
This whole issue reminds me of the NFL where they say a ref could call a penalty on any play.

After further review.............................

ssbbqguy
07-18-2009, 07:54 AM
At no part was there any visible way to tell where the attachment point was. Even cutting one up to lay flat still shows where it was attached. I aggree, no need for a pow-wow,they did and after three combined. In my opinion,they did not want to rock the boat. That was a tenderloin. Ring completely around, different texture, feel ,everything. Lost alot of respect for the enforcement bunch then. Steve.

Rick's Tropical Delight
07-18-2009, 07:55 AM
so i guess if i heat sauce and then put pork in it, the sauce needs to be at a lower temp than the pork --> not reheating.

this rule says it all:
1) The decision and interpretations of the KCBS Rules
and Regulations are at the discretion of the KCBS Contest
Representatives at the contest. Their decisions and
interpretations are final.

if no reheating is allowed, this rule doesn't make sense:


(3) Meat that is cooked, properly cooled,
and later reheated for hot holding and serving
shall be reheated so that all parts of the food
reach a temperature of at least 165° F for a
minimum of 15 seconds.

Jorge
07-18-2009, 09:29 AM
The next post that adresses another member and is snarky ends this discussion.

Debate the issues all you like. If you can't do that without taking personal shots, or being condascending I can help you with that....

Skip
07-20-2009, 10:17 AM
The Board...
The Board discussed the issue of preparing pork (slicing, pulling, parting etc.) after it has been cooked and putting it back in the smoker with sauce to re-heat. The Board stated this is a violation of the rules.


Hi QN! I'm sorry for the confusion....Seems your name is Phillip to. I had actually posed the question to CaptTable who, as you might have now guessed, is also named Phillip. If you look in the quote line you will see the member I was referring to. I'm glad you felt confident in answering my query. Are you familiar with what is going on with the board because you were at the meeting? Do you have a friend there that you may have had a casual conversation with?

Skip
07-20-2009, 10:20 AM
At no part was there any visible way to tell where the attachment point was. Even cutting one up to lay flat still shows where it was attached. I aggree, no need for a pow-wow,they did and after three combined. In my opinion,they did not want to rock the boat. That was a tenderloin. Ring completely around, different texture, feel ,everything. Lost alot of respect for the enforcement bunch then. Steve.

I don't know that I would jump to that conclusion though. Had it been a backyarder I would say possibly but not probable. When its a team at the Royal I would come to every conclusion but that. Teams able to make it to that point are both skilled and fluent in the rules. To think they had gotten that far and were now willing to cheat seems a real stretch. A full ring on the portion of the muscle you received only means they are darn good butchers and butterflied out the money muscle. They probably went through cases and cases of meat just to find that muscle.

Skip
07-20-2009, 10:36 AM
The rule is clear if the reps. would unify.

Clarity does not come from consensus. If that were the case we could never enforce a rule or law. A rule become irrelevent if its intent is skewed by simple majority or group. Where would this country be if we allowed our rules and laws to be enforced relative to the opinions of who is enforcing them not those who are charged with interpreting them. Can anyone say Animal Farm?

goodsmokebbq
07-20-2009, 10:43 AM
The Board...
The Board discussed the issue of preparing pork (slicing, pulling, parting etc.) after it has been cooked and putting it back in the smoker with sauce to re-heat. The Board stated this is a violation of the rules.

As far as I heard it this is not the issue the BOD addressed. They addressed parting then cooking. TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES.

Jorge
07-20-2009, 10:47 AM
As far as I heard it this is not the issue the BOD addressed. They addressed parting then cooking. TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES.

The notes from the meeting on the KCBS website, indicate something different than your understanding.

The Board discussed the issue of preparing pork (slicing, pulling, parting etc.) after it has been cooked and putting it back in the smoker with sauce to re-heat. The Board stated this is a violation of the rules.

goodsmokebbq
07-20-2009, 10:57 AM
The topic of slicing or pulling pork and putting it back in the cooker was discussed at the KCBS board meeting tonight. Of course the way it was brought up was actually a little disingenuous in my opinion. Mike Lake said that people were asking about partially cooking their pork then slicing part of it off and putting it back in the cooker to finish cooking. I don't think that's what most people were doing. I think people were fully cooking their pork pulling some and slicing some applying sauce and putting it back into the cooker for a short period of time so it would get to the judges hot.

The way Mike stated it everyone on the board was against it. I think if it was presented in a factual manner the outcome may have been different. Oh well no big deal. Just make sure your sauce is nice and hot when you apply it and I'm sure it will do the same thing (first place pork in Wildwood)


Quote:
The Board discussed the issue of preparing pork (slicing, pulling, parting etc.) after it has been cooked and putting it back in the smoker with sauce to re-heat. The Board stated this is a violation of the rules.


Two sides to every story, I guess. Did the notes accurately describe the conversation? Oh well, I let the Reps decide.

The one thing that is clear is that this rule (whatever it is) is not clearly understood…

CivilWarBBQ
07-20-2009, 11:06 AM
Earlier in this post, I, as a rep, gave my interpretation as to whether I felt pulling the pork, saucing, then putting back on the cooker to keep warm was legal or illegal. I said that I considered it legal. Though I still THINK it should be legal, in the future I will, as instructed, consider such an action as illegal. I'm sorry if my interpretation added to the confusion and I have to whole-heartedly agree with the poster that we reps need to make sure we are all on the same page.

Phillip

Thanks for that clarification Phillip.

Personally, I'm much less concerned with what the rules are than I am that they are universally applied. If a rule is passed that all rib entries must contain peanut butter then we'll do it that way; just make sure everybody else has to do it too!

-gf

HoDeDo
07-20-2009, 11:26 AM
Thanks RTD :) - That is what I was alluding to earlier.




BTW....
PETER PARKER!!!! PETER PARKER!!!!
(the amazing spiderman was here)

Jacked UP BBQ
07-20-2009, 11:43 AM
Guess what - I parted my pork this weekend and kept it warm on my smoker. You know why??? Because the reps said it was ok. Guess what>>>>this was after the supposed discussion by the board who according to the original post which was worded to favor the wanted decision. I will continue to do my pork style of cooking until it is an actual rule. Argue on fellas...

Double D's BBQ
07-20-2009, 12:26 PM
Thanks for that clarification Phillip.

Personally, I'm much less concerned with what the rules are than I am that they are universally applied. If a rule is passed that all rib entries must contain peanut butter then we'll do it that way; just make sure everybody else has to do it too!

-gf

Chunky or Smooth?:-D

Vince RnQ
07-20-2009, 01:05 PM
Guess what - I parted my pork this weekend and kept it warm on my smoker. You know why??? Because the reps said it was ok. Guess what>>>>this was after the supposed discussion by the board who according to the original post which was worded to favor the wanted decision. I will continue to do my pork style of cooking until it is an actual rule. Argue on fellas...

http://www.lechatnoirboutique.com/prodimages/Coffee%20Mug%20-%20Far%20Side%20Bummer%20of%20a%20Birthmark%20LG.j pg

stlgreg
07-20-2009, 01:11 PM
Why is this so hard? You can't part it at all. The rule says that pretty clear. Don't know why some folks are having such a hard time with this and making such a big stink. the board addressed it. It is considered illegal to part your butt. You can't do it to re-heat, you can't do it to cook it from a raw state.

Indeed and why do we have to have the discussion every five months.

tonto1117
07-20-2009, 01:17 PM
http://www.lechatnoirboutique.com/prodimages/Coffee%20Mug%20-%20Far%20Side%20Bummer%20of%20a%20Birthmark%20LG.j pg

http://www.picpiggy.com/smile/happy/happy0065.gif (http://www.picpiggy.com)

Jacked UP BBQ
07-20-2009, 01:27 PM
No target on my chest. If the rep said it is fine I guess it is??? I will ask at every contest and whatever they tell me goes. Unlike many others, I will not hide behind walls and trailers to prep, cook, and box. I do it right out in the open where all the public and anyone can see. Cannot be a target of anything if there is nothing wrong with it. Thank you for your concerns:roll:

Ron_L
07-20-2009, 01:33 PM
Guess what - I parted my pork this weekend and kept it warm on my smoker. You know why??? Because the reps said it was ok. Guess what>>>>this was after the supposed discussion by the board who according to the original post which was worded to favor the wanted decision. I will continue to do my pork style of cooking until it is an actual rule. Argue on fellas...

I've stayed out of this discussion until now. I fully understand the possible benefits of separating parts of a butt and cooking them that way, but I can't figure out why you (and that is a general "you", not specifically picking on OC) would want to part out the butt and put it back into the cooker to keep it warm. Am i missing something? I would think that doing this would dry out the meat. Someone educate me, please?

Jacked UP BBQ
07-20-2009, 02:01 PM
I do it for no other reason then to get the food and sauce hot together.

drbbq
07-20-2009, 02:05 PM
Guess what - I parted my pork this weekend and kept it warm on my smoker. You know why??? Because the reps said it was ok. Guess what>>>>this was after the supposed discussion by the board who according to the original post which was worded to favor the wanted decision. I will continue to do my pork style of cooking until it is an actual rule. Argue on fellas...

I think this is the kind of thing that creates the problem. Some cooks will abuse the self policing thing so the board will have to make new micromanaging rules. It's really a shame.

Jacked UP BBQ
07-20-2009, 02:10 PM
I think this is the kind of thing that creates the problem. Some cooks will abuse the self policing thing so the board will have to make new micromanaging rules. It's really a shame.

Thank you for adding think to your first line. Because that makes it your opinion (you think). When competing in anything there are rules that state what they mean. Not this one, I am starting to feel like a broken record. The only shame is the inability for specifics in the rules. I will not even get into what almost happen to me this weekend over something that is not even a rule!

goodsmokebbq
07-20-2009, 02:16 PM
I think this is the kind of thing that creates the problem. Some cooks will abuse the self policing thing so the board will have to make new micromanaging rules. It's really a shame.

Why not do away with the rule and trust us cooks (self-policing) to not cook tenderloin or cook the $muscle separate? It was never the intent of the rule to keep cooks from reheating a tray of pulled pork. Why are those who do, bad cooks or cheaters?

Jacked UP BBQ
07-20-2009, 02:17 PM
^^^^^^^Good question

Jorge
07-20-2009, 02:21 PM
Why not do away with the rule and trust us cooks (self-policing) to not cook tenderloin or cook the $muscle separate? It was never the intent of the rule to keep cooks from reheating a tray of pulled pork. Why are those who do, bad cooks or cheaters?

Because people have tried to slip tenderloin in, in the past, and probably still do on occasion. Sins of the father.....

Jacked UP BBQ
07-20-2009, 02:29 PM
Because people have tried to slip tenderloin in, in the past, and probably still do on occasion. Sins of the father.....

I don't understand the point of tenderloin. IMO low cooked money is much better.

goodsmokebbq
07-20-2009, 02:31 PM
I don't understand the point of tenderloin. IMO low cooked money is much better.

I allways cook them to long and dry them out:-D, would never even think of trying it for comp.

Jacked UP BBQ
07-20-2009, 02:37 PM
^^^^judges might like that^^^^^

Podge
07-20-2009, 02:46 PM
I've accepted the fact that they've made the pork rule more rediculous than what it already is. And why I say it's rediculous is because the same rules do not apply to the other 3 catagories.

Also, what is the intent of the original rule against parting ? I'm sure it wasn't written with the initial thought that teams would take it out of the cooker, slice and pull, sauce, and re-warm before turn-in. I had always interpret the rule as you couldn't split the pork in such a way to cook one part of it to a temp different than the other.

but, here's from the KCBS site:

The Board discussed the issue of preparing pork (slicing, pulling, parting etc.) after it has been cooked and putting it back in the smoker with sauce to re-heat. The Board stated this is a violation of the rules.

So, in my interpretation, as long as I don't put sauce on it, I can legally re-heat it. Within the other rules about cooling and re-heating procedures makes re-heating legal to begin with. But, with this new ruling, add sauce into the equation, it makes it illegal.. this whole rule is silly.

Skip
07-20-2009, 02:50 PM
http://www.lechatnoirboutique.com/prodimages/Coffee%20Mug%20-%20Far%20Side%20Bummer%20of%20a%20Birthmark%20LG.j pg


Better get me one of these mugs too. Because now I am going to do it just on principal. The question, as stated here, has been addressed by more then one rep at competition and the answer favors the proletariat not the bourgeoisie.

I would also like to thank the poster for showing his brothers and sisters his true colors. I salute you.

drbbq
07-20-2009, 02:53 PM
Thank you for adding think to your first line. Because that makes it your opinion (you think). When competing in anything there are rules that state what they mean. Not this one, I am starting to feel like a broken record. The only shame is the inability for specifics in the rules. I will not even get into what almost happen to me this weekend over something that is not even a rule!

Please add "I think" to your opinion also because clearly a few of us don't think it's fact.

Skip
07-20-2009, 02:58 PM
Indeed and why do we have to have the discussion every five months.


Hmm. Well normally when something doesn't go away even though you think it should it means there is an underlying problem that has yet to be addressed. Or perhaps it is never truly hashed out and it falls by the wayside without being settled. There are two distinct camps here and each one has an arguement with merit. The problem is many are comparing apples to oranges. One side screams you can't slice then cook while the other says its fully cooked I'm keeping heat to it to maintain HD expectations. As I said very early on. This will not be settled unless one side gives up their undefined critical expectation of the rule or we actually define what it means to cook a shoulder. We also need to state the definition of heating, warming, and what constitutes a heat sauce.

If my pork butt crumbles inside the foil inside my cooler and it is still resting in heat would it be illegal to use the piece of meat.

Jacked UP BBQ
07-20-2009, 03:03 PM
Please add "I think" to your opinion also because clearly a few of us don't think it's fact.

My opinion of what the rule doesn't say is fact. Unless I am missing a line or two in my rule book.

goodsmokebbq
07-20-2009, 03:04 PM
this whole rule is silly.

Agreed...

drbbq
07-20-2009, 03:14 PM
My opinion of what the rule doesn't say is fact. Unless I am missing a line or two in my rule book.

I respectfully disagree. The rule seems clear to me.

Jorge
07-20-2009, 03:14 PM
Hmm. Well normally when something doesn't go away even though you think it should it means there is an underlying problem that has yet to be addressed. Or perhaps it is never truly hashed out and it falls by the wayside without being settled. There are two distinct camps here and each one has an arguement with merit. The problem is many are comparing apples to oranges. One side screams you can't slice then cook while the other says its fully cooked I'm keeping heat to it to maintain HD expectations. As I said very early on. This will not be settled unless one side gives up their undefined critical expectation of the rule or we actually define what it means to cook a shoulder. We also need to state the definition of heating, warming, and what constitutes a heat sauce.

If my pork butt crumbles inside the foil inside my cooler and it is still resting in heat would it be illegal to use the piece of meat.

If the largest portion weighs over 5 lbs. then you are legal.

Edited to say: and if you only use meat from that intact 5 lb. portion.

Muzzlebrake
07-20-2009, 03:14 PM
QUOTE=OC PIG ASSASSINS;977120]No target on my chest. If the rep said it is fine I guess it is??? I will ask at every contest and whatever they tell me goes. [/QUOTE]

I will not even get into what almost happen to me this weekend over something that is not even a rule!

knowing the circumstances of the second quote I was going to say that I find it hard to believe that you will abide by "whatever they tell me goes"......... and I dont' mean that in a bad way

Jacked UP BBQ
07-20-2009, 03:20 PM
I respectfully disagree. The rule seems clear to me.

I will respectfully agree to disagree.

Jacked UP BBQ
07-20-2009, 03:32 PM
QUOTE=OC PIG ASSASSINS;977120]No target on my chest. If the rep said it is fine I guess it is??? I will ask at every contest and whatever they tell me goes.



knowing the circumstances of the second quote I was going to say that I find it hard to believe that you will abide by "whatever they tell me goes"......... and I dont' mean that in a bad way[/quote]

I guess your right. How's the ankle??

Muzzlebrake
07-20-2009, 03:35 PM
How's the ankle??

farked! neg x-rays ortho office tommorow

Skip
07-20-2009, 03:48 PM
I respectfully disagree. The rule seems clear to me.

Doc i have a lot of respect for you but i find it hard to believe that this could be clear to anyone.

PORK: Pork is defined as Boston Butt, Picnic and/or
Whole Shoulder, weighing a minimum of five (5) pounds.
Pork shall be cooked (bone in or bone out) and shall not be
parted.


Ok the definition is self explanatory. A butt, picnic or shoulder. These terms are widely used and very specific.

Weighing 5 lbs minimum. Again very specific without question.

Pork shall be cooked bone in or bone out. Specific and easily read.

Then the last statement....and shall not be parted.

To me that says never part the butt picnic or shoulder. It says nothing about before or after cooking. It gives no direction as to when and where. In essence to follow it complete and to the letter that means put the whole cooked product in the box. Now as foolish and stupid as that may sound, especially considering the rule about 6 portions, it is still the way it is written. The interpretation of anyone not familiar with competition would be that the piece of meat be presented whole. No where in the rules have I found any clause that states if a rule follows that contradicts a previous the one read last will take precedent. You have a long career here in comp BBQ and I think you probably remember this rule change. All of the discussion then probably made it quite clear. We fast forward a few years and find many teams without all that crucial knowledge who now feel that the rule is vague at best. My catholic school upbringing required that i could diagram sentences in my sleep. The compound sentence that ends the pork rule is incomplete. Gramatically it just doesn't work to draw any conclusion other then cook it with or without the bone and don't part it ever.

Dale P
07-20-2009, 03:55 PM
My 2 cents. Silly rule that is incomplete.


Thats all I got.

Skip
07-20-2009, 03:55 PM
but, here's from the KCBS site:

The Board discussed the issue of preparing pork (slicing, pulling, parting etc.) after it has been cooked and putting it back in the smoker with sauce to re-heat. The Board stated this is a violation of the rules.



Can you post this link. If true that statement has teeth.

Although if you can't re-heat in your cooker how do you accomplish rule 16g

Muzzlebrake
07-20-2009, 04:04 PM
the answer favors the proletariat not the bourgeoisie.

ummmm dude,,,,,,,,what??? really ???WTF

define what it means to cook a shoulder.

The rule seems clear to me.

have to agree with you Doc, the rule seems pretty clear to me as to what the Pork Category is, a shoulder being one of the qualifying cuts. It also seems very clear to me that it has weigh at least five pounds and is to be cooked whole.

drbbq
07-20-2009, 04:06 PM
Can you post this link. If true that statement has teeth.

Although if you can't re-heat in your cooker how do you accomplish rule 16g

Here you go.

http://kcbs.us/news.php?id=159

Skip
07-20-2009, 04:09 PM
ummmm dude,,,,,,,,what??? really ???WTF.

What what? Not sure of your question.






have to agree with you Doc, the rule seems pretty clear to me as to what the Pork Category is, a shoulder being one of the qualifying cuts. It also seems very clear to me that it has weigh at least five pounds and is to be cooked whole.

^^^ I will agree with that as well.

drbbq
07-20-2009, 04:10 PM
Doc i have a lot of respect for you but i find it hard to believe that this could be clear to anyone.

PORK: Pork is defined as Boston Butt, Picnic and/or
Whole Shoulder, weighing a minimum of five (5) pounds.
Pork shall be cooked (bone in or bone out) and shall not be
parted.


Ok the definition is self explanatory. A butt, picnic or shoulder. These terms are widely used and very specific.

Weighing 5 lbs minimum. Again very specific without question.

Pork shall be cooked bone in or bone out. Specific and easily read.

Then the last statement....and shall not be parted.

To me that says never part the butt picnic or shoulder. It says nothing about before or after cooking. It gives no direction as to when and where. In essence to follow it complete and to the letter that means put the whole cooked product in the box. Now as foolish and stupid as that may sound, especially considering the rule about 6 portions, it is still the way it is written. The interpretation of anyone not familiar with competition would be that the piece of meat be presented whole. No where in the rules have I found any clause that states if a rule follows that contradicts a previous the one read last will take precedent. You have a long career here in comp BBQ and I think you probably remember this rule change. All of the discussion then probably made it quite clear. We fast forward a few years and find many teams without all that crucial knowledge who now feel that the rule is vague at best. My catholic school upbringing required that i could diagram sentences in my sleep. The compound sentence that ends the pork rule is incomplete. Gramatically it just doesn't work to draw any conclusion other then cook it with or without the bone and don't part it ever.


Why did you separate those last two points? They're one sentence. The butt shall be cooked bone in or out and can't be parted. Cooked without being parted. What am I missing?

Skip
07-20-2009, 04:16 PM
Here you go.

http://kcbs.us/news.php?id=159


Thanks Doc. Much appreciated.

Unfortunately this is written at the end.

"These are not the official minutes of the meeting. They are simply provided as an effort to give members a quick summary of the board meeting."

Anyone know how to get the actual minutes?

Muzzlebrake
07-20-2009, 04:28 PM
Pork shall be cooked bone in or bone out. Specific and easily read.

Then the last statement....and shall not be parted.


those aren't 2 separate sentences, they are the same sentence with "bone in or bone out" in parentheses. might want to to re-read that

What what? Not sure of your question.

you really think something that happens at a KCBS contest is a class struggle favoring the workers?

drbbq
07-20-2009, 04:31 PM
Thanks Doc. Much appreciated.

Unfortunately this is written at the end.

"These are not the official minutes of the meeting. They are simply provided as an effort to give members a quick summary of the board meeting."

Anyone know how to get the actual minutes?

I give up.

Skip
07-20-2009, 04:33 PM
Why did you separate those last two points? They're one sentence. The butt shall be cooked bone in or out and can't be parted. Cooked without being parted. What am I missing?


You aren't missing anything. When breaking down the meaning of a statement one must look for compound sentences. Each statement must stand alone or it is grammatically incorrect. The compound sentence reads The butt shall be cooked bone in or out (one complete statement) and shall not be parted (another complete statement). No one is questioning whether a butt should be cooked parted. As far as I can tell everyone here understands this as illegal. Its the interpretation of what is allowed onced the pork is cooked without parting.

Vince RnQ
07-20-2009, 04:37 PM
Gentlemen, the Board laid it out as simply as it can be stated. Refusing to accept it and continuing to violate the rule is eventually going to get you DQ'd from an event. You can't hide behind the interpretation of the event Rep when the Board has spoken on the matter.

You cannot reheat parted pork. That's the rule.

Muzzlebrake
07-20-2009, 04:38 PM
I think this is the kind of thing that creates the problem. Some cooks will abuse the self policing thing so the board will have to make new micromanaging rules. It's really a shame.

because to many pushing the rules to meet their ends is just another part of competition to some. "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying" are words that many live by and I have heard them not just in BBQ but in every sport I have competed in. Hell in NASCAR it was a way of life for many teams for many years.

That being said I have to agree, I think that anything that makes the approving authority start micro-managing is not a good thing but if not for those some of those folks we might not have great advancements like the forward pass or instant replay......(just kidding about the replay...LOL)

Vince RnQ
07-20-2009, 04:40 PM
So it's OK to cheat since that's really what advances the sport?

Please.

Skip
07-20-2009, 04:42 PM
those aren't 2 separate sentences, they are the same sentence with "bone in or bone out" in parentheses. might want to to re-read that


Ok but still the same outcome. Its still a compound sentence. Pork shall be cooked -----and shall not be parted. Two distinct statements each of which can stand on their own. The question in all of this is not whether you can cook parted anyway. Its after the cook that is the issue.


you really think something that happens at a KCBS contest is a class struggle favoring the workers?

Heh thats funny. Nope just trying to play. Everyone is getting very serious. Some have their interpretation while others feel differently. The class distinctions were nothing more then a way to seperate one side from the other. It was a throw away line.

Skip
07-20-2009, 04:45 PM
Gentlemen, the Board laid it out as simply as it can be stated. Refusing to accept it and continuing to violate the rule is eventually going to get you DQ'd from an event. You can't hide behind the interpretation of the event Rep when the Board has spoken on the matter.

You cannot reheat parted pork. That's the rule.


Can you provide a link to this rule. This is the only one I have on the subject.

PORK: Pork is defined as Boston Butt, Picnic and/or
Whole Shoulder, weighing a minimum of five (5) pounds.
Pork shall be cooked (bone in or bone out) and shall not be
parted.

Skip
07-20-2009, 04:55 PM
because to many pushing the rules to meet their ends is just another part of competition to some. "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying" are words that many live by and I have heard them not just in BBQ but in every sport I have competed in. Hell in NASCAR it was a way of life for many teams for many years.

That being said I have to agree, I think that anything that makes the approving authority start micro-managing is not a good thing but if not for those some of those folks we might not have great advancements like the forward pass or instant replay......(just kidding about the replay...LOL)


All this may be true but no one here has said they want to cheat. I don't consider cheating part of competition nor would I ever consider cheating to get ahead. In fact I hate nothing more then liars and cheats. Just ask my children how many times they have heard that. No one is pushing a rule here either. All that is being said is that the rule, as written, is flawed. If in fact it is to say that at no time, until meat leaves a butt to enter a turn in box, is a shoulder allowed to be parted or kept warm by another heat source other then itself.

Muzzlebrake
07-20-2009, 05:00 PM
So it's OK to cheat since that's really what advances the sport?


no no not at all sorry if thats the way that came out. I was just trying to point out that it often takes someone who pushes the limits that make rules and the sport they govern to become modernized or changed.

somewhere someone had to be the first one to pick up and run with a soccer ball, throw the first forward pass, use a maple bat or use a wing with more downforce that many of the competitors thought was illegal...some look at what the rules say others at what they don't say, just a different way of interpreting data.

Jorge
07-20-2009, 05:01 PM
All this may be true but no one here has said they want to cheat. I don't consider cheating part of competition nor would I ever consider cheating to get ahead. In fact I hate nothing more then liars and cheats. Just ask my children how many times they have heard that. No one is pushing a rule here either. All that is being said is that the rule, as written, is flawed. If in fact it is to say that at no time, until meat leaves a butt to enter a turn in box, is a shoulder allowed to be parted or kept warm by another heat source other then itself.


You will find my cell # in your PM box shortly. I'd appreciate it if you could find the time to call me.

Vince RnQ
07-20-2009, 05:05 PM
Can you provide a link to this rule. This is the only one I have on the subject.

PORK: Pork is defined as Boston Butt, Picnic and/or
Whole Shoulder, weighing a minimum of five (5) pounds.
Pork shall be cooked (bone in or bone out) and shall not be
parted.



Skip, you've read the ruling by the Board from the link that Ray posted. You're chosing to ignore it. That's fine. When you get DQ'd for breaking the rule, please don't cry "ignorance".

Vince RnQ
07-20-2009, 05:11 PM
no no not at all sorry if thats the way that came out. I was just trying to point out that it often takes someone who pushes the limits that make rules and the sport they govern to become modernized or changed.

somewhere someone had to be the first one to pick up and run with a soccer ball, throw the first forward pass, use a maple bat or use a wing with more downforce that many of the competitors thought was illegal...some look at what the rules say others at what they don't say, just a different way of interpreting data.


I understand the logic behind taking ideas to new places. Heck, we spend damn near every drive home from a contest trying to do just that! We're constantly trying to find new and different ways to improve our cooking but we also know where the boundries are and we're not interested in testing their limits.

Muzzlebrake
07-20-2009, 05:12 PM
Heh thats funny. Nope just trying to play.

thought so Spicoli...("cause then we'd be bogus too!!!!!) lol

Muzzlebrake
07-20-2009, 05:18 PM
we also know where the boundries are and we're not interested in testing their limits.

nor am I. I have a enough on my hands trying to stay within them am not looking to be the innovator either but I'm not everyone

Jorge
07-20-2009, 05:45 PM
How about a moratorium on this topic for 48 hrs.

Take some time and think about it. Take a look at your position, and what other people think.

It's a suggestion. If you choose to ignore the suggestion then being within the letter or the rules would be a good idea.

bbqbull
07-20-2009, 05:55 PM
How about a moratorium on this topic for 48 hrs.

Take some time and think about it. Take a look at your position, and what other people think.

It's a suggestion. If you choose to ignore the suggestion then being within the letter or the rules would be a good idea.

I fully agree with Jorge, lets take a timeout here.

Rick's Tropical Delight
07-20-2009, 06:08 PM
Skip, you've read the ruling by the Board from the link that Ray posted. You're chosing to ignore it. That's fine. When you get DQ'd for breaking the rule, please don't cry "ignorance".

one more thought on that and then i'm outta here.

are competitors expected to read the notes from all the board meetings posted on the KCBS website, or are we (and i am referring to ME a newbie with three comps) expected to read the rules sheet and do what it says?

how would a newbie be expected to read anything other than the rule sheet or even this forum to know what's going on? i want to follow the rules, but if i have to search the internet and several websites to find them all, well, it ain't gonna happen.

i will be asking the reps at the next contest if what i do is illegal and i'll change if warranted to comply. i do not want any issues.

that's a newbies perspective.

Podge
07-20-2009, 06:09 PM
If this is just an abreviated version of the meeting minutes, doesn't it then need to be included into the KCBS rules themselves ? Maybe when the BOD reads everyone's concerns on all the forums out there, they can better re-write this clarification before it is inked in the actual rules. I don't think (but I'm no law professional) that just because they all agreed to it in a meeting that it is in fact a violation, there needs to be more steps before it is considered an actual rule.

(edited: reading Rick's post above, this is a good example to what I'm getting at)

Buster Dog BBQ
07-21-2009, 10:19 AM
one more thought on that and then i'm outta here.

are competitors expected to read the notes from all the board meetings posted on the KCBS website, or are we (and i am referring to ME a newbie with three comps) expected to read the rules sheet and do what it says?

how would a newbie be expected to read anything other than the rule sheet or even this forum to know what's going on? i want to follow the rules, but if i have to search the internet and several websites to find them all, well, it ain't gonna happen.

i will be asking the reps at the next contest if what i do is illegal and i'll change if warranted to comply. i do not want any issues.

that's a newbies perspective.
Rick, here in Iowa the Reps usually ask at the cooks meeting if there are any new competitors. They then invite them to stick around afterwards to listen to the audio recording (I have not listened to it). They also have books of photos to show turn in examples and pretty much all contest here hand out a copy of the rules and have a link on their sites.

So hopefully a newbie would take the time to read the rules before competing and then ask questions after listening to the audio. That's what the reps are there for.

Podge
07-21-2009, 12:23 PM
Rick, here in Iowa the Reps usually ask at the cooks meeting if there are any new competitors. They then invite them to stick around afterwards to listen to the audio recording (I have not listened to it). They also have books of photos to show turn in examples and pretty much all contest here hand out a copy of the rules and have a link on their sites.

So hopefully a newbie would take the time to read the rules before competing and then ask questions after listening to the audio. That's what the reps are there for.

that then would assume that the reps are all brought up to speed on recent rule changes, and hopefully they will remember to bring those up at the cooks meeting

HoDeDo
07-21-2009, 12:24 PM
This has all been very interesting. I do like the earlier post from RTD on the topic.

I would say, that to cover all bases. IF you are worried about a DQ for your sauce finish, - Per the rule as it has been stated - you can cook then cool your food. Perfectly "legal". You have to reheat it to 165 before serving to a judge. It has been fully cooked at that point and meets all litmus tests that you might be cooking further... or parting while cooking. Parting it after cooking, esp, in this fashion should be fine.

In that scenario, I put my butts on Friday afternoon, have them cooked. cool them, and do whatever I want to them after that point because they have been cooked.

I think we'll see that whatever the definition is, if it's scope is changing to address new technique, each rep will have their say as to how it will be followed. Another great rule. :)

And we should keep in mind.... its only BBQ right? I consider guys on both sides of this arguement friends, and strong competitors, and I would think we have alot bigger things/ issues to address. But I am sure it will be fun discussion at the rules meeting. :)

Based on the discussion here, It seems everyone knows the intent behind the rule... it is to keep folks from cheating and using other parts of the pig for thier shoulder turnins. Personally, I think I can make my shoulder taste better than a tenderloin anyway:o)

I think everyone has given great insight on this one. Thanks for the lively debate!

HoDeDo
07-21-2009, 12:27 PM
that then would assume that the reps are all brought up to speed on recent rule changes, and hopefully they will remember to bring those up at the cooks meeting

This is why rules don't change on the fly... it would be too hard to get everyone up to speed.

I think we are only talking about the interpretation of the rule at this point right? Any changes would come after the "rules meeting". I would think that someone could discussion variations/scenarios all year to get thoughts on the interpretation. Based on all the feedback, folks could then ask for the rule to be written more clearly.

Scottie
07-21-2009, 12:37 PM
It was explained to me as a "reps advisory"... So it's not changing the rules per se, as much as bringing the reps up to the same thinking of the Board who is in charge of ultimately interpreting the intent of the rules...

Jorge
07-21-2009, 12:40 PM
This is why rules don't change on the fly... it would be too hard to get everyone up to speed.

I think we are only talking about the interpretation of the rule at this point right? Any changes would come after the "rules meeting". I would think that someone could discussion variations/scenarios all year to get thoughts on the interpretation. Based on all the feedback, folks could then ask for the rule to be written more clearly.


My biggest concern continues to be the fact that all of the Reps don't seem to be on the same page. I just want to see some consistency. I think allowing parted butts to go back in the cooker opens the door for some other things (at what temp can you warm?, for example), but I can live with that as long as the playing field is level, and consistent. If the Reps have different interpretations, and enforce those interpretations then there is effectively more than one rule in play on any given weekend.

Jacked UP BBQ
07-21-2009, 12:55 PM
IMO - when cooking a certian cut of meat, there should be no rule on how you can cook it. There are no great secrets that are going to make one team do that much better then another. If one team is winning a lot, great for them. Whether they cook it hot or slow, fat up or down, parted or whole, Who gives a chit. That is there style of cooking. Putting a limit on how to create a great product is silly.

As far as all the comments of micromanaging, that is what they should do. Imagine our laws were left out for interpretation??

The board can put a simple end to this entire debate with a descriptive write up of the rule. They are not re inventing the wheel here.

KC_Bobby
07-21-2009, 01:15 PM
The board can put a simple end to this entire debate with a descriptive write up of the rule. They are not re inventing the wheel here.

I agree and I hope it is clearly rewritten after the rules meeting during the annual banquet. Personally, I don't care either way - we're probably not going to change our pork technique.

But until then, it's been reviewed and deemed as an infraction of the rule by the board. So I believe all teams should honor the rule as the board stated until something is decided otherwise. It's keeping the playing field level and no one is handicapped.

drbbq
07-21-2009, 02:08 PM
IMO - when cooking a certian cut of meat, there should be no rule on how you can cook it...........

But once you part it you don't have the same cut anymore.
If there was a butcher case full of money muscles they wouldn't be called butts.
If you slice a butt on the band saw it's not a butt anymore, it's pork steaks. And so on and so on......

Jacked UP BBQ
07-21-2009, 02:14 PM
But once you part it you don't have the same cut anymore.
If there was a butcher case full of money muscles they wouldn't be called butts.
If you slice a butt on the band saw it's not a butt anymore, it's pork steaks. And so on and so on......

Right, not much you can do with a butchered up pork butt to get a quality product other then bbq style cooking or a crock pot. Interesting though, I have never seen a butcher sell the money muscle?

ZILLA
07-21-2009, 02:17 PM
Right, not much you can do with a butchered up pork butt to get a quality product other then bbq style cooking or a crock pot. Interesting though, I have never seen a butcher sell the money muscle?

Carnitas!

Jorge
07-21-2009, 02:31 PM
Carnitas!

Exactly

Muzzlebrake
07-21-2009, 02:45 PM
My biggest concern continues to be the fact that all of the Reps don't seem to be on the same page. I just want to see some consistency.

I agree with you there 100% there shouldn't really be any subjectivity here, we aren't trying to call balls and strikes on a 95 pitch. To that end I think that's what the Board was doing and there guidance seems pretty clear to me.

I also think we need to look back at what Steve said about how it was presented to the board.e I think the rule is pretty clear and that "partially cooking their pork then slicing part of it off and putting it back in the cooker to finish cooking." is clearly illegal.

As Andy pointed out, if you follow the rules for meats that have been cooked you should be fine.

The_Kapn
07-21-2009, 02:47 PM
Interesting discussion. :oops:

TIM