Grill Games Kenosha WI Table 646

[ModelMaker]

Man I wish I had a solution for all of you, my time on the CBJ Committee was spent trying to fix problems that shot up from time to time.
I wrote a article for the Bullsheet (Judge 8841) solely for the purpose of making questionable practices highlighted and explained.
Mandatory annual classes via online seminars are a much needed practice, but the owner of KCBS wants no part of it.
Ed

 

[Okie Sawbones]

I don't understand this mentality. I will continue to support KCBS. Maybe they will see the light.

 

[pharp]

I'm not going to change anything because of the score that I get from a TOD. I hit that dreaded table this summer placed like 20th in chicken. I thought it was some of the best chicken I've ever turned in. I cooked the same recipe at he next contest and was 1st place. I was answering your question as to why cooks analyze scores to the nth degree. As far as the comment made by Okie Sawbones that sometimes the BBQ is just bad I'm not gonna totally buy into that either. I know darn well that there is bad BBQ turned in, I'm guilty of turning it in. That said, look at the example on the original post. Out of all the entry's they judged that day there was only one entry worthy of a spot in the top 10 placing 6th place in Pork, I guess that's a lot of BAD BBQ for that table, or could it be a TOD. To me a TOD only poses a problem if all of the teams don't hit that table.

I agree with your last sentence a lot. If every team hits it, then no big deal. But if not everyone hits that table it can lead to a big swing. On top of that if a team that doesn't hit the TOD but instead hits a consistently higher scoring table that can make for a huge swing. It happens to everyone and I get that. This scenario (for me it was chicken) cost me a top 10 this year but I also left a lot of points on the table in pork...so at the end of the day a better cook would have earned me the result I wanted.

 

[SuperQue]

What exactly is the definition for a Table of Death? Is it merely the lowest scoring table at a contest or is it statistically significantly lower than all of the rest? I'd think you'd have to look at the overall score of that table compared to all of the rest of the tables to determine if they were an outlier or an unlucky table that received bad bbq.

I've been on tables where we had 2-3 entries of decent bbq (8-9) and the rest were pretty bad. Our whole table mostly agreed on the reasons why and we just were on the wrong end of cooks in their worst category.

Based on the overall scoring, the winning score was in the lower 670's, i would guess this TOD was not statistically significant in their scoring. But without hard evidence, database regressions, testing, my opinion is anecdotal, much like the opinions of the chefs. Without hard facts all we can do is speculate but posing opinions as fact is misleading and is not a valid constructive argument.

In my opinion, one way to ensure 100% coverage would be to limit contests to 24 teams so that every team has to go in front of the same set judges. Everybody gets a fair shake.

 

[kwas68]

Our team ended up on that table and it clobbered us. Got a comment card that was useful, though.

I don’t have a problem in general with the judges. Judging competition barbecue is subjective. It is the nature of the beast. Sometimes you benefit from it, sometimes you don’t. Good teams will always rise to the top and bad teams don’t.

What I would like changed is how judges are seated to level the playing field. This is what we expect KCBS as a sanctioning body to do for us as competitors – level the playing field as much as possible. KCBS can get the data on judges’ average scores and seat them according to their previous stats to even out the tables. While past results do not guarantee future performance, I think using statistics would be better than anything currently in place. I’ve been at two contests using the Southwest Shuffle. They would have been better off lining them up by height as they resulted in TODs (and a TOA).

I’d imagine that using previous data would be as simple as an Excel macro. This shouldn’t be that hard.

 

[bvbull200]

Our team ended up on that table and it clobbered us. Got a comment card that was useful, though.

I don’t have a problem in general with the judges. Judging competition barbecue is subjective. It is the nature of the beast. Sometimes you benefit from it, sometimes you don’t. Good teams will always rise to the top and bad teams don’t.

What I would like changed is how judges are seated to level the playing field. This is what we expect KCBS as a sanctioning body to do for us as competitors – level the playing field as much as possible. KCBS can get the data on judges’ average scores and seat them according to their previous stats to even out the tables. While past results do not guarantee future performance, I think using statistics would be better than anything currently in place. I’ve been at two contests using the Southwest Shuffle. They would have been better off lining them up by height as they resulted in TODs (and a TOA).

I’d imagine that using previous data would be as simple as an Excel macro. This shouldn’t be that hard.

Excel has the tools built in for a regression analysis. Just need to input the data and solve.

As for the comment that there is "always" a TOD, I don't think that's true. Sure, there will always be a table that had the lowest scores, but I don't think that is the spirit of the TOD designation. Not all bell-curves are created equal and a table that sits unusually far along the tail of the curve would probably be considered a TOD. Stats are a funny thing, though, and there is a reason few things come with a certainty. A "TOD" could have actually received all of the worst boxes in the competition, even if randomization makes it unlikely.