Paying to judge

[The_Kapn]

This is going "back-wards" if you consider BBQ to be a professional competitive sport.

I can not speak for all sports, but I think they are similar.
Professional officials are paid for their services, not asked to volunteer everything and then pick up their own expenses.
Let alone PAY for the priviledge--gimme a break.

One sport I know well of is USGF Gymnastics. We paid for our own training. We were then paid mileage, lodging, a small per diem and a token fee ($50 or so a day) for judging. The big difference is that, like most pro sports officials, we were held accountable for our performance and not allowed to judge if we did not maintain accuracy standards.

There are no standards in BBQ judging, so "you get what you pay for".

Even local soccer referees are paid a small stipend for services.

There is a subtle mindset at work here.
"I am a volunteer--I will judge like I want" vs
"I am a professional judge--I will try hard to judge according to the guidance".

I am not saying all judges are that way. I know I and Chad are not and I have met many others who really care and try to do an objective job.
But it is there, just under the surface, on a lot of folks.

At an event, some organizers are working for free. Professional organizers take a profit. The wonderful volunteers are not reimbursed. They are supporting their "cause" and that is fine. The band is paid. The REPS are paid.

Officiating is just a cost of doing business and can be absorbed like any other expense IF the promoter attracts a large paying crowd and then provides them with services that they will part with their money for.

Finally, it takes (in general terms) one judge per team plus one table captain per 6 teams. If the judges were paid only a token $25 per event--(for example)-- the entry fee could be raised $30 (about 12% average except for the 'low buck' events) and the organizer would be even.
Even a token payment would impact the attitude of many judges and help with the recruitment of new judges. Not to "get rich", just to be acknowledged as a "Paid Professional".

I would gladly pay $30 more for qualified professional judges IF they were held to a standard. Hell, costs are out of sight now, what's a few $$ more :twisted:

Also, all the "get to eat great BBQ, get to take BBQ home, and support the charity" reasons go nowhere with me. I will be glad to cook, for free, some darn fine BBQ for any judge who wants it. I will even pack and cool some for his trip home. Bring a big cooler! And, I support MY charities, not someone else's--sorry.

Enough here to P*** Off most everyone :lol:
End of rant.

TIM

 

[bbqbull]

So..............what do we do? Send a letter of protest to KCBS? I agree with all of you folks, aint gonna pay for no judges. So what do we do now? Im with you guys, but bitching here isnt going to help too much. We need ideas for the next level.

 

[ChipotlePat]

Memphis in May has been charging judges for 4 or 5 years now and don't seem to have a problem getting judges.

Not all contests are charging or will be anytime soon. The Royal as stated is a charity and it is the organizer right to charge, KCBS has no policy on it at this time that I know of.

As someone who does Rep contests just because the judge is certified doesn't make them a good judge, I have seen very good non certified judges. Instruction is given before along with the concepts KCBSis looking for. I find some of those that have judged for many years have a preconcieved ideas of what they are looking for, wouldn't be a bad thing as long as they would let the cooks know what those ideas are before the contest. Some judges just don't get it.

When charities are involved as cook I like to give to them. In Boise I gave the RG check back to the Red Cross as a donation. If you can give, give.
Jim

MIM Two years a go They were running short and set every thing behind.

I think it will happen again in Kc and if you think about it at least 1000+ judges paying they will be looking for judges also.

 

[jminion]

Jeff judges don't and won't give the teams their ideas of what good BBQ is, they have their nuts handed to them in a lot of cases. Judges are asked to judge under a set of guidelines but you hear things like, they are asking us to not consider garnish but if...... I judge it down. Or if it is sweet they won't get score from me.

I have heard Master Judges set and tell everyone that is within earshot what good BBQ is according to them.

I think more time needs to spent on the concept that a judge is to judge what a cook was trying to achieve, not that it is not what they like.

Judges give of their time and they pay to travel (it's a personel choice), they also recive 2 to 3 pounds of BBQ (pay for there time). If paying a few bucks to charity is too much to ask, you may need to find a new hobby.
Jim

 

[BrooklynQ]

If I have to pay to judge, then the food better be cooked, spiced, sauced and presented the way I want it. If I'm paying, then I'm buying. And if I'm buying I want the food my way, not necessarily to KCBS standards.



I think asking judges to pay is a bad precedent and that the quality of the Q will ultimately suffer in the long run. There's a mind set of entitlement that will set in with the judges.

 

[JohnMcD348]

I can see how paying to judge would be a problem but liek has been said before, if the fee payed is going to a charity, I myself wouldn't have a problem doing it. I would have a problem paying the fee if it was simply going into the organizers pocket. Alot of the contests around my area sell "PigBucks" that have a dollar value but the vendors turn them in for anywhere from $.50-.90 cents on the dollar so the organizer makes money that way. There coems a point "IF" the money doesn't go to charity, then it becomes greed. And then I start thinking that those in charge are thinking more of themsleves than is really worthwhile.

 

[MilitantSquatter]

While the Royal choosing to charge judges for their services makes little sense to me, it is their perogative. If it is clearly stated that the money is for a charity, that's OK by me, as no one is forcing someone to judge. If I really wanted to participate, I'd consider paying a nominal fee as long as the money was not going somewhere I did not feel comfortable with. I don't see this being something that would become widespread at the local contest level. it could happen but I don't think it would catch on.

While I agree with the good Doc, that judging good BBQ is a hobby of sorts, it is still a service being provided. If a service is being provided, one should not be charged for what they contribute. Yes, judges get fed and in general takes little skill other than a class, but to charge someone seems a bit off.


To Jim's point about spending more time on judges juding what the cook is trying to achieve vs. what the judge prefers to his own standards... I never got that concept. It is practically impossible for a judge to know what the cook is trying to acheive. They are not professional tasters.. If a novice cook throws together some store bought rub and KC Masterpiece sauce, the cook may not even know or care what they are trying to achieve...how is a judge supposed to figure that out ?

I like Tim's point of paying a small stipend, just something. With that said, cash can bring out the worst and make the current protocol of no real standards appear even worse.

While it is great that an organization like the KCBS has a long term vision, the age old problem of growing too big, too fast can get the best of any good intentions. More contests will be added as more teams request contests in new areas and organizers can make a profit. The KCBS needs to ensure the problems being discussed at the board meetings have clear actions and timelines set for all issues. Not just kicked around from meeting to meeting. This could be one of those issues that should be put down in writing and voted upon. It's not rocket science.

There are a number of BBQ sanctioning bodies each with their own unique rules etc. Futher fractionalization will undoubtedly continue to grow as more organizations will undoubtedly pop up. Some will be bigger than others, but all will claim their way is the right way and all will have their BBQ Champions at the state and national level etc. Just follow the money...

The KCBS can easily be remain the most recognizeable, but the biggest area I see as the area most in need of work is more clearly defined rules, procedures, etc. as this thread indicates as well as others. The KCBS has grown rapidly and a foldout handbook pamphlet has probably outgrown itself.

I am hopeful the KCBS will continue to elect leaders with a clear vision of what the future should be like and establish better standards now, so they will be easier to adhere to and oversee when the membership is 2-10x's its current size.

 

[G$]

Jeff judges don't and won't give the teams their ideas of what good BBQ is, they have their nuts handed to them in a lot of cases. Judges are asked to judge under a set of guidelines but you hear things like, they are asking us to not consider garnish but if...... I judge it down. Or if it is sweet they won't get score from me.

I have heard Master Judges set and tell everyone that is within earshot what good BBQ is according to them.

I think more time needs to spent on the concept that a judge is to judge what a cook was trying to achieve, not that it is not what they like.

Judges give of their time and they pay to travel (it's a personel choice), they also recive 2 to 3 pounds of BBQ (pay for there time). If paying a few bucks to charity is too much to ask, you may need to find a new hobby.
Jim

Jim, you are as qualified as anyone, or more so, on this topic. I appreciate your candor. Please keep the free flow of opinions coming.

However, your premise to me is flawed. Simply because many judges do so as a hobby has nothing to do with whether it is "best" for barbecue competitions to require they also pay. My hobby may be picking up trash in my neighborhood, volunteering at the soup kitchen, or cleaning up the local forest and parkland. It may be volunterring at the Boys and Girls club, walking through my neighborhood, or lifeguarding. To say that because I get pleasure from these hobbies and should therefore pay to do them is a poor premise.

We all understand there are costs associated with holding a contest, and that a plank of KCBS' mission involves charitable contributions. My only point is that requiring judges to pay is not necessarily a good long term decision.

One man's opinion ... what do I know?

 

[jminion]

There is a point that keeps coming up and need to be cleared up. The contests are put on by organizers, not KCBS. The organizer put out the call for judges, not KCBS. The organizer, not KCBS, is asking the judges to donate to their charity.

The difference between what is happening here and what happened when MIM required judges pay, the money went to MIM not a charity. That is not the case here.

There are events that are charity events to be part of it, you donate to the charity. It's not unAmerican, it's done all the time.

Jim

 

[Kevin]

Thank you for the clarification Jim.

 

[G$]

There is a point that keeps coming up and need to be cleared up. The contests are put on by organizers, not KCBS. The organizer put out the call for judges, not KCBS. The organizer, not KCBS, is asking the judges to donate to their charity.

The difference between what is happening here and what happened when MIM required judges pay, the money went to MIM not a charity. That is not the case here.

Great point. personally I assumed KCBS itself organized this particular event, the American Royal. I guess that was a bad assumption.

There are events that are charity events to be part of it, you donate to the charity. It's not unAmerican, it's done all the time.

Jim

Bad Point. I think nobody said donations were "unAmerican". In fact most would say that donating time to help put on a charity based BBQ event is a great form of donation. Donating time to help further barbecue competitions in general is also a form of charity. Lastly, I think the vast majority of the events we enter do donate a (large) portion of the fees directly to Charity already. Personally, I:
A) am ecstatic a large portion of my next competition fee ($250) is going to a charity
and
B) Would at the same time be a little troubled if the judges were required to pay to judge that same event.

I can understand how this may seem contradictory on the surface, but to me, for the reasons BrooklynQ and others stated, it is not.

 

[Jeff_in_KC]

Just because KCBS doesn't "put on" the event doesn't mean they can't or shouldn't control what goes on and how it is run. I believe the events should go by KCBS rules and play as KCBS wants it to be played, not the other way around.

 

[LostNation]

If I was in the KC area at the time of the Royal and not cooking the contest, I would pay in a heart beat to judge the invitational. I'd love to see how the best cooks in the country turn in their product. I think $50 (to a charity) is pretty cheap for that privilege. Now the open is a different thing. I always thought there was a waiting list to judge the Royal.

 

[CharlieBeasley]

I'm with Tim on this and Doc BBQ makes a good point however, I would think that the way to go is not to charge good and bad judges but to find a way to cull the bad judges and make it worthwhile to be a good judges.

Even paid umpires are not all great like the announcer that stated on national TV that the umpire had redefined the strike zone. I would have fired the umpire on the spot (they get paid to be professional). KCSB may not call the judges but they train and certify the reps and as such have a responsibility. I would like to see more training available and for events like the royal may be should be invitation only so there is a reason to be cream of the judges. Sorry a newbie to judging 2 cents!

 

[Jeff_in_KC]

I would like to see more training available and for events like the royal may be should be invitation only so there is a reason to be cream of the judges.

Now THERE'S an idea! Don't know how the hell it could be determined who the "cream" was but if it could... wow! That might really improve the judging in the smaller contests.

 

[voodoobbqIL]

according to what we were told by our judging instructor, the KCBS is tracking judges overall like they do teams. If you are a judge that routinely scores on the low side of 6 or vice versa then they are supposed to look at that. I am not sure of all of the details in that but I would guess that way they would know who has judged the most and has the most diversity in their scores. But I think an invitation judging system would be a great thing.

 

[djmarko]

OK guys I've got my judges hat on now. I read some of these posts last night and began to get really annoyed. I decided to wait until this morning to respond so I wouldn't say anything I would regret. I've only been judging for 2 years now but I've seen alot and experienced alot. I get somewhat annoyed with all the attacks on judges. I'm the first to admit that there are bad judges out there. But guess what? There are also bad cooks out there too. Nobody is perfect.
Question for JMINION. How is a judge supposed to know what a cook is trying to achieve? Judging taste is totally a personal thing. You can't teach it.

Between tolls gas and lodging I have easily spent $120 or more to judge an event. I do it because I enjoy it. To suggest 2-3 lbs of free BBQ is ample compensation for my time and expenses is wrong. I don't judge to get free BBQ. I judge to help promote BBQ competitively. As a matter of fact I've seen a lot of judges just toss what they have left after judging and bring nothing with them. Not all the entries we get are great BBQ.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. Giving to charity is a personal decision as far as how much and what charity to give to. It shouldn't be a condition for performing a task that is totally voluntary. I also have to say I was bothered by a statement from another post: "If paying a few bucks to charity is too much to ask, you may need to find a new hobby." I think that's a little harsh. Why should I have to find another hobby because I might object to being told how much to give and what charity I have to give to?

With all the criticism of judges it's amazing to see that according to results of competitions I check, most of the time we get it right. I consistently see the top teams usually placing high up on the list.

The KCBS certifies judges. If there is a problem with how judges are judging, it seems to me that is up to the KCBS to find the problem and correct it.

Let's face it without cooks there are no competitions and without judges there are no competitions. Remember if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem. Can't we all just get along?

There, I feel better now.

 

[jminion]

Question for JMINION. How is a judge supposed to know what a cook is trying to achieve? Judging taste is totally a personal thing. You can't teach it.

Rich
Would be happy to answer your question. You say judging taste is totally a personel thing. That is true but (and I hear this often) judges will state white meat when judging chicken. White meat is going to be dry as an example, therefore that judge can't give it the type score dark meat would get.

A judge will state if it doesn't have crispy skin I judge it down.

A judge will state I don't like a sweet product or a spicy turn-in therefore I won't get another turn-in could recieve.

As a judge we need to judge what the cook was trying to do. As example the the cook turns-in chicken (white meat) his skin is tender not chrispy. He uses a sweet sauce. As a judge, does it get a lower score because you like crispy spicy chicken? If the answer is yes then you're not doing your job as a judge. That turn-in should be judged based on how well that cook did, not on the judges personel preferences. Was the breast moist, was the rub and glazed balenced with each other, that's judging.

I hope that clears up my statment.
Jim

 

[MilitantSquatter]

Jim,

I totally understand where you're coming from and I agree

BUT to play devil's advocate for the sake of the discussion of the specific point about judging what the cook is trying do do, sounds great but truly not feasible.

How many times does a cook or team take product off the pit, to taste it and say something like " It taste's like chit, too overdone,too spicy, wrong color etc"... Obviously the team did not even turn out the product that they envisioned... The team may score great... but that's not what the team envisioned... How would a judge know that ? All they knew is that they liked it even if the team did not.

Now for the really off the wall example...What if a team overloads on extremely high ratio of salt for a rub as they absolutely love salty ribs and what they want to accomplish. They take it off the pit and say "It's perfect, just what how I wanted it".. All the judges eat it and judge taste as a 2 because the salt is truly overpowering to everyone else... Should they truly judge on the side of the cook with the benefit of the doubt that the cook wanted them to try salty ribs or take their own opinion into account that the flavor is off balance ?

Again.. not disagreeing... just generating discussion as to how it is explained in a judges class as to what the expectation should be.

 

[Sawdustguy]

OK guys I've got my judges hat on now. I read some of these posts last night and began to get really annoyed. I decided to wait until this morning to respond so I wouldn't say anything I would regret. I've only been judging for 2 years now but I've seen alot and experienced alot. I get somewhat annoyed with all the attacks on judges. I'm the first to admit that there are bad judges out there. But guess what? There are also bad cooks out there too. Nobody is perfect.
Question for JMINION. How is a judge supposed to know what a cook is trying to achieve? Judging taste is totally a personal thing. You can't teach it.

Between tolls gas and lodging I have easily spent $120 or more to judge an event. I do it because I enjoy it. To suggest 2-3 lbs of free BBQ is ample compensation for my time and expenses is wrong. I don't judge to get free BBQ. I judge to help promote BBQ competitively. As a matter of fact I've seen a lot of judges just toss what they have left after judging and bring nothing with them. Not all the entries we get are great BBQ.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. Giving to charity is a personal decision as far as how much and what charity to give to. It shouldn't be a condition for performing a task that is totally voluntary. I also have to say I was bothered by a statement from another post: "If paying a few bucks to charity is too much to ask, you may need to find a new hobby." I think that's a little harsh. Why should I have to find another hobby because I might object to being told how much to give and what charity I have to give to?

With all the criticism of judges it's amazing to see that according to results of competitions I check, most of the time we get it right. I consistently see the top teams usually placing high up on the list.

The KCBS certifies judges. If there is a problem with how judges are judging, it seems to me that is up to the KCBS to find the problem and correct it.

Let's face it without cooks there are no competitions and without judges there are no competitions. Remember if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem. Can't we all just get along?

There, I feel better now.

Rich,

I couldn't have said it better myself if I tried. Cookers vs Judges has been a love-hate relationship since competitions have started. Almost all of the critcism, ruckus and such comes mostly from us cookers and that isn't right. Without judges there are no contests. We as competitors have to learn that judges volunteer so we can compete. It is as simple as that. If we not are careful all the judges that care enough and take pride in judging will be gone. They are human beings with feelings too.