On Sun, 14 May 2006 20:28:23 -0400, " BOB" > wrote:

>Barry Bean wrote:
>:: As I'm the original poster, consider me offended. Further,
>
>Good. That's what I intended.
>
>:: I'll suggest
>:: you google my past participation here before youaccuse me of
>trolling.
>
>I don't need to google. I remembered right after I hit <send>
>
>::
>:: Once again, I assumed that this was the sort of place someone might
>come
>:: to ask a question or throw out a comment regarding BBQ, so I did.
>My
>:: apologies if discussing BBQ contests in AFB or questioning the
>logic of
>:: KCBS rule upsets you.
>
>There are probably less than a dozen people (probably less than 6)
>posting here that have much experience with BBQ competitions


>I notice that you still haven't posted your question over at
>http://www.rbjb.com/rbjb/rbjbboard/ where they just *MIGHT* have more
>information about how and when the KCBS rules were adopted. To me,
>this helps my assertion that you don't really care. You just want to
>bitch.
>
>Did you get disqualified for an illegal garnish?
>Sour Grapes?
>
>BOB

The way it was explained to me, way back when, is that regulating
what is eligible as garnish, is yet one more way to remove any
distinctive markings on the presentation box in case any competitor
and a judge collaborated to enable *that* competitor to get an unfair
advantage. It may not be much on its own, but in combination with
other rules, it attempts to make the judging process as impartially
fair as possible. After all there's frequently a lot of dough
[meat;o) on the table, eh . . . .

Harry