Judges note
 

I had not competed in a while so I did a comp over the 4th of July weekend. With my scores I got some notes from the judges. The one that really bothered me was the one that the judge stated, “Pork tasted great! But where is the bark?” Normally I do put the bark in the box but I was in a rush and did not. But what bothers me is it seems like the judge marked me down because of it. If what was in the box tastes good that should be all you judge it on, right? What do you think?

I agree. If it tasted great you should have gotten a great score for taste. If it meant that it was very good and would have been great if you had some bark on it than that is what he/she should have written. My opinion as a judge. keith

Not related but are you going to do Queen Creek in October?

Scott - Little Miss BBQ

The guys I usually take out there with me can not do it. So I am trying to see if I can still get a team together. Are you going to be out there?

Yep! I'm looking forward to it. I don't think my team is going to be there either so I may have my wife with me Friday but she has school on Saturday. I'm not sure how I'm going to do it but I may be a one man team Saturday.

I have done a couple contests by myself and it is tough but it can be done. Plus a lot of the other teams are always willing to help out.

Yes, you should be judged on what's in the box, not what isn't or what the judge expected to find. Unfortunately, this isn't always the case.

judges that dont score what is presented to them ..........BLOW!!! its like judges like their entries sweet, why is that BBQ?????? chicken and beef are not sweet meats..why judge them that way? and why does cheese cake always win anything butt here in PA and most of the N.E. ?.. o.k Im done, I just triped over my bar stool..

While it's true that judges should only score what is in the box, as a cook you have to face the reality that expectation does play a significant role. Yes, it's technically feasible that you could win the chicken category with a box full of perfectly prepared necks, but I for one would not take that gamble.

For most people, the highly flavored bark is what separates pork barbecue from plain pork roast. While this judge may not have been conforming to the judging guidelines, I think you can thank him or her for that comment card. It gave you a clear read on something you should not do again, which is more useful to a cook than an anonymous average score from a kinder-hearted judge.

Oh you are right on that! I will make sure there is bark in the next turn in box! ;-)

We'll be happy to help you out DDog. Here's a helpful tip...dont forget the bark on your next pork turn-in. :thumb:

Looks like you need to work on your cheesecake.....:roll:

well........I'd only include bark that doesnt suck!!!!

judges I tell ya....

And very, very unfortunatley the above highlighted statement is true :tsk:. I have heard judges complain that they didn't get any burnt ends, or that they prefer spares (or BB's) or that they don't care for drummies or wings, etc, etc, ad nausium :mad:.
We're supposed to judge the entry "as presented by the cook" no more, no less.

Thats because there some CBJ's out there who could give a chit less. To them the CBJ class was just a free lunch. Their attitude is fark it, who gives a chit about the rules, I will mark it the way I want. Nobody is going to tell them how they should judge. If they love the taste of bark, a particular sauce or a particular part of the chicken and they don't get it.....you know what happens, the cook pays for it with a bad mark. They are punishing the cook because they didn't get what they want. They are in the minority, but they are out there. They are usually small minded people out for a Saturday afternoon BBQ lunch. They could care less about doing a good job and giving the cook an honest shake.

It's no different in every day life. Sometimes we deal with good people and sometimes we deal with people who try to take advantage of us. We have to learn to deal with it and move on because we are not going to change human nature.