Joseph wrote:

"Dave Bugg" wrote in message

Nope. All you're doing is re-heating par-boiled food.


I can see where this would take it out of being considered BBQ,
but what would be the purpose of boiling? Just to cut the grilling
time?

There are all sorts of reasons that people who use that practice give,
(render fat, tenderize meat) none of which needs boiling to produce the
results desired. The downside is that boiling meat is what you do to produce
stocks and broths, where water is used as a solvent to move the nutrients
and flavors of meats into the water. The end result is a bland, flavorless
meat the BEGS for an addendum to give the meat some sort of flavor.........
which is why this type of meat preparation is then LOADED with sauce.

REAL bbq doesn't need one steenkin' drop of sauce for flavor. Sauce is
usually offered as a 'dipping' condiment. Even those pit guys who glaze
their ribs with sauce out of the pit usually make it a light coat so that it
doesn't disguise the flavor of the meat. Of course, when the meat HAS NO
flavor, sauce is all you got.

It has been tried. There is a reason why those who truly understand
and respect the art of bbq get hot under the collar and real ****ed
when someone includes boling meat as a category of "bbq".

Sorry 'bout that...

No biggie. You'll understand as you gain experience with the art and cuisine
of bbq.

Good luck with the log. I tend to enjoy good bbq wherever I go, and
tend to think that whatever good bbq I have in my mouth at the time
is the best. :-)

I have heard many here mention keeping a log. Haven't in the
past and was just considering starting one.

I would wager that most everyone on this NG has done each and every
style (except for the purulent boiled meat). You might want to look
at the FAQ we use:
http://www.eaglequest.com/~bbq/faq2/toc.html


I have read these more than once. It has been a while though, so
I looked at BBQ definition and the southwest method appears to
qualify... I also forgot how much great info was in there, thanks
again to those involved in creating and maintaining it.

--Excerpt from FAQ--

"For our purpose here, we are using the term to describe meat,
slow-cooked, using wood smoke to add flavor."

Notice the semantic construct: "to add flavor". That is what must be kept in
mind; smoke is a spice, a flavoring. A pit master adds as much or as little
of that spice as he deems desirable. Traditional North Carolina bbq is a
prime example. Eat at someplace like Lexington #1 which still uses
traditional open pit cooking with pre-burned wood charcoal, and there is not
much -- if any -- smoke flavoring.

For some folks, it tastes bland and as far from their perception of what bbq
should taste like as one could get.

So, if smoke flavoring is "required" in order to be considered bbq, then one
would have to decide at what level the smoke taste is sufficient. At what
level is the flavor so negligable that it is NOT bbq. Would Lexington #1 be
able to meet the bbq standard based on smoke flavor?

"Barbecuing is cooking by using indirect heat or low-level direct
radiant heat at lower temperatures and longer cooking times."

If taken at face value then that would mean an oven can cook bbq.

-- Also --

"[Why is my barbecued chicken pink? Is it still raw?]"

-- --

BBQ'd chicken?

I agree.

--
Dave www.davebbq.com

What is best in life? "To crush your enemies, see them driven before
you, and to hear the lamentation of the women." -- Conan