KCBS BOD voting

[TooSaucedToPork]

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.

Yup...no rules changes, no scoring changes...just gotta print out the guidelines and give to every judge.

Hell, they could do a test run as test it out.

 

[JD McGee]

KCBS definitely needs more cook friendly members on their B.O.D. Hopefully they will help to bring more attention to the imbalances in the judging across the country. I will cast my votes to like-minded folks...

 

[Scottie]

A lot of folks 'claim' to be cooks when they are running. They turn out to be wolves. The call to the darkside is strong...

 

[National BBQ Cup]

A lot of folks 'claim' to be cooks when they are running. They turn out to be wolves. The call to the darkside is strong...

No call to the dark side is strong enough to drag or sway a strong person of high moral character.

 

[Candy Sue]

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.

Run for president in February when you get elected...seriously. Then you can create an ad hoc committee to do just that. You will have issues doing the above as a director. Bad thing is you have to give up your vote when you're president.


Otherwise, pick your battles very carefully.

 

[Uncle Buds BBQ]

Candy - Does the BOD follow Roberts Rules of Order. The reason I ask is that if they do then the rules prohibit Tom's statement of "I will continue to bring it up at every meeting"

Just wondering.

 

[Candy Sue]

When Dennis Polson got on the board, Roberts was closer to being followed in general terms. But it's not strictly adhered to. Do I believe that Tom can do what he said? Yes, probably but it'd be more likely to put him at odds with the board as a whole. Biggest problem is getting 12 people to work together. Not good for teamwork to be a disrupter.

 

[Scottie]

I thought when Merl was on the BOD and he tried having Roberts rules to be followed, he was shot down?

 

[Rich Parker]

Another good point why are we letting Brown Forman and the American Royal go around the rules?? Special interest groups exist even in our small world of bbq.

If The Jack can require different number of pieces and also force a cut of meat, why can't other sanctioned events?

If the American Royal doesn't want to do a double blind, why does other sanctioned events?

I'm sure there are other things they get to do other events don't as well. :shocked:

"Let's drain the KCBS swamp!!" :razz:

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.

 

[Slamdunkpro]

Another good point why are we letting Brown Forman and the American Royal go around the rules?? Special interest groups exist even in our small world of bbq.

If The Jack can require different number of pieces and also force a cut of meat, why can't other sanctioned events?

If the American Royal doesn't want to do a double blind, why does other sanctioned events?

I'm sure there are other things they get to do other events don't as well. :shocked:

"Let's drain the KCBS swamp!!" :razz:

My understanding is The Jack just hires KCBS to administer their contest. It's done as a competitor's series and no ToY points are awarded.

 

[pharp]

I don't want to hijack the thread, but there really should be a diagnostic component to the scoring. It is impossible to learn from your scores in the current format. I am new to KCBS and absolutely love it, but if you can only compete 8-12 times a year it makes it tough to figure out what "works."

 

[Jorge]

Another good point why are we letting Brown Forman and the American Royal go around the rules?? Special interest groups exist even in our small world of bbq.

If The Jack can require different number of pieces and also force a cut of meat, why can't other sanctioned events?

If the American Royal doesn't want to do a double blind, why does other sanctioned events?

I'm sure there are other things they get to do other events don't as well. :shocked:

"Let's drain the KCBS swamp!!" :razz:

The Jack is an invitational so they can do that. For perspective, KCBS telling them or the Royal how things are going to be would be like the tail trying to wag the dog. If the Jack added some infrastructure they could end the relationship tomorrow and teams would still go. Fact.

 

[Fat Freddy]

I don't want to hijack the thread, but there really should be a diagnostic component to the scoring. It is impossible to learn from your scores in the current format. I am new to KCBS and absolutely love it, but if you can only compete 8-12 times a year it makes it tough to figure out what "works."

I know this thread is about the BOD elections, however to this comment, I disagree. There is a ton to be learned from the scores. For example on the drive home me and the wife go over the scores category by category and criteria bu criteria. For example we will only talk chicken and appearance. If my scores are 9,8,7,8,8,9.....That tells me that my chicken had an issue, at least 4 judges didnt think it was perfect and that is an issue, now I go back and look at the photo I took and usually figure it out...Now use same criteria for taste and tenderness if 1 judge had an issue fine maybe a low judge but if you have 3 to 4 less than 9 scores there is an issue, granted there is always the TOD and TOA but if this is done after each contest a pattern might be uncovered and something to be worked on. Maybe there is a flavor that is offsetting to even 2 judges with regularity maybe the tenderness isnt quite to expectations. It takes a contest or 2 or so but a lot can be learned.

 

[pharp]

I know this thread is about the BOD elections, however to this comment, I disagree. There is a ton to be learned from the scores. For example on the drive home me and the wife go over the scores category by category and criteria bu criteria. For example we will only talk chicken and appearance. If my scores are 9,8,7,8,8,9.....That tells me that my chicken had an issue, at least 4 judges didnt think it was perfect and that is an issue, now I go back and look at the photo I took and usually figure it out...Now use same criteria for taste and tenderness if 1 judge had an issue fine maybe a low judge but if you have 3 to 4 less than 9 scores there is an issue, granted there is always the TOD and TOA but if this is done after each contest a pattern might be uncovered and something to be worked on. Maybe there is a flavor that is offsetting to even 2 judges with regularity maybe the tenderness isnt quite to expectations. It takes a contest or 2 or so but a lot can be learned.

My point is that you don't really know what the issue with it was. If the scoring was set up so that you got a 7 for too tender and a 3 for not tender enough with a 5 being perfect and the scoring formula centered on variance from a 5 you would know how you missed the mark, not just that you missed it.

 

[Smitty250]

For the BOD nominees on this thread: Do you have any ideas on what can be done to protect the teams in a case that the promoter of an event doesn't pay the cash awards? We have a case here in Peoria, AZ (Nov. 4th) where the promoter "had a medical issue" and had to be taken to the hospital before the awards ceremony. The KCBS Reps told us that because of this she couldn't sign the checks for us at the awards ceremony and she will be sending them out to us. A few weeks go by with no checks or communication from the promoter so people start asking questions and trying to get in contact with the promoter. Eventually she sends an email to everyone on the team list saying she is waiting for sponsorship money to come in so she can pay us. A couple of us have gotten some checks but the majority is still outstanding and the promoter has gone silent.

We have a post on Facebook about it and tagged Mike Peters and Mike Richter on the thread. They said to email the BOD and they will get back to us. That was 2 weeks ago and no word from KCBS.

I guess my question is why does KCBS have the following written on their website and it is a bold face lie!!?:

"To sanction or not to sanction?
The benefits of having a sanctioned BBQ contest are numerous. The Kansas City Barbeque Society (KCBS) is the world's largest organization of barbeque and grilling enthusiasts. KCBS sanctions over 400 contests across the U.S. annually.
A sanctioned contest offers the organizer:
(1) Integrity,
(2) Experience,
(3) A built in base of cookers and judges, and
(4) A support system of other organizers and members.
For the teams, it offers the assurance that a contest will be conducted in a professional manner, the prize monies will be awarded as advertised, and that the rules will be followed. Some events start off non-sanctioned and work toward sanction. Generally, if you start off as a KCBS sanctioned event your contest will run smoother, have more trust from the teams, and have a higher success rate. A non-sanctioned event is not highly regarded, nor supported by teams if they are not aligned with a proven entity. However sanctioning alone cannot guaranty the number of teams competing or the success of your event."

I'm just wondering why I keep giving money to an association that claims to protect the cooks but really they are just protecting themselves....

 

[CaptTable]

You have asked the very same questions that I am going to be asking if elected to the board! Why has the Sanctioning Committee completely ignored one of it's "prime directives"? The Board must protect its membership!]

 

[Pappy Q]

For the BOD nominees on this thread: Do you have any ideas on what can be done to protect the teams in a case that the promoter of an event doesn't pay the cash awards? We have a case here in Peoria, AZ (Nov. 4th) where the promoter "had a medical issue" and had to be taken to the hospital before the awards ceremony. The KCBS Reps told us that because of this she couldn't sign the checks for us at the awards ceremony and she will be sending them out to us. A few weeks go by with no checks or communication from the promoter so people start asking questions and trying to get in contact with the promoter. Eventually she sends an email to everyone on the team list saying she is waiting for sponsorship money to come in so she can pay us. A couple of us have gotten some checks but the majority is still outstanding and the promoter has gone silent.

We have a post on Facebook about it and tagged Mike Peters and Mike Richter on the thread. They said to email the BOD and they will get back to us. That was 2 weeks ago and no word from KCBS.

I guess my question is why does KCBS have the following written on their website and it is a bold face lie!!?:

"To sanction or not to sanction?
The benefits of having a sanctioned BBQ contest are numerous. The Kansas City Barbeque Society (KCBS) is the world's largest organization of barbeque and grilling enthusiasts. KCBS sanctions over 400 contests across the U.S. annually.
A sanctioned contest offers the organizer:
(1) Integrity,
(2) Experience,
(3) A built in base of cookers and judges, and
(4) A support system of other organizers and members.
For the teams, it offers the assurance that a contest will be conducted in a professional manner, the prize monies will be awarded as advertised, and that the rules will be followed. Some events start off non-sanctioned and work toward sanction. Generally, if you start off as a KCBS sanctioned event your contest will run smoother, have more trust from the teams, and have a higher success rate. A non-sanctioned event is not highly regarded, nor supported by teams if they are not aligned with a proven entity. However sanctioning alone cannot guaranty the number of teams competing or the success of your event."

I'm just wondering why I keep giving money to an association that claims to protect the cooks but really they are just protecting themselves....

I'm just speculating but I'd expect KCBS is concerned about the potential liability and financial impact. Personally, I believe KCBS has to take action to address these situations as it has happened several times this year. I don't have an answer yet but it's on my list of things to challenge.

 

[kmoore1021]

I think KCBS must take action or else remove that verbiage from their website.

I think it would be in the best interest that KCBS should require proof of funds in some sort of way to ensure that teams are going to be paid and also to protect KCBS reps as well.

If as a team I'm paying a promoter $350-$400 to compete in their contest and I'm supposed to get paid for taking a walk then I EXPECT to be paid immediately. Not next week, next month or a year later.

 

[CaptTable]

Seems that all of us NEW candidates feel the same way in one aspect: we want to find out WHY some things are handled as they are before we jump right in and say we are going to change this or change that. And, IF there is a valid reason, COMMUNICATE IT!!!

 

[DR]

Wouldn't it be easy to set up a "House" escrow account where each promotor would have to send a check to KCBS with the guaranteed funds, before they were granted a sanctioned contest?