Anybody paying attention to the new rules being submited?

[Uncle Buds BBQ]

Does any one by chance have the 2006 KCBS rules available?
dmp

Here ya go...
http://www.worlandchamber.com/statebbq/2006KCBSCooksHandbook.pdf

 

[dmprantz]

Looking at the evolution of the rules, it would appear that the intent, or known effect, of the BOD when adding the language regarding disqualification in 2007 was to say that if you take your meat off premise, you should not get the opportunity to have meat reinspected.

dmp

 

[Balls Casten]

The reps decision on the incident that I referred to had a huge impact on my team since we finished 7th and therefore will not proceed to the regional event. In my opinion it's a clear rules violation and should be handled as such.

Bum deal Don, I'd enter in DesMoines under Patrol Pork, looks like there is one opening left.

 

[pat]

I thought you had someone to "fill the field" for us next weekend? ;-)

 

[mjl]

Looking at the evolution of the rules, it would appear that the intent, or known effect, of the BOD when adding the language regarding disqualification in 2007 was to say that if you take your meat off premise, you should not get the opportunity to have meat reinspected.

dmp

Bingo. Upon first hearing about the incident, I couldn't imagine it wasn't a DQ. I am all for rep discretion and erring on the side of the cooks in subjective matters, pooling of sauce, sculpting,quiet time violations etc. When it comes to more objective violations, late turn in, meat leaving contest grounds, lack of identifiable pieces, or illegal garnish, the penalty should not be subject to a judges discretion. It either is, or is not a violation of the rules, and punishment should be meted out accordingly.


I would suggest that rule #7 needs to be revised. The penalties for the same infraction should not vary from rep to rep, or contest to contest. The team in question was quite lucky to have had a Sam's club 50 yards away from the contest site. Had the same violation occurred at a more remote contest, or been reported to the rep a few hours later, the decision to allow the team the chance to in effect get a "mulligan" would have been moot. At the very least, a more cut and dry wording would help to dismiss the notion that Reps may or may not be more charitable to certain teams( Think Lakeland brisket)

End of the day, I don't really have a dog in this fight, other than hoping for more rules clarity. Hats off to the team in question, I don't think I could have pulled off the same cook in similar circumstances...I also wonder if I would have been afforded the same chance.


Matt

 

[pat]

xxxx

 

[Harbormaster]

This exact scenario happened at a recent contest where a team removed their meat from the contest site, and later returned with their meat and started cooking. Later on during the cooking process the team was approached and their meat was confiscated by contest reps/organizers. This team was then allowed to purchase new meat, obtain a second meat inspection and resume cooking, finishing in the top 6 teams at a Sam's Contest. There was no penalty for this team, no judge scores of 1 and no disqualification.

We received an e-mail clearly indicating that meat inspection was from 9:00am until 5:00pm on Friday. The only way to have your meat inspected outside of this window was with previously obtained permission from the organizer. If the team in question had their meat confiscated after 5:00pm, special treatment was provided in allowing a meat inspection after the new meat was purchased.

This happened at a contest last year and the team was not allowed to use this new meat. So it seems that its up to a reps interpretation.?

And that's the way it should be, especially if a clearly defined meat inspection window exists.

Upon first hearing about the incident, I couldn't imagine it wasn't a DQ. I am all for rep discretion and erring on the side of the cooks in subjective matters, pooling of sauce, sculpting,quiet time violations etc. When it comes to more objective violations, late turn in, meat leaving contest grounds, lack of identifiable pieces, or illegal garnish, the penalty should not be subject to a judges discretion. It either is, or is not a violation of the rules, and punishment should be meted out accordingly.


I would suggest that rule #7 needs to be revised. The penalties for the same infraction should not vary from rep to rep, or contest to contest. The team in question was quite lucky to have had a Sam's club 50 yards away from the contest site. Had the same violation occurred at a more remote contest, or been reported to the rep a few hours later, the decision to allow the team the chance to in effect get a "mulligan" would have been moot. At the very least, a more cut and dry wording would help to dismiss the notion that Reps may or may not be more charitable to certain teams.Matt

Ditto.

Hats off to the team in question, I don't think I could have pulled off the same cook in similar circumstances...

If this had happened to me I wouldn't have even bought more meat. I don't have that kinda extra $$ layin' around, and I ain't that good a cook.

I also wonder if I would have been afforded the same chance. Matt

Same here.

 

[Brew-B-Q]

I think this is getting carried away. I have no dog in this either, but here are my thoughts:

What advantage does one gain taking meat off site that cannot easily be obtained through other methods? Extra coolers in trailer for example. I question the need for the rule given the lack of enforcement of the rules in general. When was the last time someone had their pork weighed? Or checked on the cooker?

What other rules were broken? Did everyone observe the no alcohol policy? Quiet hours? I personally can't recall.

Maybe there is more to this than I know, but I think it is just another example of how inconsistent KCBS is in general. It's not perfect, but it's the best we have right now.

 

[Tarheel]

I think this is getting carried away. I have no dog in this either, but here are my thoughts:

What advantage does one gain taking meat off site that cannot easily be obtained through other methods? Extra coolers in trailer for example. I question the need for the rule given the lack of enforcement of the rules in general. When was the last time someone had their pork weighed? Or checked on the cooker?

What other rules were broken? Did everyone observe the no alcohol policy? Quiet hours? I personally can't recall.

Maybe there is more to this than I know, but I think it is just another example of how inconsistent KCBS is in general. It's not perfect, but it's the best we have right now.

Exactly!!! So why make another rule that no one enforces. Unless there is a clear and definite gain realized that would give a team an unfair advantage don't throw a blanket over us all.

 

[mjl]

I think this is getting carried away. I have no dog in this either, but here are my thoughts:

What advantage does one gain taking meat off site that cannot easily be obtained through other methods? Extra coolers in trailer for example. I question the need for the rule given the lack of enforcement of the rules in general. When was the last time someone had their pork weighed? Or checked on the cooker?

What other rules were broken? Did everyone observe the no alcohol policy? Quiet hours? I personally can't recall.

Maybe there is more to this than I know, but I think it is just another example of how inconsistent KCBS is in general. It's not perfect, but it's the best we have right now.

As for being carried away, it doesn't seem like anyone is preparing nooses or sharpening pitchforks. For the most part, I think the discourse on rule #7, and its ability to be interpreted and implemented in different ways has been quite civil. Opinions vary on the interpretation of rule #7, not only from cook to cook, but seemingly from Rep to Rep. I share the opinion of some of my fellow cooks that Rep discretion on some rules could allow for the perception of favoritism. Has rule #7 outlasted its ability to be of use? Maybe. Could the rule stand to be rewritten? Probably. Moving forward, I really don't know what the best course of action might be. I only hope that if rule #7 is deemed necessary, the punishment is consistent for all found to be in violation.

As for violations of the alcohol policy, I would like to think it could carry the same liberal interpretation as rule #7. The alcohol in question would be disqualified and remain in the Reps cooler for all to see. Provided I had the time and means, I could purchase new alcohol, and begin drinking again.

Matt

 

[sitnfat]

They ALLLLLLL drink in Bentonville no matter what ya hear

 

[Plowboy]

I think the rule to leave the inspected meat on site and to cook the meat onsite are both worthy to stay in the rulebook. Having multiple local contests within miles of my house, I could take that meat home to at least prep it and maybe even cook it depending on how much the rules were relaxed. Yes, a team could cheat and do all of that now, but eliminating either of these rules would allow it to be done in the open on the up and up. If the rules allowed me to take food home to prep and maybe even cook, I'd show up for inspection and be back at 11:30a the next day ready for turn ins. To me, that is what these rules are trying to prevent.

I'm staying out of the discussion of what the penalty should be. Just saying that you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater on this one.

 

[Plowboy]

I think this is getting carried away. I have no dog in this either, but here are my thoughts:

What advantage does one gain taking meat off site that cannot easily be obtained through other methods? Extra coolers in trailer for example. I question the need for the rule given the lack of enforcement of the rules in general. When was the last time someone had their pork weighed? Or checked on the cooker?

What other rules were broken? Did everyone observe the no alcohol policy? Quiet hours? I personally can't recall.

Maybe there is more to this than I know, but I think it is just another example of how inconsistent KCBS is in general. It's not perfect, but it's the best we have right now.

We've been through these enforcement discussions before. KCBS, at great expense, could have a pit official up your ass for 24 hours like Nascar does in the team pits. Is that what we need to enforce the rules, or are we going to be people of integrity and abide by them? The fact that they don't have a pit official in your team looking at every step you make, doesn't mean that many, dare I say most, of the rules we have are good and worthy rules to govern and guide our competitions. Not taking your meat off site sounds like a good rule to me. If we want team lock downs so you can't leave the grounds after meat inspection, then okay.

Be careful what you wish for folks. Trust me that you won't like the alternatives of more governance or tossing out rules. Greater issues than what to do with a single contest infraction will arise.

I feel bad for Trucky's team. He's a great guy, but the honest to God's truth is he got beat. Moving on to the regional doesn't change the fact that someone loaded their pit at 8:30a in the morning and still placed well above the minimum to make the regional. I kinda wouldn't feel right taking that spot over something like that.

 

[Plowboy]

Ok, what would prevent two teams next to each other from doing this anyway? Again, it is up to 6 individuals to give both entries a score, I will still bet that the same meat from the same butt would get two diffrent scores. If you want to cheat there are ways.

You physically can't have the same meat in two different boxes. You could have meat from the same brisket, butt or rib, but it wouldn't be the same meat... just the same source. You couldn't get six of the same quality slices from the same brisket. Hell, even tasting one end of a brisket slice versus the other can be different. Scores most certainly would be different. I'd take that bet every day. I'm not trying to be snarky, but that's not a valid test of judging.

 

[Plowboy]

No. I'd pretty much feel like this:

Smart girl.

 

[bbqczar]

This happened at a contest last year and the team was not allowed to use this new meat. So it seems that its up to a reps interpretation.?

Yep,I have seen several rule violations at comps and usually when the violation is brought up the rep/s will say something like,"I'll go talk to them,we don't want to disqualify them,they spent alot of money and time for this",or they will say something along the lines of,it's not that big a deal,it's kind of a grey area,all of that isn't right at all.

 

[Just Smokin' Around]

Yep,I have seen several rule violations at comps and usually when the violation is brought up the rep/s will say something like,"I'll go talk to them,we don't want to disqualify them,they spent alot of money and time for this",or they will say something along the lines of,it's not that big a deal,it's kind of a grey area,all of that isn't right at all.

Do you care to share? I've only done 35 or 40 contests, but, I can't think I've seen any violations of the rules. But, then again, I'm not looking for them. I'm sure there are people living on the edge of legality and not living "the spirit the rules were intended".
There was one exception last year - on my way to the bathroom before turn-ins started, I saw someone garnishing their box with red leaf lettuce. I let them know that was against the rules and asked if they had any other garnish. They didn't. So, I went around to a few teams and gathered up some extra green leaf lettuce and gave it to the young lady. She was very surprised and appreciative. I don't know if that's a rule violation, but, it seemed like the right thing to do.

 

[Just Smokin' Around]

.....
For those that talked about the AC, where is the saftey in triming chicken on a 90+ degree day under an ezup. There is still no advantage gained by triming, seasoning, or storing your meat somewhere else if it is cooked on your own cooker. .......

I think one's equipment makes a big difference. Having a nice trailer or motor home to trim meats in comfort and stay out of the weather is an advantage in and of itself. So, there is an advantage to do it in comfort as opposed to 90 degree heat where you may make mistakes trying to get it done. That's why I trim chicken at home. Having other equipment, like a cambro, could be considered an advantage. If I want the advantages of those with climate controlled quarters and other equipment, then it's up to me and my team to provide it or overcome not having it.

But, that's not what this thread was about. I don't see much harm in parsley parties.

 

[Alexa RnQ]

Yep,I have seen several rule violations at comps and usually when the violation is brought up the rep/s will say something like,"I'll go talk to them,we don't want to disqualify them,they spent alot of money and time for this",or they will say something along the lines of,it's not that big a deal,it's kind of a grey area,all of that isn't right at all.

Which reps were these?

 

[Bunny]

This is where I am different. I think as far as the competition stuff it needs to stay in your cook site which includes box building it takes me about 45 min to make all my boxes can you seriously not take a 45 min break from drinking? All meat prep needs to be done at contest also.

I would much rather prep my meat at home. There's nothing worse than washing chicken at your site. It's much cleaner done at home!