Table of Death

[Candy Sue]

Chart the contest. Map out which teams went to which table for each category. At a 25 team, mixing ribs isn't too hard. Pork is tough and brisket has to be done only one way. I have done this. After pork in Auburn, AL (where I nearly messed up), I picked up the table captain list and built the brisket trays ahead of time (because it could only be done one way!). It's the reps job to get this right.

 

[CaptTable]

It CAN, and HAS happened to us where a Table Captain, mistakenly, marked out a wrong entry on their sheet. Say, 135 instead of 136. Then, on one of the next categories, you look at their sheet and it shows that that CAN have entry 136. BOOM! When we are printing out the individual scoring sheets, we review to see if a duplicate has occurred, if so, we try to determine the reason (such as described above). We can then address it with the affected team.

I am NOT saying that the way do things is the way it should be done, but AM saying that duplicate tables can happen in ways that the reps cannot foresee. And I am not harping on the Table Captains. They have a very tough job. Sometimes these things happen. Sorry. Most all reps we know take it personally to keep this from happening.

 

[bbq.tom]

It CAN, and HAS happened to us

THanks Phillip for weighing in on this! I know how serious Kathy takes the tray building to ensure that this doesn't happen, but unfortunately mistakes can sometimes sneak through.
Fortunately, that is rare and NOT the norm!

 

[CaptTable]

Thanks, Tom . . . THAT is what I am trying to get across.

 

[Uomograsso]

Or was it that the teams were just bad. Looking at the bottom 6 Teams here are the finishes in each category.

20) JACKO-QUE ...... 23 21 16 18
21) SULTANS OF SWINE 24 20 14 21
22) 2 RHODIES BBQ .. 16 24 22 24
23) SMOKIN GUNS BBQ. 25 11 19 22
24) Smokehouse Grill 19 25 18 19
25) E.T.'S BBQ ..... 23 22 25 20

Those teams were consistently in the bottom 25% except in 4 spots. It could be the worst teams all hit that table at the same time. Or some of the worst teams. There are two ways to look at a table of death for a category. Either the judges were low or the BBQ was just bad.

 

[GrillBillie_D]

Or was it that the teams were just bad. Looking at the bottom 6 Teams here are the finishes in each category.

20) JACKO-QUE ...... 23 21 16 18
21) SULTANS OF SWINE 24 20 14 21
22) 2 RHODIES BBQ .. 16 24 22 24
23) SMOKIN GUNS BBQ. 25 11 19 22
24) Smokehouse Grill 19 25 18 19
25) E.T.'S BBQ ..... 23 22 25 20

Those teams were consistently in the bottom 25% except in 4 spots. It could be the worst teams all hit that table at the same time. Or some of the worst teams. There are two ways to look at a table of death for a category. Either the judges were low or the BBQ was just bad.

I agree that for one category it can happen where they get a bunch of bad BBQ but look at the table for the whole day. The team that won chicken and brisket hit this table in ribs and got 18th. Possibly a bad cook?? Could have been but seems unlikely.

 

[jcog44]

Some judges were taught to start at 6 and add or subtract (this resulted in low scores). Other judges were taught to start at 9 and subtract (this resulted in high scores). Now judges are taught to do neither, but assign a score directly. Some were taught that average means average in the entire universe of bbq (like a so so bbq restaurant), others were taught that it means average competition bbq . If you have a table with mostly judges that start at six and were taught that average is average competition, then you have a table of death, because the judges are doing it as they were taught.

 

[Mac Attack BBQ]

Some judges were taught to start at 6 and add or subtract (this resulted in low scores). Other judges were taught to start at 9 and subtract (this resulted in high scores). Now judges are taught to do neither, but assign a score directly. Some were taught that average means average in the entire universe of bbq (like a so so bbq restaurant), others were taught that it means average competition bbq . If you have a table with mostly judges that start at six and were taught that average is average competition, then you have a table of death, because the judges are doing it as they were taught.

I would think KCBS could remedy this rather quickly by putting together a Powerpoint presentation together to be reviewed by all judges that would address there expectations on where a judges starting point is. As a competitor I understand that there will be good days and bad. Some days where I'm really scratching my head on the ride home it would be quite a bit more comforting knowing that KCBS was taking the bull by the horns and teaching consistent practices among all judges and I just plain had a bad cook.

 

[zanna5910]

Can someone explain the scoresheet for the uninitiated?

 

[Skip]

I would think KCBS could remedy this rather quickly by putting together a Powerpoint presentation together to be reviewed by all judges that would address there expectations on where a judges starting point is. As a competitor I understand that there will be good days and bad. Some days where I'm really scratching my head on the ride home it would be quite a bit more comforting knowing that KCBS was taking the bull by the horns and teaching consistent practices among all judges and I just plain had a bad cook.

Well to be fair to KCBS these points have been addressed. The reps give instruction in the judges meeting. A CD is played outlining the current judging criteria and KCBS has installed continuing education on its website for Judges to review new additions to the KCBS rules and judging criteria. Its very hard to destroy learned traits though. Its also hard to assume everyone will go along with the changes. I know some judges who hold close what they learned and won't let go even in the face of new contradictory instruction.

 

[Skip]

Can someone explain the scoresheet for the uninitiated?

Its showing the team placement in each of the four categories

 

[zanna5910]

The left being the rankings, 315 being the table, and the blacked out part is the judges name I guess? What meat was it for that the sheet was for? Whats the second number next to 23, 24, 25 etc?

Sorry for all the questions, I'm a comp newb.

 

[bbq.tom]

Well to be fair to KCBS these points have been addressed. The reps give instruction in the judges meeting. A CD is played outlining the current judging criteria and KCBS has installed continuing education on its website for Judges to review new additions to the KCBS rules and judging criteria. Its very hard to destroy learned traits though. Its also hard to assume everyone will go along with the changes. I know some judges who hold close what they learned and won't let go even in the face of new contradictory instruction.

Let's be completely and perfectly honest here with this issue:

1. "The reps give instruction in the judges meeting" - I have yet to actually hear a REP tell the judges in the Judge's Meeting how to score - what "Average - 6" means, where to start scoring (6,9,other), or anything else relating to how to score.

2. "A CD is played outlining the current judging criteria" - I will agree that the CD is played, but how many judges are actually listening to the CD??? And there truly isn't much information on the CD about scoring.

3. "and KCBS has installed continuing education on its website for Judges to review new additions to KCBS rule and judging criteria." - Actually, the "continuing education" is practically useless except for judges to study for the "Certified Master Judge" exam. I can't remember ANY question on the continuing education or on the exam on "how to score" or "where to start scoring". It is all about other stuff surrounding judging, but not scoring. Also, I've never seen anything relating to "new additions to KCBS rule and judging criteria" as part of the existing continuing education.

I am all in favor of continuing education or re-education or whatever you might want to call it in order to get ALL judges scoring on the same level. But what KCBS has provided to date is FAR from what is actually needed.
I'd love to see an exam that all judges must pass in order to be able to judge - about SCORING! Until this is instituted, I think that the status quo will continue. AND the TOD/TOA issue will continue as well.

 

[jcog44]

The CD does not define average or discuss how to score, nor is it in the rules, and I have not heard a rep mention during contest instructions.

How can a judge resist change, when they don't know there is a change? I agree that there will be many that hang on the old ways. Score enough samples, and scores become ingrained.

But, this problem still creates Tables of Death and Tables of Life, with folks getting mad at "picky" judges who are only doing what KCBS taught them to do.

 

[MikeJ65]

I don't judge a lot, but I couldn't tell you if I am a high scoring judge, a low scoring judge, or somewhere in the middle. Feedback would be the first step.

 

[Jorge]

I don't judge a lot, but I couldn't tell you if I am a high scoring judge, a low scoring judge, or somewhere in the middle. Feedback would be the first step.

I think that's a potential part of the solution(s). I think it needs to be presented with some context though. If two judges are actually consistent over time, and end up at a table with 4 judges that consistently are all high or low I wouldn't want the consistent judges to make changes in future contests. If there is some sort of baseline drawn from solid analysis of adequate data I think there is quite a bit of value there. Without some sort of context judges could end up chasing their tails depending upon who they happen to have been seated with at their most recent contest.

 

[DonnaB]

I would take this info and call the KCBS office. I would also ask for the e-mail address of the person who is in charge of the reps. In a 25 team cook-off, every team should have hit this table only once. Every team once and only once.

This is an example of dereliction of duties. There can be no excuse other than an inept set of reps.

[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Hi Robert. I'd like to introduce myself. My name is Donna Baroody. I'm one of the Reps that your are slandering. First of all, I am not inept. Neither is my husband. In fact, we are quite the opposite. Second, we have never been "derelict in our duties". I can't understand why someone who does not know us, who does not know our history with KCBS, and who, without the benefit of facts, can make such rude and inaccurate comments. If you think your type of behavior is beneficial to competition BBQ, you are wrong. What you are doing is undermining KCBS as a whole, and hurting the serious competitors, the organizers and the reps. If this is what you intended to do, then you have done an excellent job. I recommend that all of the naysayers do us all a favor and continue their education of KCBS policies and procedures. Become experts, certified in everything BBQ. Maybe even offer to volunteer at events so you can see first hand how it works. You can ultimately apply to be a Rep, and find out the amount of knowledge and commitment it takes to be a good rep. We love and respect competition BBQ. Try it, you may like it.[/SIZE][/FONT]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]And, our sincere thanks to the other forum members whose posts provided factual information. It is greatly appreciated.[/FONT][/SIZE]

 

[Burnt at Both Endz]

[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Hi Robert. I'd like to introduce myself. My name is Donna Baroody. I'm one of the Reps that your are slandering. First of all, I am not inept. Neither is my husband. In fact, we are quite the opposite. Second, we have never been "derelict in our duties". I can't understand why someone who does not know us, who does not know our history with KCBS, and who, without the benefit of facts, can make such rude and inaccurate comments. If you think your type of behavior is beneficial to competition BBQ, you are wrong. What you are doing is undermining KCBS as a whole, and hurting the serious competitors, the organizers and the reps. If this is what you intended to do, then you have done an excellent job. I recommend that all of the naysayers do us all a favor and continue their education of KCBS policies and procedures. Become experts, certified in everything BBQ. Maybe even offer to volunteer at events so you can see first hand how it works. You can ultimately apply to be a Rep, and find out the amount of knowledge and commitment it takes to be a good rep. We love and respect competition BBQ. Try it, you may like it.[/SIZE][/FONT]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]And, our sincere thanks to the other forum members whose posts provided factual information. It is greatly appreciated.[/FONT][/SIZE]

Yep, I'm one of the naysayer....I cooked 17 contests the last two years, plan on doing 25 this year, currently top 25 in two categories, top 100 in everything else, so I'm a "cook". I'm a KCBS MCJ, I have been a table captain, worked the collection table, worked the grazing table. With that said, maybe you can shed some light on us why this happened at "your" contest. Do you not agree that this is the reps responsibility to make sure it doesn't happen at their contest?

 

[Red Valley BBQ]

Or was it that the teams were just bad. Looking at the bottom 6 Teams here are the finishes in each category.

20) JACKO-QUE ...... 23 21 16 18
21) SULTANS OF SWINE 24 20 14 21
22) 2 RHODIES BBQ .. 16 24 22 24
23) SMOKIN GUNS BBQ. 25 11 19 22
24) Smokehouse Grill 19 25 18 19
25) E.T.'S BBQ ..... 23 22 25 20

Those teams were consistently in the bottom 25% except in 4 spots. It could be the worst teams all hit that table at the same time. Or some of the worst teams. There are two ways to look at a table of death for a category. Either the judges were low or the BBQ was just bad.

Uomograsso, I think you've missed the point. This isn't about where teams finished in the overall rankings and how they got there. This is about how a single table of judges scores consistently low. Here is a better example. It is a snapshot of how each table ended up in the scoring for each category. 84% of the entries that crossed table 315 finished 16th or worse in their respective category.

Hopefully this will give you a better perspective.

 

[Robert]

[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Hi Robert. I'd like to introduce myself. My name is Donna Baroody. I'm one of the Reps that your are slandering. First of all, I am not inept. Neither is my husband. In fact, we are quite the opposite. Second, we have never been "derelict in our duties". I can't understand why someone who does not know us, who does not know our history with KCBS, and who, without the benefit of facts, can make such rude and inaccurate comments. If you think your type of behavior is beneficial to competition BBQ, you are wrong. What you are doing is undermining KCBS as a whole, and hurting the serious competitors, the organizers and the reps. If this is what you intended to do, then you have done an excellent job. I recommend that all of the naysayers do us all a favor and continue their education of KCBS policies and procedures. Become experts, certified in everything BBQ. Maybe even offer to volunteer at events so you can see first hand how it works. You can ultimately apply to be a Rep, and find out the amount of knowledge and commitment it takes to be a good rep. We love and respect competition BBQ. Try it, you may like it.[/SIZE][/FONT]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]And, our sincere thanks to the other forum members whose posts provided factual information. It is greatly appreciated.[/FONT][/SIZE]

Well, hello there Donna. Name is Robert. I have been a member of KCBS since 1995, member number is below 1800. I have been competing since 1996 on average of about 10 per cook-offs per year. I have been a CBJ since 1997 and my CBJ number is below 700. I have judged numerous cook-offs and have been table captain quite a few times. I have encountered many good reps during this time. I have also encountered a few poor ones, but never poor ones while I've been inside the tent. When I have served as a TC, I have seen the reps work like a well oiled machine and through communication made sure that the TC's distributed the boxes fairly, meaning no duplication of tables. Most of the competitions I have judged have been more than 25 but less than 50 teams. The exception of that would be the American Royal Invitational, which I have had the pleasure of judging three times.

So this ain't my first rodeo.

Now Donna, can you please explain how in a 25 team cook-off that some teams missed table 315 completely and some teams landed there twice? Isn't it your job as a rep to make sure that the contest is administered fairly? It would seem that with only 25 teams that the boxes should be distributed fairly. How could you not? To me, it means you are derelict, meaning that you don't care to perform your duties completely, or you are inept, meaning that you can't perform your duties. Or both. I don't believe it is slanderous to make that observation given the facts that have been presented.

Do you care to enlighten us on what did happen?