"Pork" Burnt Ends?

didisea

Take a breath!
Joined
Nov 9, 2011
Messages
538
Reaction score
354
Points
0
Location
Everett, WA
This weekend, I had a judge give me a comment card from my pork entry, saying that "Burnt End a little chewy." In my box is a section of what I call "chunks," which are about the size of my girl thumb, that are not cut in nice cubes like I would do for brisket burnt ends. Just wondering if I missed the memo on this new style of pork?
 
It's becoming a pretty standard offering 'round these parts. Pork square ends!! However due to pork not having the same amount of internal fal as brisket point these PBE (pork burnt ends) are most often more hard and grisely than soft and delicious.
Ed
 
I would chalk it up to an inexperienced judge who reads way too many forums and gets excited by catchy "buzz words" without having a clue as to what they actually are. Real burnt ends are neither chunks of pork or even cubes of brisket point. They are simply the thin overcooked or "burnt" edges or tips of a cooked brisket that have been trimmed and sauced after the cook. The way most briskets get trimmed for competition, there are no thin edges, tips, or "ends". Somewhere along the way, someone cut up some cubes from the point, cooked them a little longer and called them burnt ends.
Delicious indeed, but not "burnt ends".
 
It's becoming a pretty standard offering 'round these parts. Pork square ends!! However due to pork not having the same amount of internal fal as brisket point these PBE (pork burnt ends) are most often more hard and grisely than soft and delicious.
Ed


A CBJ shouldn't prejudge... Just saying.....


:p
 
I noticed last weekend judges calling them pork burnt ends and talking specifically about how hard they are to eat. I said, "You mean pork cubes?" They looked at me like I was an idiot.

Anyway, to my surprise, if judges see pork cubes, they expect burnt end tenderness. Take that for what its worth. The judges also said they have seen a significant increase in people putting pork cubes in their turn in box over the last 12 months. I am going to go out on a limb and say I think Kosmos Q has something to do with that.
 
I would almost guarantee the Kosmos DVD have a lot to do with it. Especially if they are looking like burnt ends, as that's how they look on there. He calls them that also. It really bothers me when I hear that. You can refer to 5string's post for why I dislike it. It's the same thing.

Though, I am guilty of calling cubed point burnt ends. I didn't for a long time, but it just got painful explaining to people why they weren't burnt ends, and were, in fact, chunks or cubes of brisket/point. I got tired of doing that, so I just fell in line. I refuse to call something not brisket burnt ends, though.
 
A CBJ shouldn't prejudge... Just saying.....


:p


Actually I was speaking from past experience, not prejudging. The next one I run into will be judged as if it were the very first I've ever seen...just sayin...

I have consistenly refered to competion style "burnt ends" as "square ends" knowing full well what actual old school burnt ends are. However unless your cutting up multiple briskets your not going to have many "true" burnt ends. Thus the era of cubed points.
Ed
 
I did this last weekend and scored in the top 10. They were nice and tender or they wouldn't have went in the box. I wasn't going for "burnt ends". I just wanted to show multiple areas of the butt. I had slices, pulled chunks from around the bone and cubes from the center of the butt.

 
I did this last weekend and scored in the top 10. They were nice and tender or they wouldn't have went in the box. I wasn't going for "burnt ends". I just wanted to show multiple areas of the butt. I had slices, pulled chunks from around the bone and cubes from the center of the butt.


That's a 9 point box for sure no matter what you call it!
 
I did receive all 9's in appearance.
It scored
999
988
977
989
998
989

Judge #3 wasn't happy with something. oh well, his score was dropped
 
Like I said, thats a good looking box. I would be happy to eat anything in there.
 
I did receive all 9's in appearance.
It scored
999
988
977
989
998
989

Judge #3 wasn't happy with something. oh well, his score was dropped

Looks like judge #3 was happy, he thought your meat was excellent looking and above average in taste and tenderness. A 7 is not a bad score.
Ed
 
Looks like judge #3 was happy, he thought your meat was excellent looking and above average in taste and tenderness. A 7 is not a bad score.
Ed

Maybe in years gone by a 7 was agood score..7's can end your day in today's comp landscape
 
A 7 is death...

Looking at a 7 from both sides of the tent:

Cooks - a 7 is death (if you get more than one at a table).
Judges - a 7 is "above average" and NOT a "bad" score. If the entry is decent, but nothing special it gets a 7. A "bad" score is 5 or below (actually a 3) according to KCBS.
 
Looking at a 7 from both sides of the tent:

Cooks - a 7 is death (if you get more than one at a table).
Judges - a 7 is "above average" and NOT a "bad" score. If the entry is decent, but nothing special it gets a 7. A "bad" score is 5 or below (actually a 3) according to KCBS.
yep, when there is hundredths of a point separating us, sevens take a person out of the running pretty fast.
 
The only reason that a 7 can hurt a team badly these days is because of all the ridiculous over-scoring that is going on now. There was a 26 team contest in Conway, AR last weekend and the 18th Place Overall team had a 674.7544. That's an average score of 168.6886 over the four categories.

Are you friggin' kidding me?

We were the GC at a contest in Santa Clara, CA recently and we had ten 7s on our raw score page. Our total score was 678+ as was the RGCs. Clearly a number of 7s didn't kill is because the judges there weren't giving everything they saw all 8s and 9s.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Judges who don't use anything other than an 8 or a 9 are just as bad as judges who don't use anything other than a 6 or 7.
 
The only reason that a 7 can hurt a team badly these days is because of all the ridiculous over-scoring that is going on now. There was a 26 team contest in Conway, AR last weekend and the 18th Place Overall team had a 674.7544. That's an average score of 168.6886 over the four categories.

Are you friggin' kidding me?

We were the GC at a contest in Santa Clara, CA recently and we had ten 7s on our raw score page. Our total score was 678+ as was the RGCs. Clearly a number of 7s didn't kill is because the judges there weren't giving everything they saw all 8s and 9s.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Judges who don't use anything other than an 8 or a 9 are just as bad as judges who don't use anything other than a 6 or 7.

To be fair, I did have a decent cook :wink:
 
Back
Top