Sir Smoke A Lot
Full Fledged Farker
- Joined
- May 10, 2007
- Location
- Centuria...
I was really looking forward to my first judging experience this past weekend. As the moments before the first turn in approach, I was eager with anticipation.
Chicken - I am thinking to myself "Those are some pretty good presentations. Remember - garnish is optional, so you are judging how appetizing the chicken itself looks." I gave the chicken some fairly high scores all the way around. For the most part, it was cooked very well, and even though some of the sauces used were not exactly my cup of tea - it did not detract from the overall effort.
Ribs - Here is where I ran into some trouble. It was brought to my attention that my scores were lower than everyone else at my table. I know what a well cooked rib is supposed to be. Does that automatically make it a 9 on tenderness? I guess I don't believe it does. If it is well cooked, we are looking at above average at least. If it is not well cooked, does that make it average or below average? I tend to believe it does. If it falls off the bone when I take a bite, if I score that as average or better, is that not a dis service to the other cooks that nailed it? If your rib is well cooked, but you left the membrane on, that is going to hurt you. I don't leave it on - I expect everyone else to remove it as well. Removing the membrane does not make a rib above average - it is what everyone SHOULD do. From what I remember from the class, taste is rather subjective. I DO NOT like sickly sweet sauce. I am probably the exception around here. If your rib tastes like it was dipped in sugar, I am not going to score it high, because that is not what I like.
Pork - again, here is where I got in trouble. Once again, I was told my scores were lower than everyone else at my table. I believe I am good pulled pork cook. If I look at an entry and it looks like it is mush, I am not going to rank it high on appearance even though the box may look nice. I am judging it based on how much I am looking forward to trying it. Is this wrong? If you serve me mush, am I seriously supposed to score it high because it is "tender"? And if all I can taste is salt, even though it may be cooked well, I am going to knock you down.
Brisket - I think they figured I was a lost cause at this time. I got a "square" of brisket. It looked burnt on the top and it was full of fat. While the meat was tasty, it was overcooked and the fat inside detracted from it. Some of the entries were decent and they were cooked pretty well, but there was just not alot of flavor.
So, tell me, am I too hard? I judged things how I truly felt. It may have gone against everyone else at the table, but I was honest with myself. I understand the reps were only doing their job, letting me know my scores were low. I have no ill will toward them. I guess I am very hard on myself as a cook and that translates toward other cooks as well.
Has this happened to anyone else?
Chicken - I am thinking to myself "Those are some pretty good presentations. Remember - garnish is optional, so you are judging how appetizing the chicken itself looks." I gave the chicken some fairly high scores all the way around. For the most part, it was cooked very well, and even though some of the sauces used were not exactly my cup of tea - it did not detract from the overall effort.
Ribs - Here is where I ran into some trouble. It was brought to my attention that my scores were lower than everyone else at my table. I know what a well cooked rib is supposed to be. Does that automatically make it a 9 on tenderness? I guess I don't believe it does. If it is well cooked, we are looking at above average at least. If it is not well cooked, does that make it average or below average? I tend to believe it does. If it falls off the bone when I take a bite, if I score that as average or better, is that not a dis service to the other cooks that nailed it? If your rib is well cooked, but you left the membrane on, that is going to hurt you. I don't leave it on - I expect everyone else to remove it as well. Removing the membrane does not make a rib above average - it is what everyone SHOULD do. From what I remember from the class, taste is rather subjective. I DO NOT like sickly sweet sauce. I am probably the exception around here. If your rib tastes like it was dipped in sugar, I am not going to score it high, because that is not what I like.
Pork - again, here is where I got in trouble. Once again, I was told my scores were lower than everyone else at my table. I believe I am good pulled pork cook. If I look at an entry and it looks like it is mush, I am not going to rank it high on appearance even though the box may look nice. I am judging it based on how much I am looking forward to trying it. Is this wrong? If you serve me mush, am I seriously supposed to score it high because it is "tender"? And if all I can taste is salt, even though it may be cooked well, I am going to knock you down.
Brisket - I think they figured I was a lost cause at this time. I got a "square" of brisket. It looked burnt on the top and it was full of fat. While the meat was tasty, it was overcooked and the fat inside detracted from it. Some of the entries were decent and they were cooked pretty well, but there was just not alot of flavor.
So, tell me, am I too hard? I judged things how I truly felt. It may have gone against everyone else at the table, but I was honest with myself. I understand the reps were only doing their job, letting me know my scores were low. I have no ill will toward them. I guess I am very hard on myself as a cook and that translates toward other cooks as well.
Has this happened to anyone else?