Questioning Results

How do you know your awesome brisket was still that good when the judges tasted it?. A lot can happen to brisket slices being held in a box and while laying on a paper mat. I'd bet money your slices were dry, dull and bland by the time the judges got to them.

We cooked the same contest and cooked the best chicken we have cooked to date (or so we thought) and landed 73rd..... We also felt that our brisket was a little over done, but it landed us a 12th place.

Overall, we felt good about all of our food so I'm trying not to be reactionary and change my entire chicken program because of one bad contest. It does drive you crazy though.

I know that Gary and Dionn from Holy Smokes told me before awards that they felt that their pork was terrible, yet they got first in pork and landed the RGC. Who knows, but I'll be out their weekend after next to give it another shot.

I blame it on the margaritas.

As stated earlier, there is not much way the boxes could have been mis-numbered. At our turn-in table, as do most reps, we use two (2) people to change numbers. One reads the box number, the other looks down the list to find the corresponding alternate number, removes the sticker and covers the box number. The reader is watching to ensure the proper sticker is used.

Table captains are instructed to not remove boxes from their table until told that the numbers had cleared (ALL matched). All boxes are kept until well after awards just in case someone does want to question their entry, so please feel free to do so any time.

As for scoring input. Each card is double checked before "save" is pressed. Top 2, middle 2, and bottom 2, along with any individual score of 20 or less, is audited for each category. We even audit some individual teams that surprise us by being near the bottom when their reputation indicates they are usually higher. Then, when individual team score sheets are printed they are EACH reviewed to make sure no particularly low score may have slipped by for ANY team.

I thought the scores n Cumming were actually pretty high. The grand champion in Plant City would have finished 33rd in Cumming.

Ray is right, right now 7's are deadly. Do I have an answer? No. Decimals? Wouldn't the deadly 7 just change to 7.5 or 7.8? Someone will determine the magic number.

Sorry for the long post, but just wanted to put a couple of things out there. Hope it eased some minds that every effort is made to ensure the scoring is as honest and fair as possible. Knowing how much money (both spent and available to win) is on the line makes it pretty stressful for us, too.

Phillip

You said these judges stopped by and commented, I'd give you a high score also since I couldnt be secrective and vote in private, surprised they didnt say 9's,, (This is on top up having several judges stop by and taste our turn in brisked and give us their thoughts (at least 8s in T&T).

There's been a few contests this year when we've turned in what we thought was fantastic, well-cooked and presented food.

And then we say through awards, still waiting to hear our named called after GC is called... The fall Rome comp and Winder were two that were the biggest disappointments.

We didn't come out of there with much money or hardware, but to come away in 5th overall in that field...I'm still grinning from ear to ear.

Bottom line, it happens to everyone at some point or another. As long as there are humans involved it will be so. You just always have to cook your best then hope and pray you land on good tables. Excellent cooking is only part of the winning equation.

Y'all just haven't figured it out yet, any time you think you nailed it you should expect crap scores. Conversely when you turn in crap look for that top score, it's something in the stars me thinks.
Seriously though, I'm thinking the "problem" is the 2 kinds of judges. one judge uses 7,8,9's pretty much exclusively. They think if they give a 7 the poor cook team will not win and they feel bad after being instructed by the Rep to "give the team the benefit" because they've spent so much money.
Then there's the other kind of judge that sores as they were taught, each entry has the potential to be scored 2 thru 9, and is very aware that a score of 6 is average and there is plenty of average out there.
So, in my opinion until all KCBS judges get off this 7,8,9 only mentality, you cooks are going to continue to be amazed and amused...
Ed

Rub said:

Bottom line, it happens to everyone at some point or another. As long as there are humans involved it will be so. You just always have to cook your best then hope and pray you land on good tables. Excellent cooking is only part of the winning equation.

Click to expand...

Agreed, I think it will balance out. I have taken some walks at times that baffles the mind. You got to take the good with the bad!

ModelMaker said:

Seriously though, I'm thinking the "problem" is the 2 kinds of judges. one judge uses 7,8,9's pretty much exclusively. They think if they give a 7 the poor cook team will not win and they feel bad after being instructed by the Rep to "give the team the benefit" because they've spent so much money.
Then there's the other kind of judge that sores as they were taught, each entry has the potential to be scored 2 thru 9, and is very aware that a score of 6 is average and there is plenty of average out there.
So, in my opinion until all KCBS judges get off this 7,8,9 only mentality, you cooks are going to continue to be amazed and amused...
Ed

Click to expand...

I do agree it appears that there are 2 kinds of judges. Not sure if that will ever go away, but it can certainly be worked on.

To your statement "So, in my opinion until all KCBS judges get off this 7,8,9 only mentality, you cooks are going to continue to be amazed and amused...", I don't think is accurate because I (and probably other cooks) would still be "amazed/amused" with large fluctuations using the whole scoring table.

So to that point one way I see to somewhat "fix" or at least shed more light to why a score was a 7, 6, 5, etc is to have the judges use feedback cards a lot more even for 6's and 7's. If I see a random 6 in flavor or tenderness when all the other scores were 8's and 9's I have no shame in saying I get the knee jerk "what the heck is this person thinking" reaction. Did they in fact get the one piece in the box that was dramatically different then the others or are their standards much higher or whatever.

Because there are judges out there that say cooks just can't handle a 5, 6 or a 7 and immediately cooks jump on the defensive thus keeping the cooks vs judge line very large. Sometimes that is true simply for the fact because we don't know why we got those scores. Yes I hate getting those low scores, but I hate even more that I don't know why so I can work to improve my product. Even if it is a 7 I want to know why.

So for the judges that don't cook or even the ones that do cook and think cooks can't handle a low score that is just part of the story for me. Because how would they like it if you were told something was awful/mediocre (for anything in life), but given no explanation to why and how to improve so the next competition (scenario) you can fix the issue. Yes we spend a lot of money and no that isn't a reason to simply give us higher scores, but give us a reason you thought the food wasn't up to your standards of "excellent/9" so we can improve.
Anyways that was a little long and I realize having that many comment cards filled out would be difficult, but something to think about.

I always like these kinds of discussions because I think they will help to improve (not perfect, as you will never please everyone) the scoring system. Comments like "deal with it", "suck it up" etc lead nothing to constructive conversation for what the op was looking for.

fnbish said:

I always like these kinds of discussions because I think they will help to improve (not perfect, as you will never please everyone) the scoring system. Comments like "deal with it", "suck it up" etc lead nothing to constructive conversation for what the op was looking for.

Click to expand...

JMO here Jason after 10 years of bbq scores and observing this very thing, but the people who need cluing in aren't reading this or any other bbq bulletin board. For the most part "we" are not the problem, we get it. The ones who need to see this never will because they aren't as involved on as many levels as we are.

I used to get my hopes up 8-10 years ago thinking that these issues would be rectified, now I've learned to "suck it up" and "deal with it" so it doesn't drive me crazy. I would love to see improvements but I am not holding my breath.

The worst is when you get 989589, you wonder, maybe I deserved all 5's? or maybe one judge was a douche and I deserved the better scores. Human judging will never be perfect, and as far as the judging goes it will always be compared to the best entry they have ever had or what in their mind should be the perfect entry. So unless you nail that, its rough. Just move on. 7's are good scores in most parts. Keep it up, you will nail a first next comp! Show the box and we will tell you what you deserved at least in appearance.

Rub said:

JMO here Jason after 10 years of bbq scores and observing this very thing, but the people who need cluing in aren't reading this or any other bbq bulletin board. For the most part "we" are not the problem, we get it. The ones who need to see this never will because they aren't as involved on as many levels as we are.

I used to get my hopes up 8-10 years ago thinking that these issues would be rectified, now I've learned to "suck it up" and "deal with it" so it doesn't drive me crazy. I would love to see improvements but I am not holding my breath.

Click to expand...

Yeah and I do get that and certainly as someone still "new'ish" to competitions I may have more of a "youthful faith" that things can change :doh:. But my main point was really for more comment cards. In the end I still work on my product and won't let strange scores get me down as I know the way it is now won't change overnight.

CaptTable said:

As for scoring input. Each card is double checked before "save" is pressed. Top 2, middle 2, and bottom 2, along with any individual score of 20 or less, is audited for each category. We even audit some individual teams that surprise us by being near the bottom when their reputation indicates they are usually higher. Then, when individual team score sheets are printed they are EACH reviewed to make sure no particularly low score may have slipped by for ANY team.

Click to expand...

Phil, I'm glad to see that. And I know that you and kathy, ernie and linda do a hell of a job. KCBS reps are the first things I consider when going to a contest.

I did not realize the contest he spoke of with the Cumming, Ga. contest.

DawgPhan said:

have you ever actually gotten your boxes back after awards?

just asking because I would have never even thought about that.

Click to expand...

No, I never had to ask. But if I got a score of 20 points or more, less than what I would assume, I'd have to ask. I usually assume a 10 point swing from what I'd guess I should get. (which is a lot still)..

All of this being said, we have all heard that when you thinks it's bad you do well and visa versa. I think a lot of it comes down to the luck of the table. I also think that presentation has a lot to do with your score. I mean if a judge has already given you a 7 in appearance it makes it easier to give lower scores on taste and texture.

I think this contest is well run with Randall and crew paying attention to cooks needs. We will definitely be back.

Also, to be devils advocate getting straight 7's is pretty consistent.

It should be a little easier for cooks when detailed scoring is rolled out. In FBA we see how a table scores on all 4 categories. Even see how a judge scores. Believe it or not there really are tables that average 2 points less than others sometimes. Luck of the draw if you hit that one. Also tables that score way high.

In larger contests that draw nationally ranked teams form 1000+ miles away the scores are usually higher and the quality of entries off the chart. A top 10 entry from a local contest may be middle of the pack in these contests.

Like Rub said, we learn to live with it. That or go crazy and lose a lot of friends.

drbbq said:

Am I the only guy that thinks 7's making you almost DAL is a problem? With a three points system it's anybody's guess who will win.

Click to expand...

It was bound to happen when the "start at 6" judging point went away.

My opinion only!

Ford said:

It should be a little easier for cooks when detailed scoring is rolled out. In FBA we see how a table scores on all 4 categories. Even see how a judge scores. Believe it or not there really are tables that average 2 points less than others sometimes. Luck of the draw if you hit that one. Also tables that score way high.

In larger contests that draw nationally ranked teams form 1000+ miles away the scores are usually higher and the quality of entries off the chart. A top 10 entry from a local contest may be middle of the pack in these contests.

Like Rub said, we learn to live with it. That or go crazy and lose a lot of friends.

Click to expand...

The table-level results are coming soon with KCBScore. It's not going to help the 3 point scoring problem though. I have issues with mandating comment cards at a certain score too (like a 5 or below). All that does is gently direct judges to a 6-7-8-9 score.

My opinion only...