My take on the Pork Rule

Several posters have alluded to food safety as a concern for the rule change. This would only be a problem if the product were held for more than 3 hours and 59 minutes in the unsafe zone of 41 degrees F to 135 degrees F (numbers a lot of us live by day after day.) The time from turn in to judging is less than 30 minutes and most cooks spend 20 minutes prepping their box. If turn in for pork is 1:30 then the pork can be taken off the cooker and placed on a table at 10 am and still be within the servsafe guidelines when the judge eats his sample. Just saying, that is a non-issue on this subject.

For the purist out there that want the product to be hot when the judge samples it, go judge a contest and see how hot the product is after being opened, judged for appearance, passed around and sample placed on tray and this is times six boxes. It is then sampled one at a time. I would venture to say that by the time the judge actually tastes the product, it will be close to ambient temp.
 
SirPorkaLot said:
Yes...I am the master of absurd, bold, all encompassing statements :biggrin1:

It is my opinion that KCBS lost their way long ago, and they no longer represent true BBQ.

Bold or absurd - it is truth, as I see it.

Now am I suggesting that no one in KCBS can cook BBQ?
No..that is not what i said.

However if there are 1,000 cooks that are actual pitmasters, and 10,000 cooks who are not, but would love to give KCBS their money...who do you think KCBS is pandering to?

Again it is my opinion, that what is on the competition circuit these days is a long ways from BBQ.

Candied ribs, cupcake chicken & grilled pork is not bbq for example, at least not the way I see it..and this was the point of my post. :redface:
Click to expand...

Living in Memphis since 1976, I didn't even know about KCBS until joining this site, and I NEVER suspected chicken was BBQ...















:bolt:
 
SirPorkaLot said:
Yes...I am the master of absurd, bold, all encompassing statements :biggrin1:

It is my opinion that KCBS lost their way long ago, and they no longer represent true BBQ.

Bold or absurd - it is truth, as I see it.

Now am I suggesting that no one in KCBS can cook BBQ?
No..that is not what i said.

However if there are 1,000 cooks that are actual pitmasters, and 10,000 cooks who are not, but would love to give KCBS their money...who do you think KCBS is pandering to?

Again it is my opinion, that what is on the competition circuit these days is a long ways from BBQ.

Candied ribs, cupcake chicken & grilled pork is not bbq for example, at least not the way I see it..and this was the point of my post. :redface:
Click to expand...

Then perhaps leave the "while you folks" comments out of your posts and direct it at KCBS.

I cook what needs to be cooked at competitions according to the rules provided, call it BBQ or not.
 
Truthfully, I think someone but a bug in someones ear about wanting to set sauce on the money muscle. That's my feeling.
 
I "don't have a Dog in this fight" since we retired from competing.

But, the problem seems to be the wording of the rule.

I did rule making for many years with a lot higher stakes.

The process should be:
What is the desired outcome?
How do we write that in "plain English" to achieve that outcome?

Seems to me that if KCBS (or whatever "regulator") would follow that simple process, all of the confusion would go away.

You will never stop the bitchers, complainers, second guessers, and whiners on the Internet, but the intent and the application of the rule should be clear if it is properly written.
And this one is clearly not.

Good Luck Y'All 8)

TIM
 
So when can we expect some indisputable clarification in writing? 2015?
 
Actually, I see what Dave did here, and I can appreciate that this is a first step. The old rule was controversial for some, although I think it was fine. But, by getting the vote to make this current rule, he has opened up discussion across all of the boards and venues, the feedback is coming in pretty clear and now, the board can address the issue without being tied to the idea of the old rule somehow being sacred.

I think this would be a good thing to do with all of the meats, let's start with chicken, and see if there is any traction for making some changes there as well.

I for one, though I am at best, a marginal participant, think Dave is to be thanked for finally getting the ball rolling.
 
Fat Freddy said:
Whatever the rule is, pork will still continue being a disaster for me.:cry:
Click to expand...

It's those small shoulders on the pig in your avatar. Try one like this

BombsAway_s.jpg


Taking a serious look at breeding these monsters. (blood stock only)
 
I was lucky enough to sit down with Dave (Compton) on Saturday night and pick his brain about the new rule.

His primary response was "Don't go making MM and tubes your inspection meat yet. It ain't 2014, and the rule isn't complete."
 
I don't really care about the rule change. Part of me says the rule change makes sense to make pork rules more like the other categories, but the other part of me says they put in the rule for a reason. I don't expect the rule change as written to change many outcomes. Those who currently score well in pork, will likely continue to do so.

I just don't understand those that insist:
1) The need to rewarm it to keep it safe. Like others have said, I can put ours in the cooler or cambro and take it out 5 hours later and it's steaming hot and requires cotton gloves to work.

2) Stating the need to part to complete their cooking method. Those who do either choose not to adhere to the current rules or are turning in what they consider subpar pork (yet people win/score well with what would be considered subpar pork all the time).

3) The need to part in order to set sauce? Why not put the entire pork butt back in the smoker if you to do so? I can think of a way to help the entire butt from drying out where that wouldn't be a concern.
 
Last edited:
I haven't competed in quite a while and hope to get back in to it later this year. That said, I find the new wording sad and another step away from BBQ (traditional BBQ if you will) embracing grilling, etc. and catering to people who haven't a clue as to what BBQ IS and isn't.

If they wanted to help food safety, then word it as such, but without the no parting rule it sure seems like this is now allowed (and endorsed).

Call me crazy (you wont be the first), but I've been rather disappointed as a judge lately with all the MM's coming across the table and chopped pork and pork strings sauced into oblivion. Mind you they make for beautiful presentations, but the taste is almost completely of sauce and along the way we've begun to lose what constitutes BBQ itself.
 
KC_Bobby said:
I just don't understand those that insist:

3) The need to part in order to set sauce? Why not put the entire pork butt back in the smoker if you to do so? I can think of a way to help the entire butt from drying out where that wouldn't be a concern.
Click to expand...

Have you never had a fully-cooked pork butt fall apart on you when you try to move it?

Personally, I think the best idea I saw was the idea someone posted that you be allowed to return parted pork to the cooker starting at 12:30. That's more than adequate time to set sauce, reheat, etc., but it is not enough to individual pieces. Hard to enforce? Yes, but not any harder than the current rule.
 
White Dog BBQ said:
Have you never had a fully-cooked pork butt fall apart on you when you try to move it?
Click to expand...

No, not with the method I use. I cook pork to 200.

That said, our pork has pretty much sucked the past 2 years after 3 years of doing very well ... so I clearly haven't adjusted the right direction.
 
I guess I still don't get it. It's possible to cook 2 butts and score well. I'm not God's gift but our pork was 13th TOY in 2011, and top 50 in 2012, oh, and 1st at the AR Invite in 2012. I didn't cheat, I didnt slop it up with sauce, and I had MM + Pulled in the box. I don't plan to change a thing unless I stumble upon something else that really WOWS me.
 
Lake Dogs said:
I haven't competed in quite a while and hope to get back in to it later this year. That said, I find the new wording sad and another step away from BBQ (traditional BBQ if you will) embracing grilling, etc. and catering to people who haven't a clue as to what BBQ IS and isn't.

If they wanted to help food safety, then word it as such, but without the no parting rule it sure seems like this is now allowed (and endorsed).

Call me crazy (you wont be the first), but I've been rather disappointed as a judge lately with all the MM's coming across the table and chopped pork and pork strings sauced into oblivion. Mind you they make for beautiful presentations, but the taste is almost completely of sauce and along the way we've begun to lose what constitutes BBQ itself.
Click to expand...

I like my pork to taste like, well...pork. This is just my personal preference, but I'd like the option to always taste the pork without sauce. If you do have a sauce, that REALLY compliments the meat and not mask it, serve it on the side.
 
deguerre said:
I like my pork to taste like, well...pork. This is just my personal preference, but I'd like the option to always taste the pork without sauce. If you do have a sauce, that REALLY compliments the meat and not mask it, serve it on the side.
Click to expand...

How would you do that, without a DQ?
 
Jorge said:
I won't tell you what I think, but I will tell you why I think some people interpret the new rule to mean Pork can be legally separated after inspection.

The 2013 rule contains language that requires pork to be cooked whole, as well as prevents meat from being returned to the cooker once it's parted. Both items were removed from the 2014 rule.

Regardless of intent, I don't think it's unreasonable for a cook to interpret that parting is now legal since language that prohibited the practice has been removed.
Click to expand...

VIDEO BELOW IN NEXT POST

Thanks Jorge. Allow me time for a serious response in this forum. Allow me to be constructive; but from a catering perspective.

The "Shake" is something I have been doing to do two reasons... one, increase the bark ratio, and two, allow for a large clientele to have a little miniature pork butt of their own (with a nice bark) usually served with veggies as the entree... and typically not as a sandwich. Plus they cook wicked fast. The Shake maybe a plus for someone who has nothing to lose.

Yes, I know its not a pork butt but a part of one. But these really come out GREAT.

So the way I read the rule as well, this dish sans the onions would work. Or not. No, not saying it will win, but ponder on the possibilities of choosing the perfect two out of 8 segments a typical but can offer?

Comments?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ModelMaker
Brefas sausage FAILURE!!!!
Replies
3
Views
112
thirdeye
thirdeye
cayenne
Do you ever SPLIT your Butts (Pork) for smoking?
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
Itsdone
I
L
School me on pork loin
Replies
13
Views
621
gfh
G
ModelMaker
New pork rule possibilities!!!
Replies
5
Views
419
midwest_kc
M
snadamo
Maiden Cook on OKJ Offset: Pulled Pork
Replies
8
Views
567
TheHojo
TheHojo
Back
Top