Prestigious Invitational Qualifications - Should they be changed

[BBQchef33]

I am looking for a way to make it happen but work comes first in this economy so I am being realistic. If things change, all the better.

As for the rest, the flaw lies when some states can have multiple 30 plus team contests but can only get 1 or 2 certified by the state yet other states throw around proclamations like a whore on prom night.

So what's the solution? Stay away from contests in those states despite the organizers bending over backwards for 6 mos plus to get teams there in favor of a last second promise of a shot at the royal/jack? It depends on where your priorities lie, I guess.

hey... she wasnt a whore, she was just friendly.


anyway... that a whole notha' issue... the states where the govs office is making that determination IMO, is overstepping the bounds.. they are creating local 'rules' and applying them in a way that is not uniformaly applied nationwide. dont agtree with that either. Its not their place. All states should work the same.


ps, dont understand last paragraph. u mean stay away from the contest in the staes where govs office s butting in?

 

[Jeff_in_KC]

That would be fun.




Isnt that basically the ARI?

Yes, I originally thought so BUT instead of 100 contest winners in the Invitational, you only have 50... one from each state, whichever team won the "state championship". Instead of going to the Royal automatically when you win an event, you automatically get to go to a real state championship contest to determine that state's representative to the Royal. Problem being the Royal would have to agree to that format.

Doing it this way could make it a BIG deal back at the state level. And the state winners have the pride of (most times anyway) representing their state in a national event. The media should eat it up and the sport of BBQ grows exponentially.

So what then if Andy, for example, won the New York "state championship" contest and represented NY as a KS resident? OK, then change it so that no matter where a person won an event, they got to compete in the state championship in their own state. So say Andy wins no grands in Kansas but does in New York, he competes in the Kansas state championship. Then you assure that every team representing a state at the Royal Invitational can be proud to represent where they're from. Contest sites at the Royal could be decorated with items from the home state and a big banner proclaims which state they represent. I think this could be huge!

Another edit: If the reserve grand at a NY contest Andy wins is from New York, that reserve grand gets invited to the NY "state championship" as well while Andy goes to the Kansas one.

 

[musicmanryann]

Yes, I originally thought so BUT instead of 100 contest winners in the Invitational, you only have 50... one from each state, whichever team won the "state championship". Instead of going to the Royal automatically when you win an event, you automatically get to go to a real state championship contest to determine that state's representative to the Royal. Problem being the Royal would have to agree to that format.

Doing it this way could make it a BIG deal back at the state level. And the state winners have the pride of (most times anyway) representing their state in a national event. The media should eat it up and the sport of BBQ grows exponentially.

So what then if Andy, for example, won the New York "state championship" contest and represented NY as a KS resident? OK, then change it so that no matter where a person won an event, they got to compete in the state championship in their own state. So say Andy wins no grands in Kansas but does in New York, he competes in the Kansas state championship. Then you assure that every team representing a state at the Royal Invitational can be proud to represent where they're from. Contest sites at the Royal could be decorated with items from the home state and a big banner proclaims which state they represent. I think this could be huge!

Another edit: If the reserve grand at a NY contest Andy wins is from New York, that reserve grand gets invited to the NY "state championship" as well.

I gotta be honest, I love that idea! Wouldn't it however, be less of a change from the Jack format? Aren't representatives from other countries' already chosen in this way, i.e. they are the chosen delegates from their country to the Jack, rather than being drawn?

 

[Alexa RnQ]

Wow.. (and please dont take this as a shot) but this seems very elitist.

I see clarification is needed. I'm the last person who could be an elitist -- we came out of the backyard last year, remember? And I can easily think of more than one team who just got their first-ever KCBS GC that I would LOVE to see get the draw.

I was thinking more in terms of what you expressed better, "give[ing] more teams shots at the big one". When there's only ONE state championship, somebody somewhere is going to gripe that the "wrong" team won. We've all seen it in print where people claim that a particular invitational is meaningless because "the best teams weren't there". Multiple qualifying contests means more bites at the apple -- and yes, it does give more teams a shot than just the "usual suspects".

I have problems with run-off contests -- it puts yet another burden on the competing teams. What if a team has maxed out their competition budget on their qualifying contest(s), and just can't swing an additional runoff contest in terms of money or time off? Should their efforts for the whole season be nullified for that? At least the draw process doesn't put additional strain on a team's resources.

And that, I suppose, is why we have multiple invitationals. They are each different in character by reason of their selection process, and teams can choose which aspect satisfies their aims best.

 

[SmokeInDaEye]

hey... she wasnt a whore, she was just friendly.


anyway... that a whole notha' issue... the states where the govs office is making that determination IMO, is overstepping the bounds.. they are creating local 'rules' and applying them in a way that is not uniformaly applied nationwide. dont agtree with that either. Its not their place. All states should work the same.


ps, dont understand last paragraph. u mean stay away from the contest in the staes where govs office s butting in?

I mean should we punish organizers who work all year to get a large team following but can't get a state proclamation because the invitationals rely on how their state government interprets what is being asked of them? According to a quick glance at an unofficial Jack invite list Rod Gray did on his blog, it seems NYS is only outranked in number of qualifiers by IL, MO and KS while quite a few only have 1 or 2. Meanwhile, such nearby states as CT have 1, NJ 3, PA 2, MA and VT have 1 (I think), all with essentially the same teams competing.

There is no set criteria, ie 15 teams in place 1 mo before a contest qualifies for state sanctioning across the board. Or drop state sanctioning all together. What does it add?

Otherwise can't I go to a state that doesn't care what they give out to who, say I'm holding an "official" contest and get a proclamation then figure out how to entice 14 friends to come over to my backyard?

 

[YankeeBBQ]

Question for Steve (Yankee BBQ) - you've been at this a while, won a bunch of GC's, qualified many times, past NEBS President etc, vocal and respected opinion on current KCBS issues etc...

Do you think that if KCBS membership came together in some way (ex. petition by large contingent of teams or request for topic discussion at BOD meeting etc) and sought the BOD for to make a push to the Jack or Royal committees to re-examine contest qualifications - could it happen ? If not, why ? Should it just be left alone ? If so, why ?

I don't really think this is something the KCBS BOD should be involved in. If there were some type of grassroots movement by cook teams that presented some suggestions to the invites I don't see why they wouldn't at least consider what was being presented.

I really don't have an issue with the way things are done now except the last minute proclamations and secret state championships. I think it's difficult for the invite contests to police this stuff and I don't think they want to alienate any contests so they tread lightly.

My solution would be for the Jack and Royal to publish on their websites which contests actually are qualifiers so nobody has to guess. Some contests say they are when they really are not and others say they are not but pull some last minute stunt and end up being qualifiers. I really haven't thought this through and don't know how to make it work but it would be nice to know where you stand when you enter a contest.

 

[Diva Q]

I am looking for a way to make it happen but work comes first in this economy so I am being realistic. If things change, all the better.

.

I have to say that I will do just about anything to get back to the Jack again. Period. That includes flying out to two comps this year in Canada as my own province does not have a Jack ticket. It is worth it. Go without cable, cut back on your grocery bill, eat KD for 3 months if you have to - max your credit cards, fill up your line of credit. You HAVE to make it happen. At all costs. It is worth it.

You never ever know if you will get another chance. Being realistic and being a competitive BBQ'er are not things that go together.

 

[Muzzlebrake]

being realistic and being a competitive bbq'er are not things that go together.

lmao!

 

[stlgreg]

To throw another wrench into this. There was two contests this year in St. Louis that are state championships that are not a KCBS contest. A lot of this discussion is just for KCBS contests which technically the Jack isn't even a KCBS contest.

by their rules, one contest qualified for both the ARI, GAB, and the Jack. The other qualified just for the ARI and GAB (teams did not turn in brikset).

The former is a contest of 65-70 teams where teams compete in 8 categories over two days - the big four plus dessert, open, pork steak, and chili.

 

[MilitantSquatter]

Thanks for all the great, well thought out replies so far.. it made for good reading tonight.. I was wondering who would venture into the mix...

Here's my random thoughts

• State Proclamations are outdated and really are irrelevelant but I can see how the it seems more prestigious. I can also see why the Jack wants all states represented to make it National (and International)
• Timing - I agree that a pre-qualified list of contests with advance notice is ideal and most fair to all teams looking to plan their schedule and/or strategy.
• Playoffs at the state level would be inefficient to run.
• Using highest scores at the state level would be unfair - using it as a metric nationally is even more limiting due to the regional variances that exist in GC scoring (Midwest - high scores , Northeast - low as an example
• KCBS - while they don't make the decisions surely has a lot of influence/leverage in these contests.. They are the largest sanctioning body representing the most teams.. I noticed this first hand at the Jack last October during the awards ceremony. It was very clear there is a long standing relationship that is co-dependent in many ways.. I think if the KCBS teams spoke in mass requesting BOD assistance, the BOD would have to represent the membership to at least initiate a discussion

I agree that the current system works relatively well but has faults .. but nothing will change unless those who have legit gripes or viable solutions step up to see if the faults can be fixed.

 

[Dale P]

I have to say that I will do just about anything to get back to the Jack again. Period. That includes flying out to two comps this year in Canada as my own province does not have a Jack ticket. It is worth it. Go without cable, cut back on your grocery bill, eat KD for 3 months if you have to - max your credit cards, fill up your line of credit. You HAVE to make it happen. At all costs. It is worth it.

You never ever know if you will get another chance. Being realistic and being a competitive BBQ'er are not things that go together.

I agree 100% and if we ever get lucky enough, i will do whatever it takes to get there. To even think about passing on The Jack is out of the question for us. We are going just to be there,.

 

[Butcher BBQ]

The way I read the original post, he just wants ideas to host an invitational not work on the existing ones. My 2 cents are to take the previous years team standings be it NEBS, FBA, IBCA, KCBS, Rocky Mountain, California BBQ, and all the rest. Invite there top 10 and host a best of the best.

 

[MilitantSquatter]

The way I read the original post, he just wants ideas to host an invitational not work on the existing ones. My 2 cents are to take the previous years team standings be it NEBS, FBA, IBCA, KCBS, Rocky Mountain, California BBQ, and all the rest. Invite there top 10 and host a best of the best.

I was looking for thoughts on both but it all stemmed from concerns over existing format of the some of the bigger existing contest criteria.

Yours is a good suggestion... I think that's kinda how the Best of the Best in Douglas, GA builds their contestant pool.. It's a big contest but doesn't get the same recognition as some others... Could be that it's still relatively new, maybe it's the location or something else too ??

Maybe if that contest grows and more qualifying teams embrace it, it will lessen the concern on criteria for the other big ones.. (assuming it's a well run event, which I thought it was from what I recall reading).

 

[Butcher BBQ]

. was looking for thoughts on both but it all stemmed from concerns over existing format of the some of the bigger existing contest criteria.

Yours is a good suggestion... I think that's kinda how the Best of the Best in Douglas, GA builds their contestant pool.. It's a big contest but doesn't get the same recognition as some others... Could be that it's still relatively new, maybe it's the location or something else too ??

Maybe if that contest grows and more qualifying teams embrace it, it will lessen the concern on criteria for the other big ones.. (assuming it's a well run event, which I thought it was from what I recall reading)

Great info from everyone, hope it gives you or someone food for thought.

 

[Coz]

I dont care if a team has 50 wins, or ZERO wins and took a GC on the first time out. "They did it, they made it, they worked for it that day and got the brass ring. If they beat top teams good for them!!! But I for one will never look down on a team for achiving a win or expect them to pull out because they hit their table of judges 4 times."

Thanks for lookin out for us little fellers.

 

[Sledneck]

I mean should we punish organizers who work all year to get a large team following but can't get a state proclamation because the invitationals rely on how their state government interprets what is being asked of them? According to a quick glance at an unofficial Jack invite list Rod Gray did on his blog, it seems NYS is only outranked in number of qualifiers by IL, MO and KS while quite a few only have 1 or 2. Meanwhile, such nearby states as CT have 1, NJ 3, PA 2, MA and VT have 1 (I think), all with essentially the same teams competing.

There is no set criteria, ie 15 teams in place 1 mo before a contest qualifies for state sanctioning across the board. Or drop state sanctioning all together. What does it add?

Otherwise can't I go to a state that doesn't care what they give out to who, say I'm holding an "official" contest and get a proclamation then figure out how to entice 14 friends to come over to my backyard?

First off I doubt you have 14 friends:tongue:. Why would it be wrong to do that? If they all cooked the required categories and had fair judging I dont see it as a problem. None of us are professionals so why shouldnt one of the 15 guys in your backyard have a chance?

 

[BBQchef33]

I mean should we punish organizers who work all year to get a large team following but can't get a state proclamation because the invitationals rely on how their state government interprets what is being asked of them? According to a quick glance at an unofficial Jack invite list Rod Gray did on his blog, it seems NYS is only outranked in number of qualifiers by IL, MO and KS while quite a few only have 1 or 2. Meanwhile, such nearby states as CT have 1, NJ 3, PA 2, MA and VT have 1 (I think), all with essentially the same teams competing.

is that because the gov office is butting in and limiting qualifers(i thought only PA did that), or is it that the count of contests overall in the state? We(NY) only had one qualifer back in 2004, 05 and 06 had ribfest, 07 added more(us and lake placid?) and then we experienced a few more that cropped up as the sport grew in NE. If a state only has one contest, folks have to step up and organize more...

Point is if during decision time, choices include a state with only one contest and its a qualifer, going agaisnt a state with lots of qualifers and a choice of locations, sorry, but my travel time and fuel costs, lodging, etc are higher up on my list than returning to a contest for the sake of returning. Sucks for them, but its how I choose. Be sure that if we had a 5-6 contest saturation of qualifers within 150 miles of home, and my options were limited by time or cost, I sure wouldnt be driving 6 hours salisbury and 4 to albany.

 

[HoDeDo]

These invitationals extend past KCBS sanctioned events -- so any contest can request to be included in these invitational events. I think if a contest meets the criteria of that invitational, it is fair game. 15 in your backyard.... or better yet, skip the state champ designation and just get 50 teams...

I would think the BoD has no reason to insert themselves into the requests that cookers may have to these invitationals. If teams felt a change was needed; rally behind your ideas, and submit them to the hosts of the event for input. Every contest can be considered regardless of the rules. I guarantee all of the entries granted are at the organizers discression. Just because you meet the criteria, does not mean you automatically get included in the list... There can also be other extenuating circumstances.

For example... Todd and I had GAB Open and AR Invitiational Pork wins. Two of the qualifiers for the Butt to Butt were the GAB invitational, and the AR Open... We won pork in the exact opposite set up. BUT we did win BOTH events. Todd lobbied the organizer for an exception, since we won pork at the two "opposite" events. Not just one or the other. Our invitation was granted. Was it part of the rules, no. Was it considered by the event, and the invitation extended -- YES!

So if you would like a change, or feel you might have an extenuating circumstance, go straight to the source. No need to engage KCBS, it isnt an event in thier purview. But I would think the folks running these events would be open to ideas, thoughts etc.

Having said that, they are both sought after events to cook in, and I dont have any issues with how they the attendees are chosen. Heck sitting around with a bung in hand during the draw is the best thing ever!

Now if I win the NY state champ, do I have to move to that Levittown house, and get to work with Phil, and Vinny is buying me a boat???

 

[BBQchef33]

sorry dude, but if u come to work with me, hope u dont mind sitting in the yard poolside and being on the internet and phone all day. ?? its a rough life.

 

[Jeff_in_KC]

Playoffs at the state level would be inefficient to run.

How so? I don't agree. Yes, it would take planning and organization but inefficient? I don't agree.

KCBS - while they don't make the decisions surely has a lot of influence/leverage in these contests.. They are the largest sanctioning body representing the most teams.. I noticed this first hand at the Jack last October during the awards ceremony. It was very clear there is a long standing relationship that is co-dependent in many ways.. I think if the KCBS teams spoke in mass requesting BOD assistance, the BOD would have to represent the membership to at least initiate a discussion

Still, the BOD must stay within its scope of authority as a board. Interfering with the selection criteria of independent contests, especially ones that are not even KCBS sanctioned events, steps well beyond that scope of authority and could get some people in trouble. Yes, the BOD does represent the membership of KCBS, however, in this particular situation the BOD is responsible to tell the membership that they are on their own. Surely membership doesn't want the BOD to get in any legal situation that will negatively affect the KCBS.