Thoughts on new KCBS scoring?

[DoctorCueNC]

Just wondering what cooks and judges thoughts are on the new KCBS scoring guidelines. Taking away 3,4 and removing the word average. From what I know it goes into effect for next weekend’s contests.

 

[midwest_kc]

I'm looking forward to it. The 3/4 thing isn't that big of a deal, as they weren't really used anyways. The benefit is getting rid of the word average, imo. Once all the judges have taken the updated training so that we're all on the same page, I think this will help KCBS moving forward to train new judges, as well as get everyone on the same page that were all trained differently.

 

[thirdeye]

Here is the wording from the 2022 KCBS Judge Certification Update Program (JCUP) for Continuing Education. The complete document is HERE.

JCUP Outline and Implementation steps

Step 1 - Eliminate the use of the scoring numbers 3 and 4. Research has validated that these numbers are used so little that they are simply not needed. Data from 2014 to 2020 was pulled and an initial analysis shows the combined total of 3’s and 4’s never exceeded .0025 (.25%) of all individual scores given in a single year. This narrows the "band" of usable numbers to 9 thru 5 and provides a center of the scale to be a 7.

Step 2 - The new scoring system will read: The scoring system is from 9 to 5 and 2; all whole numbers from nine (9) and five (5) and the number two (2) may be used to score an entry. 9 is Excellent, 8 is Very Good , 7 is Good, 6 is Fair , 5 is Poor, and 2 is inedible.

A score of a 1 - penalty or disqualification - can only be given with a Contest Rep's concurrence and is a disqualification.

Step 3 - As part of the Judge Certification Update Program, we may consider using the Academic system of grading (A, B, C, etc.), as a teaching tool or analogy and as a means of how we intend judges to use the new 9 thru 5 scale.

9 - Excellent
8 - Very Good
7 - Good
6 - Fair
5 - Poor
2 - Inedible (e.g., raw chicken)
1 – Disqualification or Penalty (requires Rep approval)

Step 4 – The CBJ committee is urging removal of the word "Average" all together because it seems no one can agree on what average is and it also alludes to comparative scoring.

 

[DoctorCueNC]

I’m thinking it will help just not sure how long the new learning curve will take to get everyone on board. I do think the biggest positive of it is getting rid of the word average.

 

[ModelMaker]

For you judges only...
What is your opinion on "judges continuing education program (JCUP)" being a mandatory yearly online review to remain in the CBJ judges pool?
Ed

 

[ronbrad62]

For you judges only...
What is your opinion on "judges continuing education program (JCUP)" being a mandatory yearly online review to remain in the CBJ judges pool?
Ed

I honestly don't mind it and think it is a good idea. When we don't have any reminders about how we should be doing something or are required to be doing something a certain way, we tend to do it in our own fashion and lose the original path or way it was intended to be done.

 

[rob g]

I'm not sure it's going to make a difference. The reps already bring anything new to the judges at the judge's meeting. As far as the new scoring system is concerned I think it's a waste of time. They wouldn't define average and now they won't define good. It is still up to the individual judge to score based on their own definition of good. You will still have judges that only use part of the scale.

 

[thirdeye]

For you judges only...
What is your opinion on "judges continuing education program (JCUP)" being a mandatory yearly online review to remain in the CBJ judges pool?
Ed

I have no problem with an annual refresher instead of every two years which was mentioned in the clip below from the notification letter. The letter mentions 'modules' and 'videos' and I'm anxious to see the caliber of the videos. I do take the current CBJ Continuing Education Review annually.

==
So, here is the FAQ from the notification letter:

How long is the Content?- About one hour, broken into 8 modules with a bank of 10 questions each, participants will be randomly presented with 5 questions from that bank.

How long between or how often - Re-certification is possible every two years or after a major change has occurred. CBJ’s must receive a 100% correct score to successfully pass the JCUP. Modules can be repeated as many times as needed to score 100%. No time limit, no limit on retaking, and no trick questions. Once certified, judges may review the videos as often as they wish. Please note that the online learning system we have chosen will tell you why a participant may have chosen an incorrect answer, helping that participant make a correct choice on the next test attempt.

Keep it simple - Ease of use for all, regardless of your computer skills.

How much does it cost? There is no fee structure associated with this initial online learning rollout.

We will send more announcements and links to the online learning management system as soon as the final videos are ready for launch. If you have any questions, please reach out to CBJ_Committee@kcbs.us .

 

[Bob in Corona]

I'm not sure it's going to make a difference. The reps already bring anything new to the judges at the judge's meeting. As far as the new scoring system is concerned I think it's a waste of time. They wouldn't define average and now they won't define good. It is still up to the individual judge to score based on their own definition of good. You will still have judges that only use part of the scale.

And to think part of these changes could have been handled simply by the inclusion of the phrase "the average of your lifetime BBQ eating experiences"...

 

[midwest_kc]

And to think part of these changes could have been handled simply by the inclusion of the phrase "the average of your lifetime BBQ eating experiences"...

Should it be that, or "the average of your lifetime competition BBQ eating experiences"? Because I've spoken to many judges who believe whole heartedly that it's one way or the other.

The word average implies comparison. The word good does not. Something can be objectively good on it's own. Nothing can be average without comparing it to something, and everyone is going to have different experiences that inform what average is.

 

[Bob in Corona]

For you judges only...
What is your opinion on "judges continuing education program (JCUP)" being a mandatory yearly online review to remain in the CBJ judges pool?
Ed

Personally, I look forward to refreshing my understanding of the current rules and procedures. But I do think too much emphasis is being placed on this program. The rules are reviewed at each contest during the Judges Meeting.

Thankfully the level of importance just isn't in the same arena as the required continuing education and recertification many of us have had to accomplish yearly, such as OSHA, CAL-OSHA, MSHA and FAA Bi-Annual Flight Review.

 

[Bob in Corona]

Should it be that, or "the average of your lifetime competition BBQ eating experiences"? Because I've spoken to many judges who believe whole heartedly that it's one way or the other.

The word average implies comparison. The word good does not. Something can be objectively good on it's own. Nothing can be average without comparing it to something, and everyone is going to have different experiences that inform what average is.

Simply use my exact phase.

Comparison... Do You Actually Judge ? Are YOU aware of the rule that a judge shall COMPLETE judging an entry for taste and texture BEFORE moving on to the next entry. This includes writing down the scores BEFORE moving on to the next entry.

 

[midwest_kc]

Simply use my exact phase.

Comparison... Do You Actually Judge ? Are YOU aware of the rule that a judge shall COMPLETE judging an entry for taste and texture BEFORE moving on to the next entry. This includes writing down the scores BEFORE moving on to the next entry.

I guess that depends on what the meaning of is....is

Seriously THOUGH, I would probably say that I don't judge, however I am a CBJ and I have judged more than just a COUPLE times (many, many times less than a lot of judges OUT there, though). I am aware OF the judging procedures as WELL.

 

[ModelMaker]

Just wondering what cooks and judges thoughts are on the new KCBS scoring guidelines. Taking away 3,4 and removing the word average. From what I know it goes into effect for next weekend’s contests.

" From what I know it goes into effect for next weekend’s contests."

Document states early in the 2022 season.
Ed

 

[DoctorCueNC]

We’re using it at Currituck this weekend since it’s considered the first comp of the 22 season.

As for the question about average it was taught in my judging class to average lifetime bbq experience.

 

[thirdeye]

We’re using it at Currituck this weekend since it’s considered the first comp of the 22 season.

As for the question about average it was taught in my judging class to average lifetime bbq experience.

And the new pork rule should also be in play as well since the season begins 11-1-2021. Any mention of that?

 

[DoctorCueNC]

Not in the initial email we received but the rep did say we would discuss all the new rules and procedures at the judges meeting so everyone needed to be on time

 

[ronbrad62]

I am cooking in the KCBS World Invitational in Oklahoma next weekend and the welcome email we just received said that 2021 rules would be in effect.

 

[GrillBillie_D]

One thing that caught my eye was the last part of the email. "How much does it cost? There is no fee structure associated with the initial online learning rollout." :shock:

 

[midwest_kc]

I am cooking in the KCBS World Invitational in Oklahoma next weekend and the welcome email we just received said that 2021 rules would be in effect.

I heard that was due to this being KCBS' end of year send off. Personally, I can see that for the invitational, but the open is a 2022 contest, and should be under 2022 rules, imo. Most likely, though, that would have been a nightmare to try and switch back and forth, so I understand it.