982 in chicken at the Royal

The reps review all the cards turned in by the table captains before they give them the ok to clear the table. A 2 or 3 would definitely be checked by the rep at the time. An undercooked piece of chicken would rate a 2 for tenderness if the judge spit it out but could have a good flavor. I've had under cooked chicken while the rest of the table had no issues.

Could be an old judge? I believe in the early 2000's a score of 2 was for "bad" instead of inedible.

They had to think it was undercooked, but gave you the benefit of the doubt on taste after biting it.

I hope any judge who saw pink knew about doing a napkin blot test. :shocked: They run over "well-cooked chicken could still look pink near the bone" in the recording/reading that happens before the oath. Unless it ended up being like one contest I was at where they gave us black napkins for wiping our fingers with. Before we got food, I had to speak up to the TC and ask, "how do we check for blood with a black napkin?"

That's an odd score. My guess is either what Brad and others have suggested, or a keying error.

I noticed yesterday that my Ribs and Pork ended up on the same table. I didn't think they would allow that, and certainly it is a huge coincidence in a field that size.

midwest_kc said:

That's an odd score. My guess is either what Brad and others have suggested, or a keying error.

I noticed yesterday that my Ribs and Pork ended up on the same table. I didn't think they would allow that, and certainly it is a huge coincidence in a field that size.

Click to expand...

In the open, they don't do any sort of box switching/table matching because the odds of getting placed on the same table are so small. Unfortunately, small odds don't necessarily mean it won't happen.

You had very consistent scores for appearance and taste but the two actual 7's in tenderness appear to indicate a wider range in that criteria... so I could see a data entry rather than a 2. However let's say the judge did get a drumstick that he or she interpreted as undercooked. The judge should have known about the napkin test, but could have been confused as to how to score. The table captain manual contains some Rep advisories in the form of Q&A, and the snip below deals with undercooked meat, so the TC should have been aware of these rules. But the Rep who would have seen a "2" certainly would have been able to offer guidance.

From the TC Manual:
Under Cooked Meat Question: Uncooked meat doesn’t seem to violate any rules. How do you score an entry if a judge refuses to eat their sample because it is undercooked? Opinion: Under cooked meat poses a health problem and shouldn’t be eaten. A score of two (2) through nine (9) should be given for taste and tenderness by the judge(s) who refuse to eat the entry. This is not a disqualification and therefore should not be given a one (1). Assuming the entry has already been scored for appearance, do not go back and change the score given for appearance. NOTE: It’s not uncommon for smoked chicken to be pink, especially near the bone. This should not be confused with undercooked meat. Use the “napkin” test (place paper towel against the meat/bone; if it comes away pink, or red, it is undercooked.) February 17, 2006

Amendment to Raw Chicken Advisory: When a judge finds a piece of chicken not completely cooked and verifies it via the napkin test, the rep will not request the judge find an area cooked in order to score it for taste or tenderness. The judge should simply be instructed to utilize the definitions on the score card and score accordingly. April 14, 2010

NoNotTheDuo said:

In the open, they don't do any sort of box switching/table matching because the odds of getting placed on the same table are so small. Unfortunately, small odds don't necessarily mean it won't happen.

Click to expand...

Yeah, my chicken and ribs hit the same table too.....

If it was a 2, the TC should have brought this to the attention of the reps. and then should of had a conversation with the judge. To follow up properly, the reps. should have notified you or encouraged the judge to write a comment card or both. My gut tells me a transposition error but, the scores should be double checked when keyed into the scoring system...Perhaps a true anomaly unfortunately.

At one time you could request to see a copy of the score cards. I don't know if that's still the case or not. If it matters enough to you, you could at least potentially rule out a data entry error.

Probably a keying error. 8 and 2 are oppositely arranged on computer keyboards vs. telephone keypads. Probably a mistake by the person keying it in. If it were a normal contest, it would have probably been caught by the rep.

NoNotTheDuo said:

In the open, they don't do any sort of box switching/table matching because the odds of getting placed on the same table are so small. Unfortunately, small odds don't necessarily mean it won't happen.

Click to expand...

Do they number switch? That's important to the double blind system.

midwest_kc said:

Do they number switch? That's important to the double blind system.

Click to expand...

They do not.

I doubt it was a keying error. I'd say the judge(whether they were right or not) thought your chicken was under cooked.

tduffy said:

They do not.

Click to expand...

They don't number switch after turn in for the Open, but IIRC the boxes assigned to you are not your spot number. Is that right tduffy? I think they are offset by some set number for everyone so that if a judge were to look up the Last Call Heroes spot number they wouldn't be able to know if they got the box at their table.

I can confirm they don't match the spot number. I have to think of that every year, as it never matches.

They use a complex algorithm. Your space number plus ten. If the judges were smart enough to piece that one together they’d spend their Saturday doing something other than judging BBQ. JK, I love you all!

They’ll probably have to add 20 next year because I just unearthed the Royal Double Blind Rosetta Stone to cipher the complex computation.