Please Judge our boxes

[Hawg Father of Seoul]

Not to be a jerk or any thing, but if you give me chicken pucks... they better be uniform. If you give me chicken.... it is okay for it to look like chicken and not be as uniform.

You might want to think about making your sauce more "pourable".

 

[early mornin' smokin']

sauce on the chicken and pork is way overdone and gloppy. Ribs aren't uniform in size, brisket is tiny for the box.
Appearance wise, chicken 5-6
ribs 6
pork 6-7
brisket 6-7
I'm no pro, but consistency in each piece, and uniformity is key.
If your rib bones aren't close to the same size stack 3 on 4 or 4 on 4. But in all honestly, if you stacked them differently to get rid of the size difference, that wouldve been your best box.
Chicken, same thing, fill the box up. Looks like your sauce is very thick from the pictures, I can see finger marks in the bottom right one, top left looks like it was spackled on. Thin the sauce out and make sure you set it in the cooker before turn in.
Pork, show us that bark! That's always something you want to see when cracking open a pork box, that sweet bark.
Brisket, the slices aren't uniform, and look sloppy, plus the burnt ends are buried in the parsley. pile in the burnt ends, and always try to give 7+ slices
Nothing wows the judges like a nice full box of meat. Parsley is just a little extra, try to have as little as possible showing.

 

[sdbbq1234]

Late note here:

The skin on the chicken looks like it was scraped and it pulled away from the meat; kinda like it is bubbling up.

wallace

 

[CBQ]

Some people said the brisket was uneven. I though so too, but then I realized that some of the burnt ends are party covered by the parsley, making one piece look really small. Watch out for that in a comp. After you arrange your meat, look at the box and move pieces of parsley that are in the way, have drops of sauce on them, etc.

+1 to cleaning up the brisket slices themselves...looks like strands of meat on them.

 

[Lake Dogs]

And from the East German Judge:

Chicken - 4
The brown gloppy sauce is off putting. Looks like cold brown gravy was spooned over the chicken. I want to close this box, not dig in.

Ribs - 7/8
Whatever the little round object is on the third rib from the left is my eye is immediately drawn to it. The right rib is really ragged looking at the bottom
Garnish note - the multi hue garnish is distracting from the meat

Pork - 5
Looks more like Swanson TV dinner turkey in brown gravy. Again the splotchy thick gravy looking sauce is not appealing.

Brisket - 5/6
The ends in front are buried in the garnish and the 4th one looks like a crumb. Staining on the slices which are also buried in the garnish. Slices look roughly cut and all the splinter bark is distracting.

I'm of a very similar opinion myself

Chicken 6

Ribs 8 (was thinking 7, then 8, then 7, then 8)...

Pork 5 (worse than a swanson dinner, IMHO)

Brisket 6



Seriously, I suggest checking out bbqcritic.com for examples, good and bad....

 

[bodcat]

And from the East German Judge:

Chicken - 4
The brown gloppy sauce is off putting. Looks like cold brown gravy was spooned over the chicken. I want to close this box, not dig in.

Ribs - 7/8
Whatever the little round object is on the third rib from the left is my eye is immediately drawn to it. The right rib is really ragged looking at the bottom
Garnish note - the multi hue garnish is distracting from the meat

Pork - 5
Looks more like Swanson TV dinner turkey in brown gravy. Again the splotchy thick gravy looking sauce is not appealing.

Brisket - 5/6
The ends in front are buried in the garnish and the 4th one looks like a crumb. Staining on the slices which are also buried in the garnish. Slices look roughly cut and all the splinter bark is distracting.

4(poor)/5(below average)'s really? I would hate to hit your table. My guess is those scores would be flagged by the new scoring system.

 

[Slamdunkpro]

And from the East German Judge:

Chicken - 4
The brown gloppy sauce is off putting. Looks like cold brown gravy was spooned over the chicken. I want to close this box, not dig in.

Ribs - 7/8
Whatever the little round object is on the third rib from the left is my eye is immediately drawn to it. The right rib is really ragged looking at the bottom
Garnish note - the multi hue garnish is distracting from the meat

Pork - 5
Looks more like Swanson TV dinner turkey in brown gravy. Again the splotchy thick gravy looking sauce is not appealing.

Brisket - 5/6
The ends in front are buried in the garnish and the 4th one looks like a crumb. Staining on the slices which are also buried in the garnish. Slices look roughly cut and all the splinter bark is distracting.

4(poor)/5(below average)'s really? I would hate to hit your table. My guess is those scores would be flagged by the new scoring system.

Really. The range in KCBS is 2-9 not 7-9. When I judge excellent product gets excellent marks (and I see and award a lot of 8's & 9's), but I have no problem getting out the 4 / 5 (or lower) hammer when it's warranted. I think judges do new cooks a disservice when they inflate scores or refuse to hand out anything lower than a 6 or 7.

If these scores got flagged by KCBS so be it. My critiques were rational, justifiable and deserved.

 

[BasicPatrick]

Chicken = 6.....I think muffin pan chicken has to be exactly the same size...I would fill the box w/9 pieces and as others have said you need more color...set sauce in smoker.

Ribs = 7....I think you could get that slab up to an 8 by centering the rack in the box ad flipping the rack the other way with the curved shape of the rack on the "top" side and the striaght end of the ribs to the bottom

Pork = 7/8...You are well on your way with this presentation. Multiple types of pork is good. Good design layout. I think you need more color and more even sauce.

Brisket =6...Make burnt ends larger and the exact same size...Clean up slices (less bits of bits) and make slices wider left to right....As others have said...FILL THE BOX....BUT...DONT PUT POOR QUALITY MEAT IN THE BOX

Overall this is a great attempt for a first shot before a first comp.....waaaayyyyyy betther than our first few boxes....Well done and keep at it...you are in good shape.

 

[Gowan]

A 4 in appearance would absolutely be red flagged by the data analysis engine.

I think you are being way too harsh - this chicken box was neatly garnished and some thought and effort was put into shaping and arranging the meat in the box. Granted, I agree the sauce is off-putting, but no way is it a four.

In the years I've been judging I've never seen a 4 given for appearance, even when the box contained meat that was so terribly burned it resembled charcoal.

Your opinion is your opinion and you are welcome to it, but there is little doubt that it is not consistent with the scoring of the majority of CBJs.

 

[bbq.tom]

Chicken = 7
RIbs = 8
Pork = 7
Brisket = 6

Just my humble opinion...

 

[Slamdunkpro]

A 4 in appearance would absolutely be red flagged by the data analysis engine.

I think you are being way too harsh - this chicken box was neatly garnished and some thought and effort was put into shaping and arranging the meat in the box. Granted, I agree the sauce is off-putting, but no way is it a four.
Garnish means nothing other than is it legal?(yes) Other than that it's a meat contest. I saw your earlier post - you would seriously give that box an 8?

In the years I've been judging I've never seen a 4 given for appearance, even when the box contained meat that was so terribly burned it resembled charcoal.
Then some judges need reeducation to understand that the scales is 2-9. If it's "so terribly burned it resembled charcoal. " it should get a 2,3,or 4. Not a pity 7.
Your opinion is your opinion and you are welcome to it, but there is little doubt that it is not consistent with the scoring of the majority of CBJs. Just because it isn't consistent doesn't mean it isn't correct anymore than your 8's across the board on all 4 boxes.

See my comments in red.

 

[coastal]

Can someone post a 9 box for each. I need to see a 9 box to understand some of these comments

 

[Southern Home Boy]

I also think Slamdunk is being too harsh.

Yes, it's a 2-9 scale, but that means that 6 = average. To me, "average" is, "Yeah... that's BBQ..." but nothing more.

7 = "Hey... that's pretty good....
8 = "Damn... that's good....
9 = "Pardon me, fellow judges, but me and this turn in need a moment alone..."

I've given out a few fives which to me says, "Dude... you need to seriously work on that..." and one four "Why did you do this to me?"

Twos and threes are insulting and because I'm a cook and know how much work and effort goes into even the shabbiest turn in, I will not insult someone with those scores. It's not necessary.

When I look at our Brother's photos, I see way too much sauce applied unevenly over too little meat in the boxes. The garnish (yes it's a meat competition, but appearance is judged by how appetizing does it appear and multi-colored garnish that hides, obscures or "swallows" the meat is not appetizing) needs work. If you're going to do putting greens then take the time to do them right; tight, shallow, even and uniform in color and shape of leaf. Personally, as a judge, I hate putting greens because I have to defoliate the piece before I taste it. Picking little bits of parsley off a rib or chicken thigh is not my idea of fun. However, as a cook, I know that my best appearance scores come from putting greens, so I do them. As a judge, I don't judge garnish, but I do take off if the garnish gets in the way of the meat. And in most of these pictures it does.

The sauce should be even and thin and should provide a clean, smooth sheen and mahogany color to the piece. It may be the photos, but there seems to be a very yellowish hue to your turn ins and that is off-putting.

The best looking boxes are full. Nothing says appetizing like abundance. Try pre-trimming your brisket to just over the size of your turn in box. That way, once it cooks, it will sit nicely in your box and provide that full appearance.
Also, make your burnt ends pieces bigger - 3/4 to 1" cubes - and provide more than just one for each judge. And if your burnt ends aren't absolutely spectacular, don't include them. Better to keep just the slices than to put in mediocre or worse burnt ends.

Those are my criticisms. I do, however, compliment you on your pork. I agree that that color is bad. However, of the turn ins you presented, it is the fullest and best arranged. I like that you presented three different styles. To me that shows confidence and a certain level of expertise.

I think that if you clean up your cuts a little, get some uniformity in your selected pieces, even out your glaze and get your color more red/mahogany, you will be presenting 8s and 9s instead of 6s and 7s.

Good luck on your first competition! You're already miles ahead of where I was when I started.

 

[Gowan]

See my comments in red.

I said "In the 8 range". By that I mean 8 plus or minus, I hesitated to give exact numbers because this was a new cook and since entries aren't judged by pictures on a computer screen it isn't helpful to somebody starting out to get too fixated on how people score pictures of boxes.

In my experience, photos of boxes are often scored lower than they did at the actual table, and very rarely scored higher. I believe this is both because the time people spend examining a photo is many times greater than you are given in a live judging environment, and also because the quality of the photography greatly affects how a box is perceived.

For the record, the charred meat box scored fives and sixes across the board. I don't believe a 2 is really possible in appearance as long as there is meat in the box, I suppose if you turned in a box of rib bones it could happen - that's the only instance I can think of where you could truly say an entry was "inedible" just by looking at it for 4 seconds.

While I agree with your arguments for a wider spread in scores from the academic perspective, in the real world of today's KCBS environment there is little difference between a 2,3,4 or 5 beyond the degree of insult a judge wishes to communicate. Any score in this range equates to total failure. If you are actively judging and handing out such scores regularly, the true effect is that the data will show your table is "cold" and therefore risks skewing the contest.

I think we can agree that there will always be a bit of black magic to cooks figuring out their results until ALL judges are working from the same perspective as to how the numbers should be applied.

 

[Slamdunkpro]

Twos and threes are insulting and because I'm a cook and know how much work and effort goes into even the shabbiest turn in, I will not insult someone with those scores. It's not necessary.

I'm a cook too and to me none of the effort, money, time, work etc matters when I'm judging, all that matters is what's in that 9x9 in front of me. I don't care or factor in how it got there. If you refuse to ever use the lower end of the score range because "it's insulting" then 1) You're not being honest with the cook and 2) You're not fulfilling your oath as a judge.

 

[Slamdunkpro]

For the record, the charred meat box scored fives and sixes across the board.
So a box of briquet looking meat is, in your mind "average or just below average" bbq? Really?

I don't believe a 2 is really possible in appearance as long as there is meat in the box, I suppose if you turned in a box of rib bones it could happen - that's the only instance I can think of where you could truly say an entry was "inedible" just by looking at it for 4 seconds.

I've seen boxes that deserved 2's in appearance - back ribs that were so charred they looked like carbon on a stick - and they were.

While I agree with your arguments for a wider spread in scores from the academic perspective, in the real world of today's KCBS environment there is little difference between a 2,3,4 or 5 beyond the degree of insult a judge wishes to communicate. Any score in this range equates to total failure.

I really don't understand all the concern over "insulting" the cook with a low mark like a 4. We as cooks aren't 8 year olds in an "everyone gets a ribbon" soccer league. We (at least I do) want a fair, honest and impartial evaluation of our food. If it's that bad I want to know so I can evaluate my recipe and process. Don't lie to me with a pity 6 or 7 for fear of insulting me so I don't change much because sooner or later I'm going to run into a table of brutally honest judges. If I don't know what's wrong or how far off the target standard I am I can't fix it. The more pity 6's and 7's I get the longer I'm going to wallow in middle of the pack mediocrity.

If you are actively judging and handing out such scores regularly, the true effect is that the data will show your table is "cold" and therefore risks skewing the contest.

No offense but this is the most specious argument against honest scoring yet. The whole hot / cold table thing is utter dreck. How is honestly evaluating the sample in front of you "skewing" the contest? In the end it isn't the judge's fault you got low marks - It's your's.

I'll give you an example - there is a team I know that had pretty good run of hitting the "8-9 happy" judges in a few recent contests and they were finishing pretty high. I've sampled their food and imho it was more in the 4-6 range. We had the conversation about "perhaps you should try...." and their response was "but we're getting calls and good scores". Fair enough. This weekend they ran into 4 honest tables (you'd call them cold tables even though those tables produced multiple top 5 calls) and this team got slaughtered - bottom third on everything. Now they are pissed and frustrated. Not at themselves, but at "those judges" when the truth is they should have been getting 4's, 5's and 6's all along and been working to improve their food.

 

[coastal]

I'll give you an example - there is a team I know that had pretty good run of hitting the "8-9 happy" judges in a few recent contests and they were finishing pretty high. I've sampled their food and imho it was more in the 4-6 range. We had the conversation about "perhaps you should try...." and their response was "but we're getting calls and good scores". Fair enough. This weekend they ran into 4 honest tables (you'd call them cold tables even though those tables produced multiple top 5 calls) and this team got slaughtered - bottom third on everything. Now they are pissed and frustrated. Not at themselves, but at "those judges" when the truth is they should have been getting 4's, 5's and 6's all along and been working to improve their food.

So to you one 4, 5, 6 contest is truth compared to multiple 8, 9.


Anyone on this earth could think of three categories of boxes that are lower than the one presented here. If you give this a 4..and their are multiple ways you could finish under this box how do you justify that?

 

[J&B'sBBQ]

Can someone post a 9 box for each. I need to see a 9 box to understand some of these comments

Go to BBQ Critic and check out the box submissions on there. You'll see some really pretty boxes on there that people have submitted for critique and you can see the real reactions in the comments. That is where my team went to find some good ideas for layout. Also, once you've looked at a few pictures come back here and read through the constructive criticism and I think the comments will make sense. You'll see what they mean about the sauce and shape of the ribs. Good luck!

 

[Gowan]

"No offense but this is the most specious argument against honest scoring yet. The whole hot / cold table thing is utter dreck. How is honestly evaluating the sample in front of you "skewing" the contest?"

Because what you define as "honest scoring" is very different than what the majority of judges are currently by your own admission. All academic arguments aside, it's just that simple.