Brownie Pan for Chicken

[deepsouth]

it actually looks like a plate of wedding meatballs on steroids to me.

 

[Carnivorous Endeavors BBQ]

Wow, reading this thread enlightens me to getting appearance, taste & texture scores of
998, 999, 998, 998, 988, 677. I've even sat next to a judge who commented " i just hate those little chicken balls, as soon as i see them i know i won't like that chicken" WOW!!!

 

[Lake Dogs]

Wow, reading this thread enlightens me to getting appearance, taste & texture scores of
998, 999, 998, 998, 988, 677. I've even sat next to a judge who commented " i just hate those little chicken balls, as soon as i see them i know i won't like that chicken" WOW!!!

While if they were little red balls of luv, I understand the 6 in appearance (although I probably would've given a 7), the 77 in tenderness and taste seem unwarranted, and have NOTHING to do with appearance score (as we all know).

 

[atvalaska]

Up here where things are big... the chicks are big, and there is no way to get "12 "in a box (like the pic above) save the nuggets for mickey D's....... imo bty ; way chicken ain't round or square., and 25% of the score goes for looks...50% for mr tasty !

 

[swamprb]

Where a lot of people hate chicken, I embrace it! I don't always enjoy prepping it before a contest, but there is something theraputic about it for me. Last year we seemed to do pretty well in our scores, but this year, new teamate/cooker we tried a lot of different styles of cooking and the judges haven't cared much for my offerings. I was all about the combo box and included sliced skin on breast with thighs and sometimes wings. But after a few disappointing results we decided to dumb it down and just do thighs. Personally, I feel the new CBJ's probably go nuts for the pillow thighs or cupcake chicken and the experienced judges sneer and want chicken that looks like barbecued chicken. I say that because we get comment cards and when I was dabbling in the boneless pillows, I would bring extras around for TC's and helpers and heard reports of "someone is doing weird things to chicken". Tried it, got the hint, took the message and moved along. I'm not knocking it, its always good to learn as many styles to cook in this game we play.

 

[Q-Dat]

It seems from reading this, and other threads, that there are just judges that hate this style of chicken. I can't imagine a scenario where a judge would score down for natural looking chicken. They might not be blown away by just looking at it, but they won't hate it.

Taking this into consideration, I am going to refrain from making "chicken balls". Yes they can get you alot of 9's, but it would seem that they can also get you some 5's and 6's. And since we are talking about appearance, I have decided to be satisfied with some 7's and 8's. With the KCBS scoring set up the way that it is, you don't need all 9's on appearance. It would be nice, but the scoring is weighted so heavily towards taste and tenderness that if you nail these and get decent appearance scores you should stand a pretty good chance, unless I am mistaken.

I got some good advice recently that basically said that many judges are not looking for what they can love about your food. They are looking for something to dislike.

This person told me that you want the judge to bite into your entry and say "there's nothing wrong with that"

 

[RX2006JE]

While I agree that it does start to look like nuggets instead of a thigh, they do have for the most part uniformity. Everywhere I have read and have heard from judges is that they want to see uniformity. Now I have done chicken both ways and the "nuggets" have scored the best for me not scoring out of the top 3. For me it seems that the judges want uniformity, which is more difficult to attain if at all in "normal" bbq chicken, but when they see the heavily trimmed uniform thighs comments are made that "it doesn't look like chicken." Ribs are hard to find that have straight bones and if you turn in some that are cut crooked because of the way the bones curve you get scored down because they are not uniform although that is traditional presentation for ribs. So my question is do the judges want meat to look like meat "tradidional" bbq or something that is sculpted and pleasing to the eye. I have seen when things look like meat they have been scored down for not being uniform enough and when things are formed not sculpted, as that would be a DQ, they are also scored down for not looking like the initial product or preconceived notions. It all comes down to a personal preference and that will never change unless the judging is not done by a person.

 

[Rub]

I got some good advice recently that basically said that many judges are not looking for what they can love about your food. They are looking for something to dislike.

Unfortunately I think this is becoming a trend with some of the "master judges" out there. It's a terrible way to go, and one that needs to be stopped IMO.

That said, I always thought it's not supposed to matter what the judge thinks chicken is supposed to look like that affects scores. Preconceived notions are a big no-no, correct? So why all the comments stating something like "...if I see chicken balls I'm giving it a 5 automatically..." Unless I'm missing something - and I may be - this type of judging is BS and incorrect, and should be addressed. The judge is in need of remediation and a refresher. Please correct me if this is incorrect.

 

[Lake Dogs]

Using no pre-conceived notions, score this (below):

Remember, no pre-conceived notions:

How would you score this, in appearance, in the brisket entry:

Now, what if it came in the pork entry:


9's? Now now, no pre-conceived notions!

 

[Smokedelic]

Using no pre-conceived notions, score this (below):

Remember, no pre-conceived notions:

How would you score this, in appearance, in the brisket entry:

Now, what if it came in the pork entry:


9's? Now now, no pre-conceived notions!

Hopefully, the first judge at the table would inform the table captain that they are fairly certain that the entry isn't brisket/pork. If you would give an appearance score to this entry for the brisket or pork category then you have no business being in the judging tent because this is obviously a chicken entry and shouldn't be scored for pork or for brisket.

 

[Gadragonfly]

Using no pre-conceived notions, score this (below):

Remember, no pre-conceived notions:

How would you score this, in appearance, in the brisket entry:

Now, what if it came in the pork entry:


9's? Now now, no pre-conceived notions!

I'll bite......I've seen pork that was pulled and then formed, probably using an ice cream scoop, and placed in the box in 6 or 8 mound. There is no reason that brisket, pulled, couldn't be done the same. If it was presented to me and looked as clean as that box, as well organized, uniform size, moist, nice color....I'd give it a 9. -Julie

 

[Rub]

Using no pre-conceived notions, score this (below):

Remember, no pre-conceived notions:

How would you score this, in appearance, in the brisket entry:

Now, what if it came in the pork entry:


9's? Now now, no pre-conceived notions!

If this box came across as a legal pork or brisket entry, I would have to think that the cook was very clever, put a lot of time and effort into making it look neatly presented, and probably score it a 9. And IF toads had wings they wouldn't bump their a$$eS when they hop.

But the point is that some judges have the mindset that they would automatically score it down because it doesn't look traditional enough. Personally I think it is well within the realm of what chicken can look like and is commonly accepted in bbq contests. To penalize the team because a judge personally doesn't agree with the style is wrong, IMO. If I submit a Cadillac cut on my ribs and a judge doesn't like the look of it and prefers single bones/single meat, should the team be penalized? Heck no. As someone said earlier, judges are supposed to judge what is presented to them. If a team wants to submit trimmed thighs, you judge them as trimmed thighs. The category doesn't state that chicken must look as it does when you get it from the market. There is no legitimate basis for scoring down for that for appearance, IMO.

 

[swamprb]

If I submit a Cadillac cut on my ribs and a judge doesn't like the look of it and prefers single bones/single meat, should the team be penalized? Heck no. As someone said earlier, judges are supposed to judge what is presented to them.

But when you do Hollywood or Cadillac rib entries and the judges ding you for "uneven knife cuts" because they don't get it, you have to scratch your head and wonder if they are even trained to distinguish the different cuts. I believe most are not.

 

[Lake Dogs]

If this box came across as a legal pork or brisket entry, I would have to think that the cook was very clever, put a lot of time and effort into making it look neatly presented, and probably score it a 9. And IF toads had wings they wouldn't bump their a$$eS when they hop.

But the point is that some judges have the mindset that they would automatically score it down because it doesn't look traditional enough. Personally I think it is well within the realm of what chicken can look like and is commonly accepted in bbq contests. To penalize the team because a judge personally doesn't agree with the style is wrong, IMO. If I submit a Cadillac cut on my ribs and a judge doesn't like the look of it and prefers single bones/single meat, should the team be penalized? Heck no. As someone said earlier, judges are supposed to judge what is presented to them. If a team wants to submit trimmed thighs, you judge them as trimmed thighs. The category doesn't state that chicken must look as it does when you get it from the market. There is no legitimate basis for scoring down for that for appearance, IMO.

Respectfully Rub, and I really tend to agree with you almost 100% down the line ALL the time, on this one we'll just have to disagree, IF:

If it doesn't look like chicken at all (to the judge). My point above is that you can sculpt pork to look like this (brisket would be almost impossible), and I for one wouldnt expect to receive over a 6 or 7, and then only because the sauce shines. Judges aren't supposed to judge effort. You and I both know it. Appearance is simple; what IS or IS NOT appetizing. We both know this too. To your point, if someone is grading down for "no legitimate basis", then absolutely wrong. However, if they dont find it appetizing whatsoever, they're supposed to start grading/judging on apparent effort?
Really? Where is that in the rules/training <rhetorical>? Ok, I'll rephrase: I'm fairly certain that that's not the way to go. So, IF a judge finds it un-appetizing (which obviously you cannot imagine), what should they do?

Different scenario, but same problem: What if the ribs come in blackened? Some people really like that black look and grade them 8's and 9's. What about the 3 judges that hate blackened meat and find the look and smell distasteful? They're supposed to judge on effort? No, we both know it.

It's subjective. Apparently some people find little red balls un-appetizing.

 

[SmokeInDaEye]

As a damn cook I am impressed by the work that went in to making those perfect red chicken balls but as a damn eater I ain't looking forward to the meal....

 

[Lake Dogs]

As a damn cook I am impressed by the work that went in to making those perfect red chicken balls but as a damn eater I ain't looking forward to the meal....

^^^ I've tried, and have not succeeded... THIS IS PERFECT.

 

[Matt_A]

I think I'm going to grind my chicken and then wrap it in paper thin skin for that perfect shape. Then it's into the Parkay bath inside this fancy brownie pan!!! Yep, that's the ticket. On a weird side note, would that be KCBS legal?

Rules say skin-on , skin-off, bone in , bone out, sliced, chopped, pulled are all legal for chicken. Grinding and stuffing.... that would probably be considered sausage.

 

[Matt_A]

Appearance is a subjective criteria. We are instructed that it's a subjective area. Subjectivity means personal preference. Do you find it irresistible and crave a bite of it? Would you pay for it in a restaurant? So YES, personal taste is what it's ALL about. I commend the cook for going to such painstaking effort to get that box built, but that effort alone does not determine the score. Personally, I do not find it appetizing, and I surely would not pay for it in a restaurant.

 

[Matt_A]

That said, I always thought it's not supposed to matter what the judge thinks chicken is supposed to look like that affects scores. Preconceived notions are a big no-no, correct? Please correct me if this is incorrect.

See my comment above. The only standards given during judging class are for tenderness. For Appearance & taste it is clearly and repeatedly stated that it is a subjective matter and they can not tell you how to judge for appearance or taste. They specifically say that you should view the box and use your own judgement about whether or not you find the entry appetizing.

 

[Rub]

Respectfully Rub, and I really tend to agree with you almost 100% down the line ALL the time, on this one we'll just have to disagree, IF:

I think I can agree that we're going to disagree on this as well.

Save for cutting off the oyster and evening up the sides, those thighs are not doctored up that much. So if we don't trim them up, that leaves us with trapezoids with a bump on one end. Now we have a challenge of placing those in the box so that it still looks neat, symmetrical, and doesn't expose too much green or bottom. We'll prolly get dinged for that now. Just how much can you trim off before the anti-uniformity judges take away points?

And SIDE, I'll have to respectfully disagree with you too. If I saw those come across my table I'd be excited to dig into one. Any cook who pays that much attention to detail has got it going on, and is most likely turning in a kick-a$$ piece of chicken.