I don't know. I'd forgotten about it. Someone that was there could probably answer that question.
Seperating Brisket
- Thread starter Peteg
- Start date
I don't know. I'd forgotten about it. Someone that was there could probably answer that question.
KC_Bobby
Babbling Farker
I asked the rep at M'Town about it (he said he was familiar with this thread) and he clearly said it was clearly illegal based on the rules as written.
I don't understand the need. My pork is still hot when I put it in the box.
I don't understand the need. My pork is still hot when I put it in the box.
This is probably a question for the BoD to look at. Everybody, thinks their interpretation of the rule as written is right.
While I hate to see the rules, that were intended to be simple and easy to follow, become that focused and narrow it's probably better than pitting neighbor against neighbor.
While I hate to see the rules, that were intended to be simple and easy to follow, become that focused and narrow it's probably better than pitting neighbor against neighbor.
Scottie
Quintessential Chatty Farker
ique
is One Chatty Farker
I asked Mike this question at a class I took recently and he seemed to think it was illegal to put processed pork back in a cooker.
Scottie
Quintessential Chatty Farker
The responses that I have received from folks in the know... Their direct quote was "illegal. illegal, illegal!!!!!"..... My thinking is if the reps are afraid to step up here and not respond, as I can understand why they don't or won't do it... That maybe the BOD should address this issue. Si I guess I can ask Mike that too. Although, my understanding is that this BOD meeting they might be a little busy with more pressing issues!!! :roll:
Jacked UP BBQ
Babbling Farker
like when the next meeting is
Scottie
Quintessential Chatty Farker
I was thinking... Which bar they were going to be going to after the meeting... :icon_shy
Of course I am just kidding.... As I respect my leaders...
CaptTable
Full Fledged Farker
Hey, Scottie, sorry we won't be seeing you in Kettering!
Just found this post and saw what it was about and yeah, I think you are right. The Board may have to make a ruling because I would have said "legal" My reasoning is that sauce is being added, then put back on to stay warm, not cook more. Sort of like a holding area.
NOW . . . will it cook more? Guess it depends on the temp of the cooker. I would think if it is the near the temp of the meat, it wouldn't cook more, just hold it. To me it goes back to the honor system, you could cheat and cook it more, but I really don't see how that would help to cook more after saucing.
I guess I may have to go back to Rep school after this:icon_smil.
Phillip
Just found this post and saw what it was about and yeah, I think you are right. The Board may have to make a ruling because I would have said "legal" My reasoning is that sauce is being added, then put back on to stay warm, not cook more. Sort of like a holding area.
NOW . . . will it cook more? Guess it depends on the temp of the cooker. I would think if it is the near the temp of the meat, it wouldn't cook more, just hold it. To me it goes back to the honor system, you could cheat and cook it more, but I really don't see how that would help to cook more after saucing.
I guess I may have to go back to Rep school after this:icon_smil.
Phillip
Vince RnQ
is Blowin Smoke!
Putting sauced pork that has been pulled, sliced, chunked or parted in any way back into a cooker would have the effect of glazing the meat because the cooker is a heat source.
I really don't get the mystery here.
Putting pork that has been parted in any way, shape or form, back onto any kind of heat source is cooking. You can call it whatever else you like but if there's an active heat source in the vessel into which you are placing the meat, it is cooking and that is a violation of the rule.
I really don't get the mystery here.
Putting pork that has been parted in any way, shape or form, back onto any kind of heat source is cooking. You can call it whatever else you like but if there's an active heat source in the vessel into which you are placing the meat, it is cooking and that is a violation of the rule.
Skip
is Blowin Smoke!
Again I wish I could be so organized to break down my butts and have time to throw it back in the cooker but I don't. :sad:
Placing a butt in the same cambro/cooler as a brisket is putting meat in a box with an active heat source. Therefore by your definition cooking
Keeping meat warm for turn in is cooking no matter what the heat source following that definition.
Or do you mean a fire tended and maintained at a certain temperature? If my box is shut down and only carrying residual heat from the prior cook is it an active heat source? What makes it different then my brisket and pork butt in the cambro?
I'm not looking to blur the rule but I feel that the current interpretation here is creating a stricter tolerance on a friendly rule. In essence this can't be answered without defining the word cooking. Thats why the reps are shying away.
ique
is One Chatty Farker
Ultimately you are probably correct. But where the confusion comes in is that is clearly NOT what the intention of the rule is. The intent is to keep cooks from cutting off a small tenderloin sized piece of pork and cooking that for the turn in.
There is literally no difference between taking a 1/2 alum of processed pork and putting it in a warm pit vs. putting in a warm cambro. I guess it seems silly that it is illegal (esp. when it is legal with brisket).
Vince RnQ
is Blowin Smoke!
Well, then I guess just to be safe, anyone who wants to keep their meat warm and be certain of not breaking the rules should just put their meat in a cooler/Cambor with a brisket to keep warm instead of the pit. Looks like you've found the perfect solution.
Vince RnQ
is Blowin Smoke!
Except for the fact that the rule states that you cannot cook a parted pork butt and there is no such rule for brisket.
Skip
is Blowin Smoke!
Actually no it is not a solution. As stated the use of a brisket as an "active heat source" in my Cambro I would be in violation of the rule as you interpret it. The presence of an "active heat source" is considered cooking by your definition. If my pork is parted and returned to the cambro I am in violation?
Smoke'n Ice
is one Smokin' Farker
Regardless of what the intent of the rule is or was, it is superseded by the servsafe rule as listed in the KCBS official rules. I personally do not know of a way to generate a temperature of 140 degrees F in any cambro without the introduction of a heat source. DO YOU? I would offer good odds that the BOD will come down on the side of holding temps must be 140 wheather parted or not. It becomes a legal issue because of food bourn illnesses. By the way, the high holding temperature refers to the air temperature in which the potentially hazardeous material is being held. The time and low end temp refer to the internal temperature of the potentially hazardeous material. The high temp of the reheat refers to the internal temperature.
g) After cooking, all meat
g) After cooking, all meat
:
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
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.
Vince RnQ
is Blowin Smoke!
The KCBS Board of Directors has ruled on the parted pork issue. Here is their statement from the Quick Notes From The Board July 15, 2009:
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.
This should pretty much end any speculation or misinterpretation of that rule.
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.
This should pretty much end any speculation or misinterpretation of that rule.
