• working on DNS.. links may break temporarily.

Possible KCBS rules changes

Lake Dogs

Lake Dogs

Quintessential Chatty Farker
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
5,892
Reaction score
3,619
Points
0
Location
Lake Sinclair, GA
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
 
Lake Dogs said:
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.

The Dawg
Click to expand...
If I read this right you just said the meat looks better. So a judge is still just judging the meat and not how the parsley looks.

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.
 
Lake Dogs said:
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
Click to expand...

I've got no problem with garnish, I've got no problem doing without it either. IBCA garnish is a sheet of foil, that works. I like a box of parsley too, especially if there is a slight imperfection that could benefit from some camouflage.

I just don't see garnish being a big issue in the grand scheme of things right now.
 
Jorge said:
I've got no problem with garnish, I've got no problem doing without it either. IBCA garnish is a sheet of foil, that works. I like a box of parsley too, especially if there is a slight imperfection that could benefit from some camouflage.

I just don't see garnish being a big issue in the grand scheme of things right now.
Click to expand...



You sure your from Texas? I am not sure if I have ever heard a Texan say they like garnish..... :shock:
 
Ford said:
If I read this right you just said the meat looks better. So a judge is still just judging the meat and not how the parsley looks.

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.
Click to expand...

Ford, respectfully, if it looks better, then the garnish was taken into
account.
 
Scottie said:
You sure your from Texas? I am not sure if I have ever heard a Texan say they like garnish..... :shock:
Click to expand...

hehe, I take some heat for it.

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.
 
Jorge said:
hehe, I take some heat for it.

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.
Click to expand...

Making KCBS unique, definitely. It does. And, yes, the cook could opt
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.
 
Scottie said:
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.
Click to expand...

It absolutely does (first paragraph). That's a huge reason that I only
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?!...
 
Lake Dogs said:
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.
Click to expand...


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.
 
Scottie said:
then how can you cook and/or judge a MBA event?
Click to expand...

Cook? I cook because we have a pretty good sized one 3 miles from
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.
 
Last edited:
Merl said:
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
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info Merl. Good to see you the other night in Parker. Thanks for putting on the class! In your post above, you touched on one of the questions I failed to ask before the end of the night. ...and that is, is there a "refresher" course required, or is there a minimum number of contests per year that a CBJ needs to fulfill in order to maintain their CBJ status?

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
 
Scottie said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.

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.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: G$
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Gore
Top Ten BBQ Restaurants (my list)
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
PaPaQ
PaPaQ
K
Brisket dialed in, FINALLY!
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
Kevin James
K
O
New Years Throwdown Cook Thread - Gumbo
Replies
10
Views
1K
ericandcandi
E
rwalters
Pellet Cookers 101 - Part One
Replies
0
Views
535
rwalters
rwalters
T
My experience with a rental kitchen/commissary/ghost kitchen.
Replies
5
Views
322K
blackdogbbq21
B
Back
Top