Possible KCBS rules changes
I see Chatham Bill & others talking about potential rules changes, so I
thought I'd start a few... Bill is right, the judging lacks some to be desired (or a lot to be desired). 1. What about changing the scoring system from a 1-9 based to a 7-10 based like MBN (old MIM)? This would reduce/eliminate the variance problem and reduce the "old judges tough scoring" problem. Define what a 7 means, what an 8 means, 9 and then 10 likewise (ala. MBN). 2. Is it time to ditch garnish? There honestly is no way to ignore it. The others have it gone... Just a thought. |
I can't help but think getting rid of the garnish would be nice.
If it's really all about the meat, then it's all about the meat. It might look pretty, but how often do you normally eat BBQ off of a putting green? |
Lake Dog,
If you look back, KCBS had a 7, 8, 9 judging system, when the instruction was to begin at 9 and judge down. The cooks absolutely hated and the board listened. We removed the point to begin and asked judges to judge based upon the quality of what was presented to them. This actually appear (in my opinion) to be a superior system. I did not have a vote, as this was done before I was on the Board, but I support the action as a good step. It resolved may issues where were objectionable to cooks and judges alike. I believe that KCBS is not likely to go back unless some overwhelming reason was brought forward. The 987 did not work well in KCBS in the past. But things and times do change. I think the best response would be continued education for our CBJ's. As to garnish, that is a yearly question. This will be discussed by the BOD Friday at the BOD meeting. I will tell you this. KCBS is unique, and we there is an attitude from membership to celebrate what makes KCBS unique. KCBS only changes rules annually. The Rules meeting was held in January and will be presented to the Board in February for 2010. Please keep track of ideas and present them at the next rules meeting, which may be in KC at the 25th Annual Banquet. Yours in Que. (speaking only for myself) Merl |
Thanks Merl, didnt know about it previously being 7-9.... Agreed, continued
education for CBJ's will definitely help/reduce the problems. I must admit, the garnish allowed confuses me a little. Mind you, I've gotten all 8's and 9's in presentation, so this isn't a complaint. It's an honest question of "why is it allowed". I'll admit, BBQ looks much better garnished. It just does. That nice dark green background, "framing" the reddish/brown or reddish/yellow Q, wow what a beautiful color contrast. However, as much as we'd like to ignore it and say "it doesn't come in to play", there is no way that it can't, even if ever-so-slightly.... Respectfully, The Dawg |
Quote:
Maybe it's nitpicking but I like garnish. It improves presentation. Just read an article about a lady here in Grand Rapids MI who works with the local businesses to improve appearance of their product for photo sessions. Sounded a lot like making a good box. I thoight about hiring her for making some presentations of my food for my new website and brochures. I think the major grocery guys and top end restaurants have a bigger budget than I do. |
Quote:
I just don't see garnish being a big issue in the grand scheme of things right now. |
Quote:
You sure your from Texas? I am not sure if I have ever heard a Texan say they like garnish..... :shock: |
Quote:
account. |
Quote:
I think garnish is one of the things that makes KCBS unique, and the option still gives a cook the choice. In a lot of cases (but certainly not all)those that object to the use of garnish just don't want to mess with it, no matter what their stated objection is. |
Quote:
out and present it sans garnish. I'm guessing that there's probably not been a 1st place in any category in the last 12 months where someone had it sans garnish. Just a guess, but I'll bet 'ya a $1 on that one. As to those that object, for me, it's truly about the Q. I became accustomed to judging/seeing BBQ sans garnish (MIM/MBN). It struck me right off as both different and NICE, but nice in the "the green compliments the Q therefore it looks better" way, which therefore takes garnish into account. Mind you, I've done color for a living. Mine will never go in with a light green background, never. And, as a result, I've always gotten 8's and 9's in presentation. Some may, yes. For me, it's about judging Q against Q, nothing more, nothing less. It actually takes one of the things that a judge can screw up out of their hands. Lets not even begin to discuss whether having something un-cooked presents a health hazard to the judges... The guys who complain about judging should jump all over this. |
If you like the no nonesense from MBA, then why do they do the dog and pony show at teams sites? Why do they fluff up their smokers for presentation of the hog, ribs or shoulder with all of that garnish inthe smoer. I guarantee you that to buy grrens, fruits, et al for a MBN contests, costs way more than the garnsih does for KCBS.
Let's face it, garnsih separates the KCBS from other sanctioning bodies that came after the formation of KCBS. So for those that want the rules to change like the others. Then go and join the other sanctioning bodies. I for one like the KCBS garnish. |
Guys, from what I've seen in earlier discussions/debates/arguments regarding garnish,
the best argument for it is the "making KCBS unique". It absolutely does that. There's nothing wrong with that argument, either. However, to somehow think that it's even possible for a human being to not take it into account is like asking a guy to see a picture of a nude woman and not take her ... breasts ... into account. Can't happen. The green compliments the natural colors of BBQ and is a direct contrast to the white box. It therefore is a frame, and there is no way for the eye of a human not to take it into account. Perhaps if it's decided that it is to stay, consider rewording the rule so that it IS taken into account. At least we're being fair and honest. The arguments against it stack up pretty high. I'll just list a few: 1. judging something else other than Q 2. gives the judges something to mess up on (the way its currently worded) 3. introduces the remote possibility (I admit, it's remote) of e coli or other BAD things lesser arguments 4. gives new cooks/teams something else to fubar, refer to BBQ PitMasters for vivid 5. gives experienced cooks/teams something else to purchase (more $$$), and in my case more to literally throw away. Personally, and very respectfully to those who want/like the garnish, I'd like to see BBQ judged against BBQ and absolutely no way anything else can be taken into account. |
Quote:
compete in 1 MBN contest. The on-site is unnecessary and stupid. We're not discussing that, are we? I thought the topic up top was KCBS?!... |
Quote:
then how can you cook and/or judge a MBA event? |
The topic is about KCBS. But it seems like you are talking out both sides of your mouth right now? I am confused...
don't get me wrong, each sanctioing body has a place. But for those to come along and say that KCBS needs to change because of garnish? It's never going to happen folks. Not as long as Carolyn Wells has a part with the KCBS. |
Quote:
my house and 1/2 the town demands that I'm there. That's why. As to judge, I no longer judge except a few contests (not MBN) where I've worked with the organizers closely. Again, they'd have a fit if I weren't there. I'm just not interested in judging any longer. Does that answer your question? Again, I thought this was a KCBS discussion, and not a personal thing, nor a MBN thing. My personal preference as to style is FBA. > The topic is about KCBS. But it seems like you are talking out both sides of your mouth right now? I am confused... > > don't get me wrong, each sanctioing body has a place. But for those to come along and say that KCBS needs to change because > of garnish? It's never going to happen folks. Not as long as Carolyn Wells has a part with the KCBS. I frankly am of the opinion that KCBS is the premier sanctioning body. If you've read something different and I've confused you, I'm sorry. However, nothing is perfect. You cannot and never will please everyone. I know that, and it doesn't hurt my feelings if you disagree. However, I dont care for the personal jabs. That tends to tick me off. I didnt say that "KCBS needs to change". I'm merely suggesting that they consider it. Merl hit it dead on (the counter side), and I respect that, and I understand. But, I'll be honest, there's many more wonderful and unique things about KCBS than the need for garnish. LOTS. I dont think it would lose it's cache if it were to drop garnish. You might find it interesting that I've proposed to at very least 14 organizers that they either adopt KCBS rules and sanctioning and/or that they change from GBA and MBN to KCBS. One of the places that I referenced above is changing this coming year to KCBS "style" as a result of my efforts. They want a year of "lets try this" before they go the sanctioning route.... F Y I. I took CASI from 1 sanctioned cookoff in the state to now 8. I plan on doing similar for/with KCBS. |
Quote:
Also, the only minor complaint I had about last Friday night's CBJ class was that we were not really presented with a box that would have score 9's. So how is a judge supposed to know what "great" is if they have no sense of it going into a competition? I may have been a bit biased due to the fact that I have cooked competitions and have seen and tasted some winning entries. :wink: Your insight is appreciated. Kevin |
Quote:
It's just garnish, it's not rocket science. And yes, it IS fully optional, as we have seen teams submit naked boxes and be highly rewarded for them. The "contamination" and "waste" arguments are incredibly weak. When KCBS did respond to a contamination scare, the decision was reamed up one side and down the other -- no way to please everyone either way, it seems. Somebody with a fragile enough immune system to worry about possible contamination from garnish has absolutely no business judging a contest where food is prepared by unknown methods, in open conditions. And when it costs a cool thousand bucks to roll out of the driveway for one of these gigs, $12 for lavish garnish supplies is not even a factor. There are multiple other sanctioning bodies that are available if garnish is such a terribly onerous task. But as my last two years of box photos and score sheets show, it's just not about the lettuce. |
> Hear, hear.
> It's just garnish, it's not rocket science. And yes, it IS fully optional, as we > have seen teams submit naked boxes and be highly rewarded for them. I'll lose my $1 here (on the bet), but has there actually been a team who took 1st place in a category sans garnish? > The "contamination" and "waste" arguments are incredibly weak. Even I said it was weak (well, I think I said remote). > When KCBS did respond to a contamination scare, the decision > was reamed up one side and down the other -- no way to please > everyone either way, it seems. Yep, you cant win for losing sometimes. Agreed 100%. > Somebody with a fragile enough immune system to worry about > possible contamination from garnish has absolutely no business > judging a contest where food is prepared by unknown methods, > in open conditions. On the one hand, I agree with you. HOWEVER, coming from someone who is rarely sick with anything (maybe 1 in 10 years I'll get a little cold), I had the wonderful (sarcasm) experience of contracting salmonella about 20 years ago. I wont draw you a picture... Lets just say it's disgusting, nasty, and can kill someone weaker than I was. It was a complete fluke, but it happened. It's something for the BOD to consider (taking away that possibility). > And when it costs a cool thousand bucks to roll out of the driveway > for one of these gigs, $12 for lavish garnish supplies is not even a factor. I dont know about you, but we dont get decent greens around here. I pre-order mine 45 miles away, then drive to get them, and drive back. That $12 bunch of greens cost me another $10 in gas alone, not to mention my time in the evening (because I work M-F 6am-5pm). It's just one more thing on the list... > There are multiple other sanctioning bodies that are available if garnish is > such a terribly onerous task. It's not such an onerous task, and as I stated above, I'm of the opinion that KCBS is the premier sanctioning body. However, that doesn't mean that there's not room for improvement. Hell, even I can stand to lose a few pounds....... > But as my last two years of box photos and score sheets show, it's just > not about the lettuce. Never said it was. Plus, appearance score is weighted very low.... |
The prospect of contracting salmonella is far greater when patronizing local restaurants. Funny, HD is all over our butts at some contests, most usually in counties where restaurants are swarming with rats and cockroaches -- which I haven't seen in any BBQ camp.
Getting garnish is more difficult for you. So? Getting sauce and rub is more difficult for me -- we make our own. Hell, getting TO a contest is more difficult for us -- we drive up to 17 hours one way to find one. Everybody's got their own hurdles, and the only place the playing field is perfectly level is inside that 9x9 styrofoam box. As for improvement -- well, now we finally come to the "meat" of the matter. I find that as meat scores improve, concerns over garnish diminish. Nobody turns in 100% perfect meat every time not even Myron. Perhaps that's more difficult than arguing about garnish in the off-season. |
I'm all in favor of keeping garnish too. I like the fact we (KCBS) are unique and I'll support Carolyn in this as long as I'm around.
Yes, I'm aware that it is a meat contest. Someone said something to the effect that if the garnish makes the meat look better, a judge took the garnish into account. My response to that is basically "big deal". It's not a sauce contest either but our shiney, perfectly placed sauce on the meat makes the meat look better. Not burning it makes the meat look better. There are a lot of things we can do to make the meat look better. Why are we bashing garnish when it's only ONE thing we do to improve the appearance of our boxes? If we outlaw garnish, sauce better be next. See how ridiculous this is getting? |
First off, let me say that I just took my CBJ class and have no actual experience. Take what I say with a grain of salt...
I found it very confusing on how to judge based on one CBJ class. I am in no way saying my instruction was inadequate, just that the KCBS doesn't exactly do a good job telling you what the scoring system is supposed to mean. I understand that the CBJ is a ticket to a judging apprenticeship where you learn the finer details from the other experienced judges at comps. As a future competitor, I learned from the class that garnish is for more than good looks. It keeps the meat from sitting in a puddle of juices and sauce and keeps it from sliding around the box. Thus the final product will be better packaged before serving. I don't think garnish should affect scores, but hundreds of cook teams know that presentation will have a subtle effect on the perception of your product. I think the KCBS does then "require" garnish by default. |
Quote:
posed the question (reference at the very top): Is it time to ditch garnish? There honestly is no way to ignore it. The others have it gone... > Getting garnish is more difficult for you. So? You were the one making the statement. I was merely pointing out that your statement was off and false, at least in my case. I wasn't whining. I was, in essence, addressing your point. > Hell, getting TO a contest is more difficult for us -- we drive up > to 17 hours one way to find one. I believe ya, and we can't do it. No way, no how. Dont have the luxury of that much time away from work. If we cant get to it within a 2 or 3 hour drive, we can't get there... But, that's us. That's about 99% of the reason why I work with city leaders, project managers, etc who organize these so as to *grow* more cookoffs (because I enjoy competing and can't drive that far). > Getting sauce and rub is more difficult for me -- we make our own. I special order the meat, and I have all the spices/rubs ordered and delivered (Pendereys, etc). Come to think of it, I cannot think of a competition we've competed in within the last 5+- yeas where we used ANY consumable product purchased at the local store (other than chuck roast we use in chili). No biggie. Always make my own sauce, but I'm trying a combination of Blues Hog & BH Tennesse Red for giggles... No local store carry that. Hell, I dont think it's carried anywhere in the state... Always my own rub, using Pendereys and Mild Bills spices (I'm not in Texas, they ship them to me). What, is this now a "compare who jumps through more hoops to compete" thing? That's silly, unnecessary, and completely off topic. Wait. My bad. I use chicken thighs purchased at the local store for the KCBS cookoff. My bad. Ok, chicken thighs and chuck roast used in chili. That's it. Not even so much as black pepper is purchased here.... I merely asked "Is it time to ditch garnish?". Somehow this was mistaken as an assault to the very foundation of KCBS. It's not, nor was it intended to be. It's not even a gripe about ordering and fetching greens. It's not. I'm done. I'm tired of defending myself vs. talking about a topic. Really. Simply this: The way the rules read (for judges), it's impossible to do what they're being asked. As a result (of this and other stuff), many teams either despise judges or the judging process (not me). I posed a question as to whether it should be reconsidered. No more; no less. I'm done trying to discuss something when it's apparent very few will actually discuss the topic. I'll drop it. Matter of fact: Moderator, is there a way I can delete this whole topic/thread? |
Quote:
No offense, just sayin... -Gowan |
Quote:
the judges are instructed. Regarding garnish, they cannot abide by this. It cannot be humanly done. So, I asked, either consider dropping the garnish, or please reword the rules/instructions. |
Quote:
I am not a KCBS profit for the state. Will never be. I'm work with promoters and event coordinators and assist them in which style to choose and why one makes sense vs. another. Y'alls focus obviously has been N GA. Finally there's Waynesboro and Oconee in the central part of the state. They're new, and small, and wonderful, and I had nothing to do with either. I was merely trying to explain to folks that I'm not anti-KCBS. That's it. With any luck though, we'll have a few more KCBS cookoffs here in the center of the state in the next few years. And, my appologies, the damned new Macon one went MBN vs. KCBS. I found out about them too late... Still working on that one. Maybe a joint sanctioning in the future... No offense taken. Like I said, I didnt claim to be KCBS profit, I'm not a KCBS profit, and I never will be a KCBS profit. |
Quote:
|
Moderator, is there a way I can delete this whole topic/thread?
|
Quote:
friendly give and take). |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Thanks. I didnt mean to urinate on folks' wheaties. I didnt mean to call into question the very foundation of KCBS. As I said more than a few times, I think KCBS is the premier BBQ sanctioning body. I happen to think that good debate is a good thing, and now is the time to debate topics such as this, not during a season. I actually like the argument of it (garnish) being a unique characteristic of KCBS. However, other than this, noone has presented any other argument. When they do, they're basically saying "rules dont matter than they cannot be enforced." To that I say "well then, how about changing the rules so that they can be enforced". Every sanctioning body has it's *issues*, and the others that I'm familiar with have MANY more serious issues than KCBS. I was merely posing a question. I will not defend this any longer, and I will certainly not defend myself any longer, as frankly it's unnecessary to do so. |
Quote:
I agree Jorge. I think everyone remained calm and there was no name calling or other things that bring a thread down. Let's face it, I believe that Lake Dog wants KCBS to conform to what the sanctioning bodies have done? I may be corrected on this, but I know that for sure FBA was formed in the last 10 years and baiscally modeled their body after the KCBS, except for no garnish. Now maybe some sanctioning body in Texas was before the KCBS, but I do not think any of them are still in existence. I don't think that IBCA is older, as I want to say that Lynn stated it was after the KCBS was formed. Garnish in KCBS for their blind judging is unique and that is what separates KCBS from other sanctioning bodies. I guess the way that I llok at it is, if you don't like it, don't cook KCBS contest. Or in the alternative, don't use garnish, as it is clearly stated int he rules that garnish is not required. But to make call to arms over it, I am not sure if that is correct either... ***Please understand that this post was in no way any slight to any other sanctioning body. |
Quote:
Respectfully: > Garnish in KCBS for their blind judging is unique and that is > what separates KCBS from other sanctioning bodies. While it is unique, IMHO you think too little of KCBS if this is what separates KCBS from the others... KCBS is a superior organization, with SUPERIOR judging, process, flow, etc. SUPERIOR. None close. MIM was (IMHO), but not there. Then they decided to ditch it, and so what was left became MBN... I digress. > if you don't like it, don't cook KCBS contest. I imagine those who dont like it dont cook in it... What's your point? Me/us perhaps? In what words above did you perhaps derive that I or my teammates dont "like it"? If I didnt like it, I wouldnt care enough to pose the question in the first place. Matter of fact, the farthest contests for me to compete are those sanctioned by KCBS. We go there because we enjoy them MORE, not less. > Lake Dog wants KCBS to conform There! You articulated it. Thanks. Strangely, I hate conformity itself, because ordinarily conformity breeds bland. It's usually conformity for the sake of conformity. So, I worded my initial question wrong when I stated the others are doing it... Conformity be damned (IMHO). HOWEVER, I am asking that they either re-word the instructions/rules so as to a) embrace the darned difference that garnish brings and get it in there, or b) remove it altogether, as there is no way a human can judge it and not take it into account (the way the rules state it today). > But to make call to arms over it, I am not sure if that is correct either... Exactly. I'm not! Didn't! Never did (call to arms). That's what annoyed me. I'm being raked over the coals for no reason, other than apparently this is a sacred issue. My bad. Sarcasm <with a humoristic intent> coming: There. There's another suggestion. Note the rules in the rule book that are sacred and question the foundation of the organization. That way we'll know to not ask the question. -The Dawg |
Quote:
Your point about most KCBS events being in the northern half of the state is well taken. This isn't by design so much as circumstance. With the long established MIM/MBN shows, FBA gaining traction and now GBA popping up to offer an MBN-like all pork format on a KCBS budget there has been a lot of competition for sanctioning down South. As for the Macon show, I doubt there is much chance of you swaying those folks since they have been tapped to become the new MBN Championship event in place of Memphis in May starting this year. I cooked there last fall with JOS (my first MBN experience) and I have to say I loved the showmanship aspect of the contest! Not much chance of my regular team doing whole hog though, since we are sponsored by Primo Grills. Oh and sorry you felt like you were blasted for your initial post. These forums can be pretty contentious at times, and when you put up an opinion post the two best strategies seem to be either to be prepared to defend against all comers or just let your statement stand alone and not address any rebuttals. The good news is will tone down once the weather improves and everyone is busy cooking again instead of debating. Aloha, -gf |
Quote:
|
Quote:
takes a 2nd large cooker, one that I'm just not ready to fund. I enjoy the on-site, but as an opinion, I think it's unnecessary. It does add a nice difference though... The other side is that it requires to cook a lot more meat, especially if you plan to make finals. I loved the panic seen by Trigg & whats-his-name on Pitmasters when they made rib finals at Vienna... I'll be darned, the only reason we didnt see you in Macon was $$$. We just didnt have it this year. 2010 will be better, but the team has put that one on our "wait and see what happens" list. Hey, if you liked that event, you may enjoy the MBN one in Milledgeville. This is the one I get shafted into cooking. Usually about 35 teams+-. Late October. Will you guys be at Lake Oconee in September? That's now our #1 event, in an RV park on the lake. Being a Lake Sinclair type-o-guy, we dont get a lakeside spot. However, it's a wonderful venue, with LOADS of space for everyone. Matter of fact, if there is one problem with it, we're almost too spread out.... KCBS, and Jay Weems does a GREAT job with organizing it. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
j/k :lol: |
I'm sorry, KCBS is not unique in the garnish area, PNWBA, which started at the same time, also allows garnish and uses a similar set of rules for judging, etc.
In TX most carry a paper towel roll to turn in to sop up the juices. Aint that grand, something has to keep the foil from getting soiled. I have judged in TX and the boxes looked like a jumbled mess as the meat slides around and gets dumped. Of course, they don't judge appearance as the only score given is a 2 to 10. The instructions are if it looks like BBQ, smells like BBQ, tastes like BBQ, then it must be BBQ. Can't have no sauce or juice, must be dry as da bone. Score it 2 to 10. Come cook if you want, I'll take KCBS/PNWBA with all the faults. |
The question of did any one win a category with out garnish recently didnt Smokin Cracker do that last year maybe even a G.C. remember now I have a short memory.
|
Quote:
pnmbw - 1991 |
I wish they'd get rid of garnish it's a waste of money, for the team that is.
Usually it's just thrown away. |
My personal take is garnish is good, but kale should be allowed. It's the perfect garnish - looks great, cheap, simple to prep and it takes a blowtorch to wilt the stuff. I use it exclusively in non-sanctioned contests and it takes less than three minutes for me to build a kale box, a fraction of the time required for parsley.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
my boxes look good i hired the local landscaper to get them ready. I too was a new team( ocean county pig assassins) at the 06 guitarbeque and was unsure of what to put in the box for garnish. i think we added a few sprigs of parsley in fear of being disqualified for some silly garnish rule. i think we took a 4th in brisket and 6th in chicken. not bad for 3 drunks cooking on a 25 dollar smoker who never smoked a piece of meat in their lives. if it werent for the old douche next to us who misinformed us on the way we should garnish our boxes we probably would have done better. if you disagree your full of s---! If it were about the meat and only the meat then there would be no parsley in the box. Why is it every time a new suggestion comes out people jump all over it? probably because half the people who compete are not cooks simply people who read a piece of paper the entire contest that tells them when to flip it when to spray it when to take a leak. god forbid there is a change then they have to go back and revise their BBQ schedule. like you i laugh all the way up to the stage to collect the check but i wish i didnt have to sit and pick parsley instead of drinking my vodka. well i got to go i have to go check out what evryone is crying about in the "should we let LP cookers into the kcbs events" section |
KCBS should have an onsite judge. Thats all I'm saying.:biggrin:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
and BBQs your BFF too, right? This chit sounds mighty familiar. :confused: |
Quote:
|
You guys are starting to make my head hurt.
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:01 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
2003 -2012 © BBQ-Brethren Inc. All rights reserved. All Content and Flaming Pig Logo are registered and protected under U.S and International Copyright and Trademarks. Content Within this Website Is Property of BBQ Brethren Inc. Reproduction or alteration is strictly prohibited.