Judge classes suspended?

[Podge]

Therefore, there is a need to discontinue KCBS contests until there are enough "retrained" or "newly certified" judges to be able to provide knowledgeable and consistent judges for each contest.

Somehow this just doesn't pass the sanity check either...

It wouldn't kill me to take off for a year, especially if that meant better judging.. and I'm dead serious when I say that. I know I am the exception. I'm close to 'retiring' as it is. But you do make a good point, but there should be some sort of common ground. Can't keep on the way we're going.

 

[Bob in Corona]

Curious what people think retraining should involve other than :
1. Reinforcing that only the current, published rules are to be used.
2. Reinforcing that only the current judging procedures, as played during the judges meeting prior to each judging session, are used.

Personally, I would like to see KCBS state that prior procedures, such as starting a some number, are not accepted judging procedures and shall not be used. Also removal of the phrases 'score down' and 'score up' from the vernacular of judges and cooks alike.

Your thoughts...

 

[woodburner]

Has anyone taken a "refresher class" if your a current member and judge in the KCBS does it cost anything?

Thanks Woodburner

 

[Rookie'48]

. . . prior procedures, such as starting a some number, are not accepted judging procedures and shall not be used. Also removal of the phrases 'score down' and 'score up' from the vernacular of judges and cooks alike.

Your thoughts...

The first generation of judges were taught to start at 9 and deduct points for things that were "wrong". The next generation (mine) were taught to start at 6 (average) and go up or down as needed. The last and largest group has been instructed to give the sample whatever score that the judge feels has been earned.

One of the largest stumbling blocks that I can see is that, first, no one has a definition of "average" and second, that everyone's "average" is different.

Has anyone taken a "refresher class" if your a current member and judge in the KCBS does it cost anything?

Thanks Woodburner

If you are a CBJ in good standing you can take a refresher at no cost. Now, you've got to understand that it's kind of up to the organizer if they have enough room for the "extras". One way to do this is to offer to volunteer as a helper for the class - sometimes there's a shortage of helpers who have some knowledge of what goes on.

 

[Bob in Corona]

One of the largest stumbling blocks that I can see is that, first, no one has a definition of "average" and second, that everyone's "average" is different.

So very true. Being a member of the most recent method, we were told our 'average' should be based on our lifetime bbq experience. Although I have never seen an official written statement to that effect. Not only are our lifetime bbq experiences different, they continually change as our judging experience grows. A sliding scale starting at some universally undefined point. At least it's consistently inconsistent.

By chance, do you have any printed info on those past methods ? Would really like to see how the judging methods/procedures were handled back then.

Bob

 

[Podge]

What about a probationary period. By the end of 2016, all judges, new and existing, to have completed the new standardized judging class to be able to judge in 2017 and beyond? That is more than enough time and more time than what I'm comfortable with.

 

[thesemicullen]

I would be willing to accept a probationary period in a select time frame if we're guaranteed to have a certain number of judging classes regionally to service the thousands of people who will have to get re-certified.

There hasn't been a class in the Memphis area in years because we've been trying to manage the amount of judges here.

I honestly don't think ensuring every currently certified judge gets recertified to a new standard is feasible. Not in a classroom setting, anyway. Online training, however, is quite doable. I could see that.

 

[Podge]

I would be willing to accept a probationary period in a select time frame if we're guaranteed to have a certain number of judging classes regionally to service the thousands of people who will have to get re-certified.

There hasn't been a class in the Memphis area in years because we've been trying to manage the amount of judges here.

I honestly don't think ensuring every currently certified judge gets recertified to a new standard is feasible. Not in a classroom setting, anyway. Online training, however, is quite doable. I could see that.

I would agree to an online training system. But it better be a damn good one.. Also, there should be a test right after it, and set up to where a person couldn't go back and look up the answers. Pass.. yer a judge..

I should add… I do not hate judges, I do not think judges are bad people, and I am not bashing judges.. I think they are some of the best people out there as are most BBQ competitors.. They are unfortunately trained inconsistently, which I could see some judges better than other judges as far as their job of judging. It is just as unfair to them as it is to cooks. For instance, a low-balling judge could be that way because that’s the way they were trained (possibly) and shouldn’t be flagged from future contests because of that.. Just like all other cooks, if I think my stuff deserves a 6, it gets a 5-7.. if it deserves a 9, it gets a 8-9. I don't have a problem with judges, I have a problem with judging.

 

[Southern Boy]

It is that CBJ review, or the threat of being reviewed, causing the overall higher scoring. Judges do not want to be relegated (using an English soccer term) for being a low scoring judge and having to go through retraining.

I am in favor of putting a hold on CBJ classes simply so current judges will have the opportunity to judge more frequently. Better judges come from judging more contests, not from sitting in a class learning about red leaf lettuce. Classes cannot teach taste and with only one or two cooks at a class, it is very hard to teach tenderness. Only by being able to judge will people gain that necessary experience.

It will not however change the high scoring. That went out the window when Reps. started warning judges about being sent to retraining for scoring lower.

Excellent points, thanks for the wisdom.

The misstep by KCBS was not so much changes in training over the years, although that was certainly not ideal, but the bigger problem was the information given to judges about how and why they are tracking scoring. It was poorly explained and raised more questions than it answered. The minute I heard it, all I could think was, uh-oh, this is going to be bad. I knew it was going to narrow scores into a tighter range and would be at the expense of objectivity.

Judges should be knowledgeable, fair, and fearless. Judges should never be afraid to give a 9 or a 4 if an entry deserves it (and the 4 better come with a comment card obviously).

Regarding the differences in training over the years and the issue of the "starting point" score, this can be dealt with. Decertifying judges is a gross overreaction, and requiring judges to take another training class is not necessary. The in-person class with the initial training is a must because that's when you're taught fine points of appearance, taste and tenderness. Teaching how to score is a different matter. That can be easily taught, and re-taught, online. Just require each CBJ to take an online test which instills the current approach to scoring. Also, change the recording played before each competition. Then, don't change it again every three years. I'm up for that online test as well as any other online training they offer. Most judges I know want to learn as much as they can about bbq because we take our responsibility seriously.

One last thought while I'm up on the soapbox... Scoring ranges have narrowed for the reasons mentioned above, but you know what, bbq entries have also become more homogenized. I've seen it over many years as a judge and for whatever reason...cooking classes, online training, or cooks sharing successful practices...it is not unusual to get 6 chicken boxes at one table that all look and taste fairly similar. I have no problem with that and it's also true that overall quality of entries has gone up. But, don't be shocked by less variation in scores when there is less variation in the entries. It's the subtle differences that separate the 8's and 9's.

 

[5string]

After judging today, I'm more confused than ever. I actually witnessed a table captain AND rep try to convince a judge to change his score. The judge stood by his score and challenged them both to taste the sample for themselves. His score stood.
what I learned today was that perhaps the retraining should start with the reps. Even the judging instructions differ greatly by region. If everyone is to get back on the same page, it needs to start at the top.
Unless the laws of physics have changed, sh*t still rolls downhill.

 

[ModelMaker]

Once a score is placed on the score card it can not be changed unless it was placed in the wrong box or was a DQ. Both actions require Rep approval.
However a out of line score can be brought to the attention of the Rep and a discussion between the parties will take place to try to have the score given explained.
I can't imagine any Rep trying to make a judge change their score.
It looks like the judge was sure of his score and stood by it, good for him/her.
If a sample deserves a 4 then give it that 4 and be prepared to explain your score!
Ed

 

[Slamdunkpro]

Once a score is placed on the score card it can not be changed unless it was placed in the wrong box or was a DQ.
Ed

Unless of course the rep invokes Rule#1.

 

[Smoke'n Ice]

Unless of course the rep invokes Rule#1.

Well, there is always the data entry phase :heh:

 

[Jorge]

Once a score is placed on the score card it can not be changed unless it was placed in the wrong box or was a DQ. Both actions require Rep approval.
However a out of line score can be brought to the attention of the Rep and a discussion between the parties will take place to try to have the score given explained.
I can't imagine any Rep trying to make a judge change their score.
It looks like the judge was sure of his score and stood by it, good for him/her.
If a sample deserves a 4 then give it that 4 and be prepared to explain your score!
Ed

Ed, looked briefly this morning and couldn't find what I was looking for. The more I thought about this the more it seemed like ther used to be a provision for a score to be changed with Rep approval. It went something like, "....once written a score can't be changed without a Contest Rep...". I also don't remember it being part of the DQ process. Does that sound familiar at all?

 

[ModelMaker]

Ed, looked briefly this morning and couldn't find what I was looking for. The more I thought about this the more it seemed like ther used to be a provision for a score to be changed with Rep approval. It went something like, "....once written a score can't be changed without a Contest Rep...". I also don't remember it being part of the DQ process. Does that sound familiar at all?

I helped at a CBJ/CTC class yesterday and this exact situation was discussed and the ruling (pry from Rep advisory?) was "no score shall be changed once written down as this becomes comparison judging". Now granted a Rep wanting a score changed because it was "out of line" with the others is definatley beyond their scope and even ability. If this is indeed a documented case with witnesses it should be presented by the person calling foul to the chair of the Rep Committee found at the KCBS website.
Ed

 

[5string]

I helped at a CBJ/CTC class yesterday and this exact situation was discussed and the ruling (pry from Rep advisory?) was "no score shall be changed once written down as this becomes comparison judging". Now granted a Rep wanting a score changed because it was "out of line" with the others is definatley beyond their scope and even ability. If this is indeed a documented case with witnesses it should be presented by the person calling foul to the chair of the Rep Committee found at the KCBS website.
Ed

The judge fully intends to report the matter to the appropriate persons.

 

[Jorge]

I helped at a CBJ/CTC class yesterday and this exact situation was discussed and the ruling (pry from Rep advisory?) was "no score shall be changed once written down as this becomes comparison judging". Now granted a Rep wanting a score changed because it was "out of line" with the others is definatley beyond their scope and even ability. If this is indeed a documented case with witnesses it should be presented by the person calling foul to the chair of the Rep Committee found at the KCBS website.
Ed

Thanks Ed. I found what I was remembering. It was in the CBJ Manual, and stated that once written a score couldn't be changed without the permission of the Table Captain and Contest Rep. When that would happen was a little vague. I new I'd read it, but couldn't remember what application, if any, was associated with it.

The judge fully intends to report the matter to the appropriate persons.

In any situation like this it's helpful, and important, for those that witnessed any sort of incident to contact KCBS. Sometimes different people will see the same event differently. Sometimes additional witnesses prevent it from becoming a swearing match. The more information KCBS has, the easier it is for them to determine what happened, and what if anything should be done about it.

 

[Porcine Perfection]

Thanks Ed. I found what I was remembering. It was in the CBJ Manual, and stated that once written a score couldn't be changed without the permission of the Table Captain and Contest Rep. When that would happen was a little vague.

Probably the most common instance is if the score was written in the wrong field of the score sheet.

 

[Funtimebbq]

After judging today, I'm more confused than ever. I actually witnessed a table captain AND rep try to convince a judge to change his score. The judge stood by his score and challenged them both to taste the sample for themselves. His score stood.
what I learned today was that perhaps the retraining should start with the reps. Even the judging instructions differ greatly by region. If everyone is to get back on the same page, it needs to start at the top.
Unless the laws of physics have changed, sh*t still rolls downhill.

Are you referring to the contest in Lake Havasu? At that contest, it was made quite clear during the question/answer period in the judges meeting that once a score is written down it cannot be changed except in the case of a DQ and only at the instructions of a KCBS Rep. The reps that day were the Macintosh's and the Whitebooks. Were any of those 4 involved in the alleged incident?

 

[Rookie'48]

One of the largest stumbling blocks that I can see is that, first, no one has a definition of "average" and second, that everyone's "average" is different.

By chance, do you have any printed info on those past methods ? Would really like to see how the judging methods/procedures were handled back then.
Bob

Sorry Bob, I have nothing in writing on this. I know how we were taught and I've listened to a bunch of the "older" CBJs talk about the "start at nine and go down" process. From what I understand, the "start at nine" was changed because there were too many 180s compared with a few years before - however, I could be wrong on this as it was before I got into competitive BBQ. I hope that this helps.