KCBS BOD voting

[cpw]

As for cooks being KCBS members, I think they should be required to be in order to cook a KCBS contest.

There was a thread on the FBA facebook page a couple of months ago about whether or not you should have to be an FBA member to cook an FBA event. As a non-FBA member, I didn't think it should be a requirement, but after hearing the arguments FOR requiring membership, it made a lot more sense, and I think the same thing could be said for KCBS. If the 3000 plus cooks in the TOY standings were all members, I think their voice would be heard much louder. And $40 a year is a drop in the bucket compared to all the other expenses we have.

 

[Scottie]

Candy, to clarify... I dont want all cooks on the BoD. But I am tired of rules being created, so the rep dominated board can shoot it down. Because by using your example, what do they know about cooking? You could use that reasoning for banquet chair, philanthropy, international, et al... (that is in no way singling out those committees, as much as it was using it as examples).

 

[Slamdunkpro]

As for cooks being KCBS members, I think they should be required to be in order to cook a KCBS contest.

The big stumbling block to this is Brown Forman. In order for a contest to be a Jack Qualifier it must be open to anyone.

 

[Candy Sue]

Lots of fluidity between CBJ, cooks, reps and organizers. I've done all 4 (I'm still on probation as a rep!), lots of other people have too. It takes all roles to make a contest happen. All roles should be represented on the board. When I got elected, I was the only primarily a cook on there, while Mike Lake and Paul Kirk cooked occasionally. All the other board members were reps.


There's been a real adjustment on the board with more inclusion the result. That's not a bad thing.


It'd be a good thing, IMO, if there was a moratorium on rule changes and examination made of rules, the rep alerts and consolidate it all down to one place where any cook and judge can see everything.


I personally feel very strongly that the CBJ program as it exists today should be eliminated. All instruction done by video, so everyone is taught the same way, the same things.


There should be a motivation for cooks to become KCBS members and be highly involved in the organization. What would do that for you?


Scoring needs to be more than 7-8-9 or 8-9. Let's do decimals to get the range back!


My time in BBQ politics is done. I wish the very best for KCBS and the 2017 board. Be a member! There's time to join and VOTE for next year's direction!

 

[Scottie]

You can have all the reps, CBJs and organizers and it still doesnt guarantee a contest. A contest is guaranteed when the cooks show up.... No cooks, no contest. No matter how important everyone else thinks they are.

 

[Right on Q]

Scoring needs to be more than 7-8-9 or 8-9. Let's do decimals to get the range back!

They have decimals in MBN. If you don't get a 9.9 or 10 from all the judges you don't make finals (top 3) typically :shocked:

 

[Slamdunkpro]

Scoring needs to be more than 7-8-9 or 8-9. Let's do decimals to get the range back!

They have decimals in MBN. If you don't get a 9.9 or 10 from all the judges you don't make finals (top 3) typically :shocked:

^^This^^ Add decimals and we go from 7-8-9 to 8-8.5-9 or 8.8-8.9-9.

 

[Jorge]

^^This^^ Add decimals and we go from 7-8-9 to 8-8.5-9 or 8.8-8.9-9.

I think that's a likely eventual outcome. For the first year, or maybe longer, it wouldn't surprise me to see it create some range. Instinctively I think it could lead to more comparative judging, but that's probably already going on as well.

No! I'm not suggesting that all CBJs are doing it.

 

[DUBBAGA]

So far, it looks like 3 of the 7 candidates for KCBS BOD are on the Brethren, and have been able to provide some input.

As the KCBS website only provide 7 questions for each of the candidates to answer, this would seem to be a good forum for any of them to put forth whatever additional information they would like the potential voters to know.

Would you like to expand on your published answers, or discuss something else which you feel should be considered before voting commences?

 

[Pappy Q]

So far, it looks like 3 of the 7 candidates for KCBS BOD are on the Brethren, and have been able to provide some input.

As the KCBS website only provide 7 questions for each of the candidates to answer, this would seem to be a good forum for any of them to put forth whatever additional information they would like the potential voters to know.

Would you like to expand on your published answers, or discuss something else which you feel should be considered before voting commences?

I'm open to any questions via here or through email at [email protected]

 

[DUBBAGA]

I'm open to any questions via here or through email at [email protected]

Thanks Tom. I already made my decision after reading your thoughtful answers.

Even though you have my vote, I am interested how you will attempt to address the difficulties you identify in your answer to Question #2.

"The biggest challenge to the success of this plan would be arriving at a consensus among the BOD and Executive leadership of KCBS to admit that there is a problem, then to set aside personal feelings and interests to do what is right for the entire membership."

 

[Pappy Q]

Thanks Tom. I already made my decision after reading your thoughtful answers.

Even though you have my vote, I am interested how you will attempt to address the difficulties you identify in your answer to Question #2.

"The biggest challenge to the success of this plan would be arriving at a consensus among the BOD and Executive leadership of KCBS to admit that there is a problem, then to set aside personal feelings and interests to do what is right for the entire membership."

I've made my views on that topic very well known, so if elected that sends a message to the BOD and the Executive Director that members believe it's an issue. At the first BOD meeting I will make a motion that a new BOD Committee be established for the sole purpose of overhauling the current Judging/Scoring system. If this is denied, I will continue to bring it up at every meeting and if it continues to be denied I will ask the membership to become more vocal in demanding the issue be addressed. I will be persistent and not back down.

 

[CaptTable]

I'm with Tom on this. Will be glad to expand on any of my answers either here or via email . . [email protected].

And, not just from a candidate point of view, but from a rep's and PERSONAL point of view, I would like to say thanks for the kind words expressed in this thread about how Kathy & I conduct ourselves at contests. THAT is what we shoot for at EVERY contest.

 

[DR]

^^This^^ Add decimals and we go from 7-8-9 to 8-8.5-9 or 8.8-8.9-9.

Personally i like the FBA judging. No decimals but they do use half point increments. Something might not be a 9 but damn close you could give it an 8.5 instead of dropping to an 8 or giving the 9.

 

[kmoore1021]

The only way to get the issues addressed is to vote some cooks on the board. Those of us who deal with it at every contest. I personally liked the way King of the Smoker organized their judges, it was all based on the average scores of those judges how they were seated at each table.

It's unfortunate that letters are being submitted by KCBS members and these issues are not being addressed and it's very apparent the members need advocates. I agree with Tom you have to keep pressing the issues and either A they will listen with open minds and open ears or B they will get so tired of hearing you they have no choice but to listen.

 

[TooSaucedToPork]

The 1-9 number system is fine...You just have to get everyone to use it correctly. Decimals, half points, adding numbers are all bandaids. It eventually heals wrong.

You give specific language for comparison on EACH OF THE CATEGORIES and each number...and then enforce it. Only then can change occur.

Examples

Appearance - ALL ENTRIES
9. Excellent Example- Looks better than the top 3 of this meat ever seen in your life
8. Very Good Example - There is absolutely nothing visually you would do differently - mouthwatering
7. Above Average Example - Well balanced color, Pleasing to the Eye - alluring
6. Average Example of Meat - Slightly off balanced color, Pleasing to the Eye, tempting
5. Below Average - Off balanced color, Pleasing to the Eye, appealing
4. Poor - Off balanced color, appetizing
3. Bad - Color not good, Not appetizing
2. Inedible - Color not good, Not appetizing, Don't want to put it in my mouth
1. DQ

Taste - ALL ENTRIES
9. Excellent Example of Meat - Tastes better than the top 3 of this meat ever eaten in your life
8. Very Good Example of Meat - There is absolutely nothing related to taste you would do differently
7. Above Average Example of Meat - Well blended spices, sauces, and flavors. Everything is balanced.
6. Average Example of Meat - Spices, sauces, and flavors are balanced but a single flavor is pronounced
5. Below Average - Spices, sauces, and flavors are balanced but a few flavors are pronounced.
4. Poor - Spices, sauces, and flavors are slightly off balance and a few flavors are pronounced.
3. Bad -Spices, sauces, and flavors are out of balance, multiple flavors are pronounced.
2. Inedible - Spices, sauces, and flavors do not go well together, most flavors are out of balance.
1. DQ

Rib Tenderness
9. Excellent Example - Perfect bite mark, clean bone, no meat falling off bone, very juicy, tender
8. Very Good Example - Perfect bite mark, no meat falling off bone, juicy, tender
7. Above Average Example - Bite mark in meat stays without meat coming totally off bone, juicy, tender
6. Average Example of Meat - When bite is taken meat pulls off bone, juicy, tender
5. Below Average - When bite is taken meat pulls off bone, a touch dry, but still tender
4. Poor - meat falling off bone or slightly chewy, juicy
3. Bad -meat mushy, tough or very dry
2. Inedible - meat mushy or tough and totally unappetizing
1. DQ

And so on...and so forth.

In order to create variation in numbers, specific goals and definitions are needed...not more numbers

JMHO

 

[rob g]

The 1-9 number system is fine...You just have to get everyone to use it correctly. Decimals, half points, adding numbers are all bandaids. It eventually heals wrong.

You give specific language for comparison on EACH OF THE CATEGORIES and each number...and then enforce it. Only then can change occur.

Examples

Appearance - ALL ENTRIES
9. Excellent Example- Looks better than the top 3 of this meat ever seen in your life
8. Very Good Example - There is absolutely nothing visually you would do differently - mouthwatering
7. Above Average Example - Well balanced color, Pleasing to the Eye - alluring
6. Average Example of Meat - Slightly off balanced color, Pleasing to the Eye, tempting
5. Below Average - Off balanced color, Pleasing to the Eye, appealing
4. Poor - Off balanced color, appetizing
3. Bad - Color not good, Not appetizing
2. Inedible - Color not good, Not appetizing, Don't want to put it in my mouth
1. DQ

Taste - ALL ENTRIES
9. Excellent Example of Meat - Tastes better than the top 3 of this meat ever eaten in your life
8. Very Good Example of Meat - There is absolutely nothing related to taste you would do differently
7. Above Average Example of Meat - Well blended spices, sauces, and flavors. Everything is balanced.
6. Average Example of Meat - Spices, sauces, and flavors are balanced but a single flavor is pronounced
5. Below Average - Spices, sauces, and flavors are balanced but a few flavors are pronounced.
4. Poor - Spices, sauces, and flavors are slightly off balance and a few flavors are pronounced.
3. Bad -Spices, sauces, and flavors are out of balance, multiple flavors are pronounced.
2. Inedible - Spices, sauces, and flavors do not go well together, most flavors are out of balance.
1. DQ

Rib Tenderness
9. Excellent Example - Perfect bite mark, clean bone, no meat falling off bone, very juicy, tender
8. Very Good Example - Perfect bite mark, no meat falling off bone, juicy, tender
7. Above Average Example - Bite mark in meat stays without meat coming totally off bone, juicy, tender
6. Average Example of Meat - When bite is taken meat pulls off bone, juicy, tender
5. Below Average - When bite is taken meat pulls off bone, a touch dry, but still tender
4. Poor - meat falling off bone or slightly chewy, juicy
3. Bad -meat mushy, tough or very dry
2. Inedible - meat mushy or tough and totally unappetizing
1. DQ

And so on...and so forth.

JMHO

That would be a great start. At the same time you need to define "average". In my opinion average should be defined as the average competition meat you have sampled. This would narrow down the wild variations in people's life experiences. Most samples at a competition should score in the 6 to 7 range. This would leave room for a stellar sample to be able to stand out from the crowd with an 8 or 9.

 

[MattG]

I've always voted for 4. There's 4 seats on the board and filling every seat matters to how the board operates. I don't buy the dilution thing, sorry.


Pappy and Walrus are for sure for me. Both will be solid for KCBS, I think. I am also voting for Dennis Polson. Have you seen all he has done in 2016? He's been a valuable board member and has earned member respect. He has earned my vote.


The 4th vote is harder. I can't vote for anyone associated with a provider of services to KCBS. There's already 2 seats on the board filled by members in that same situation. 4 directors who benefit with a check indirectly from KCBS is too many in my opinion. That cuts out Randall Bowman and Michael McDearman. Not that they aren't people I like or I consider friends or that they wouldn't be good directors, I just don't like the "feel" of it.


I'm likely to vote for Eddie Smith. He's got a solid BBQ background and valuable life experience. His experience on other boards may be valuable on the KCBS board. I particularly like his short term and long term goals.


That's where I'm voting and why. Thanks for reading and I hope you consider using ALL 4 of your votes. Again, all 4 seats are vacant, all 4 seats are important, all 4 of your votes count!

I would ask that you reconsider looking at Randall Bowman. Yes he is an organizer but I believe he is a cook first. Just this year he's cooked 11 competitions. We desperately need more board members that care about the cooks. The judges may pay the bills but it's us cooks that give the judges the opportunity to actually judge. And unfortunately I feel like the cooks are getting the short end of the stick more and more often. Randall is always making sure that team are getting what they need at the competitions that he organizes. And I mean over and beyond. Randall is a big ol boy with an even bigger heart. And we need people on the board that are not only cooks and not only reps but both and can see both the whole picture and not just part of it. So I would ask you to read the interviews that are in the Bullsheet (if you haven't already) and if you have anymore questions reach out to him on Facebook or at Deep South Smokers. I'm sure you won't be disappointed.

 

[MattG]

The only way to get the issues addressed is to vote some cooks on the board. Those of us who deal with it at every contest. I personally liked the way King of the Smoker organized their judges, it was all based on the average scores of those judges how they were seated at each table.

It's unfortunate that letters are being submitted by KCBS members and these issues are not being addressed and it's very apparent the members need advocates. I agree with Tom you have to keep pressing the issues and either A they will listen with open minds and open ears or B they will get so tired of hearing you they have no choice but to listen.

Yes, Yes, Yes! Why can't we track the judges score and set the judging tables accordingly!

 

[lavinjj]

The 1-9 number system is fine...You just have to get everyone to use it correctly. Decimals, half points, adding numbers are all bandaids. It eventually heals wrong.

You give specific language for comparison on EACH OF THE CATEGORIES and each number...and then enforce it. Only then can change occur.

Examples

Appearance - ALL ENTRIES
9. Excellent Example- Looks better than the top 3 of this meat ever seen in your life
8. Very Good Example - There is absolutely nothing visually you would do differently - mouthwatering
7. Above Average Example - Well balanced color, Pleasing to the Eye - alluring
6. Average Example of Meat - Slightly off balanced color, Pleasing to the Eye, tempting
5. Below Average - Off balanced color, Pleasing to the Eye, appealing
4. Poor - Off balanced color, appetizing
3. Bad - Color not good, Not appetizing
2. Inedible - Color not good, Not appetizing, Don't want to put it in my mouth
1. DQ

Taste - ALL ENTRIES
9. Excellent Example of Meat - Tastes better than the top 3 of this meat ever eaten in your life
8. Very Good Example of Meat - There is absolutely nothing related to taste you would do differently
7. Above Average Example of Meat - Well blended spices, sauces, and flavors. Everything is balanced.
6. Average Example of Meat - Spices, sauces, and flavors are balanced but a single flavor is pronounced
5. Below Average - Spices, sauces, and flavors are balanced but a few flavors are pronounced.
4. Poor - Spices, sauces, and flavors are slightly off balance and a few flavors are pronounced.
3. Bad -Spices, sauces, and flavors are out of balance, multiple flavors are pronounced.
2. Inedible - Spices, sauces, and flavors do not go well together, most flavors are out of balance.
1. DQ

Rib Tenderness
9. Excellent Example - Perfect bite mark, clean bone, no meat falling off bone, very juicy, tender
8. Very Good Example - Perfect bite mark, no meat falling off bone, juicy, tender
7. Above Average Example - Bite mark in meat stays without meat coming totally off bone, juicy, tender
6. Average Example of Meat - When bite is taken meat pulls off bone, juicy, tender
5. Below Average - When bite is taken meat pulls off bone, a touch dry, but still tender
4. Poor - meat falling off bone or slightly chewy, juicy
3. Bad -meat mushy, tough or very dry
2. Inedible - meat mushy or tough and totally unappetizing
1. DQ

And so on...and so forth.

In order to create variation in numbers, specific goals and definitions are needed...not more numbers

JMHO

What you are suggesting is much like they have with the beer judging certification program for the American Home Brewer's Association and makes judging more standardized and helps to show those who are learning what to look for when judging in a competition. If something like that could be agreed to with KCBS it would go along way to evening out scores across the board and I'm for something like that.