Hello friends. I've been experimenting with the charcoal smoker for
about a year now. Often, I try 'pulled pork' sandwhiches; they always
turn out pretty good, but almost never will the cuts of pork simply
pull apart with a fork.

Here is my usual routine, can anyone tell me where I may be going off
course:

1) Buy Boston butt pork shoulder in ~ 3lb chunks.
2) Rub with paprika / salt / sugar mixture, leave for ~ 1 hr.
3) Start the smoker with charcoal briquettes and wood chips. Keep the
temperature in the chamber ~ 200 for between 5 and 8 hours, adding more
charcoal to the smoker and wood chips every hour or so.
4) Even after 8 hours, the chunks of pork still needed a knive to carve
up.

I have considered breaking the pieces of boston butt into smaller
sections before cooking; but it seems like I've seen other pieces the
same size as mine come out pull apart tender. Could this also be a
quality of meat issue?

Any insight is appreciated.
Thanks.

- cm

Executive Crackhead wrote:
> Hello friends. I've been experimenting with the charcoal smoker for
> about a year now. Often, I try 'pulled pork' sandwhiches; they always
> turn out pretty good, but almost never will the cuts of pork simply
> pull apart with a fork.
>
> Here is my usual routine, can anyone tell me where I may be going off
> course:
>
> 1) Buy Boston butt pork shoulder in ~ 3lb chunks.
> 2) Rub with paprika / salt / sugar mixture, leave for ~ 1 hr.
> 3) Start the smoker with charcoal briquettes and wood chips. Keep the
> temperature in the chamber ~ 200 for between 5 and 8 hours, adding more
> charcoal to the smoker and wood chips every hour or so.
> 4) Even after 8 hours, the chunks of pork still needed a knive to carve
> up.
>
> I have considered breaking the pieces of boston butt into smaller
> sections before cooking; but it seems like I've seen other pieces the
> same size as mine come out pull apart tender. Could this also be a
> quality of meat issue?
>
> Any insight is appreciated.
> Thanks.
>
> - cm
>



I don't think you're cooking it long enough. I cooked a 5 pound (?)
pork shoulder roast in an electric roaster yesterday @ 300° and it took
about 5 or 6 hours before it was falling-apart tender. If you cooked it
at 200°, it could take much much longer.

Bob

On 2005-05-30, Executive Crackhead > wrote:

> temperature in the chamber ~ 200 for between 5 and 8 hours, adding more
> charcoal to the smoker and wood chips every hour or so.
> 4) Even after 8 hours, the chunks of pork still needed a knive to carve
> up.

You're not cooking it long enough at that temperature.

Pork shoulder is not like doing a brisket. It has enough fat so that
you don't need to do that 'low-n-slow' thing so many bbq zealots like
to harp on. Pork shoulder will cook quite nicely at higher temps. I
did it once up around 350 deg F. It came out just fine and only took
about 3-4 hrs. With pork, the low-n-slow is primarily for the smoke,
but how much do you need? Also, it's not necessary to cut the thing
up in smaller pieces. That won't help. Time and heat are the answer.
You'll know when it's done because you can pull the meat. If it's a bone
in roast, you'll be able to turn the bone. I'd recommend you
raise your temps up to 225-250 deg F to get a good balance between
time and smoke.

nb

On 30 May 2005 12:24:30 -0700, "Executive Crackhead"
> wrote:

>Hello friends. I've been experimenting with the charcoal smoker for
>about a year now. Often, I try 'pulled pork' sandwhiches; they always
>turn out pretty good, but almost never will the cuts of pork simply
>pull apart with a fork.
>
>Here is my usual routine, can anyone tell me where I may be going off
>course:
>
>1) Buy Boston butt pork shoulder in ~ 3lb chunks.
>2) Rub with paprika / salt / sugar mixture, leave for ~ 1 hr.
>3) Start the smoker with charcoal briquettes and wood chips. Keep the
>temperature in the chamber ~ 200 for between 5 and 8 hours, adding more
>charcoal to the smoker and wood chips every hour or so.
>4) Even after 8 hours, the chunks of pork still needed a knive to carve
>up.
>
>I have considered breaking the pieces of boston butt into smaller
>sections before cooking; but it seems like I've seen other pieces the
>same size as mine come out pull apart tender. Could this also be a
>quality of meat issue?
>
>Any insight is appreciated.
>Thanks.
>
>- cm

Howdy,

My smoker has a huge bowl of water above the coal and below
the food. That water simmers continuously during the entire
process.

It is that moisture that makes for "falling-apart-tender"
results in my experience.

All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

"Kenneth" > wrote in message
...

>
> My smoker has a huge bowl of water above the coal and below
> the food. That water simmers continuously during the entire
> process.
>
> It is that moisture that makes for "falling-apart-tender"
> results in my experience.

No, it is the breaking down of the collagen that makes it tender. That
happens at about 160 degrees. The water pan acts as a heat sink and buffer
between hot coals and the meat.

That is the science of meat. People learned that 200 years ago before water
pan cookers were invented.
--
Ed
http://pages.cthome.net/edhome/

On Mon, 30 May 2005 19:54:11 GMT, "Edwin Pawlowski"
> wrote:

>
>"Kenneth" > wrote in message
.. .
>
>>
>> My smoker has a huge bowl of water above the coal and below
>> the food. That water simmers continuously during the entire
>> process.
>>
>> It is that moisture that makes for "falling-apart-tender"
>> results in my experience.
>
>No, it is the breaking down of the collagen that makes it tender. That
>happens at about 160 degrees. The water pan acts as a heat sink and buffer
>between hot coals and the meat.
>
>That is the science of meat. People learned that 200 years ago before water
>pan cookers were invented.

Hi Ed,

I know nothing of the science, but do know something of the
consistent results we have gotten with the simmer smoker.
Thanks for the education on the reason...

All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

"Executive Crackhead" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Hello friends. I've been experimenting with the charcoal smoker for
> about a year now. Often, I try 'pulled pork' sandwhiches; they always
> turn out pretty good, but almost never will the cuts of pork simply
> pull apart with a fork.
>
> Here is my usual routine, can anyone tell me where I may be going off
> course:
>
> 1) Buy Boston butt pork shoulder in ~ 3lb chunks.
> 2) Rub with paprika / salt / sugar mixture, leave for ~ 1 hr.
> 3) Start the smoker with charcoal briquettes and wood chips. Keep the
> temperature in the chamber ~ 200 for between 5 and 8 hours, adding more
> charcoal to the smoker and wood chips every hour or so.
> 4) Even after 8 hours, the chunks of pork still needed a knive to carve
> up.
>
> I have considered breaking the pieces of boston butt into smaller
> sections before cooking; but it seems like I've seen other pieces the
> same size as mine come out pull apart tender. Could this also be a
> quality of meat issue?
>

I'd try a higher temp - maybe 250-275. Then when done wrap in foil and let
sit for 1 hour. THis latter step does not make it more tender but does help
the moistness and flavor IMO.


--
Peter Aitken
Visit my recipe and kitchen myths page at www.pgacon.com/cooking.htm

"notbob" > wrote in message
...
> On 2005-05-30, Executive Crackhead > wrote:
>
> > temperature in the chamber ~ 200 for between 5 and 8 hours, adding more
> > charcoal to the smoker and wood chips every hour or so.
> > 4) Even after 8 hours, the chunks of pork still needed a knive to carve
> > up.
>
> You're not cooking it long enough at that temperature.
>
> Pork shoulder is not like doing a brisket. It has enough fat so that
> you don't need to do that 'low-n-slow' thing so many bbq zealots like
> to harp on. Pork shoulder will cook quite nicely at higher temps. I
> did it once up around 350 deg F. It came out just fine and only took
> about 3-4 hrs. With pork, the low-n-slow is primarily for the smoke,
> but how much do you need? Also, it's not necessary to cut the thing
> up in smaller pieces. That won't help. Time and heat are the answer.
> You'll know when it's done because you can pull the meat. If it's a bone
> in roast, you'll be able to turn the bone. I'd recommend you
> raise your temps up to 225-250 deg F to get a good balance between
> time and smoke.
>
> nb

I absolutely agree, notBob. We had to pull our pork too early off the
smoker yesterday because we were tired of hearing, is it done yet, is it
done yet? No, it wasn't done yet! It was at 300 degrees for about 4 hours
and it wasn't quite done. The outside pulled, but the inside had to be
chopped. When the inside has to be chopped, it really lacks flavor, IMO.
This was the LAST time we cook for someone on request, because most people
don't understand how it works. We'll willingly cook, if WE invite the
guests; not be the invited guests so everyone can eat we can cook.

kili

"Executive Crackhead" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Hello friends. I've been experimenting with the charcoal smoker for
> about a year now. Often, I try 'pulled pork' sandwhiches; they always
> turn out pretty good, but almost never will the cuts of pork simply
> pull apart with a fork.
>
> Here is my usual routine, can anyone tell me where I may be going off
> course:
>
> 1) Buy Boston butt pork shoulder in ~ 3lb chunks.
> 2) Rub with paprika / salt / sugar mixture, leave for ~ 1 hr.
> 3) Start the smoker with charcoal briquettes and wood chips. Keep the
> temperature in the chamber ~ 200 for between 5 and 8 hours, adding more
> charcoal to the smoker and wood chips every hour or so.
> 4) Even after 8 hours, the chunks of pork still needed a knive to carve
> up.
>
> I have considered breaking the pieces of boston butt into smaller
> sections before cooking; but it seems like I've seen other pieces the
> same size as mine come out pull apart tender. Could this also be a
> quality of meat issue?
>
> Any insight is appreciated.
> Thanks.
>
> - cm
We just did an 8 pound roast yesterday. We tried out the new digital,
remote thermometer as well. We had the smoker at 225F . I forget how many
hours it took to get the roast to what the thermometer called 'well done' or
170F--probably 2.5 hours. However, it took another 5 hours after that
before the meat began to pull apart on its own. The bone pulled out totally
clean. If you are opening the smoker every hour to replenish stuff, you are
losing a lot of heat, so I bet that a lot of the 8 hours you had the meat in
the smoker you were bringing the smoker back up to temp. If you watch the
Food Network, all the pros in the contests do their pork roasts at 225F.
Even if you were using a Weber Kettle, I would think that you could go at
least a couple of hours without having to open up to feed it. You need to
improve your heat management.
Janet

On 2005-05-30, kilikini > wrote:

> I absolutely agree, notBob.

I knew you would. Hell, I learned it from TFM.

nb

Executive Crackhead wrote:
>
> Hello friends. I've been experimenting with the charcoal smoker for
> about a year now. Often, I try 'pulled pork' sandwhiches; they always
> turn out pretty good, but almost never will the cuts of pork simply
> pull apart with a fork.
>
> Here is my usual routine, can anyone tell me where I may be going off
> course:
>
> 1) Buy Boston butt pork shoulder in ~ 3lb chunks.
> 2) Rub with paprika / salt / sugar mixture, leave for ~ 1 hr.
> 3) Start the smoker with charcoal briquettes and wood chips. Keep the
> temperature in the chamber ~ 200 for between 5 and 8 hours, adding more
> charcoal to the smoker and wood chips every hour or so.
> 4) Even after 8 hours, the chunks of pork still needed a knive to carve
> up.
>
> I have considered breaking the pieces of boston butt into smaller
> sections before cooking; but it seems like I've seen other pieces the
> same size as mine come out pull apart tender. Could this also be a
> quality of meat issue?
>
> Any insight is appreciated.
> Thanks.
>
> - cm

Not long enough for such a low temp. The barbeque place down the road
cooks its pork for about 12 hours.

"kilikini" > said:

>This was the LAST time we cook for someone on request, because most people
>don't understand how it works. We'll willingly cook, if WE invite the
>guests; not be the invited guests so everyone can eat we can cook.

Some friends, huh? I think you've made a good decision.

Carol

--
CLICK DAILY TO FEED THE HUNGRY
United States:
http://www.stopthehunger.com/
International:
http://www.thehungersite.com/

"Executive Crackhead" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Hello friends. I've been experimenting with the charcoal smoker for
> about a year now. Often, I try 'pulled pork' sandwhiches; they always
> turn out pretty good, but almost never will the cuts of pork simply
> pull apart with a fork.
>
> Here is my usual routine, can anyone tell me where I may be going off
> course:
>
> 1) Buy Boston butt pork shoulder in ~ 3lb chunks.
> 2) Rub with paprika / salt / sugar mixture, leave for ~ 1 hr.
> 3) Start the smoker with charcoal briquettes and wood chips. Keep the
> temperature in the chamber ~ 200 for between 5 and 8 hours, adding more
> charcoal to the smoker and wood chips every hour or so.
> 4) Even after 8 hours, the chunks of pork still needed a knive to carve
> up.
>
> I have considered breaking the pieces of boston butt into smaller
> sections before cooking; but it seems like I've seen other pieces the
> same size as mine come out pull apart tender. Could this also be a
> quality of meat issue?
>
> Any insight is appreciated.
> Thanks.
>
> - cm
>
Go to http://www.virtualweberbullet.com/index.html which is a site run by
fans of the weber smoky mountain and similar devices. It gives detailed
instructions and will answer all your questions. It is not associated
with the Weber company.

On 30 May 2005, Executive Crackhead wrote:

> Hello friends. I've been experimenting with the charcoal smoker for
> about a year now. Often, I try 'pulled pork' sandwhiches; they always
> turn out pretty good, but almost never will the cuts of pork simply
> pull apart with a fork.
>
> Here is my usual routine, can anyone tell me where I may be going off
> course:
>
> 1) Buy Boston butt pork shoulder in ~ 3lb chunks.
> 2) Rub with paprika / salt / sugar mixture, leave for ~ 1 hr.
> 3) Start the smoker with charcoal briquettes and wood chips. Keep the
> temperature in the chamber ~ 200 for between 5 and 8 hours, adding more
> charcoal to the smoker and wood chips every hour or so.
> 4) Even after 8 hours, the chunks of pork still needed a knive to carve
> up.
>
> I have considered breaking the pieces of boston butt into smaller
> sections before cooking; but it seems like I've seen other pieces the
> same size as mine come out pull apart tender. Could this also be a
> quality of meat issue?
>
> Any insight is appreciated.
> Thanks.
>
> - cm
>
>


I haven't read the other replies and there are some great bbq'ers around
here. And, I'm no expert. It's been a number of years since I bbq'ed every
week.

I wouldn't cut a boston butt. I don't think this is a meat quality issue.

We used a barrel cooker, Built a wood fire - no charcole, pushed it to the
far sides, put the butts on the rack (probably close to 2 or 2 1/2 feet
above the heat), no marinade, basted with water spritzer, and cooked for
about 6 or 8 hours. It fell apart and was delish. I sold a ton of the
stuff.

You use the word "smoker". That makes me think of a thing that dries out a
turkey to half its size. Sorry about being picky about terminology. I know
they have a lot of things on the market today with different names with
which I am not familiar.

I've never cooked any bbq that didn't have some direct heat. I've never
"smoked" (as in the turkey) any bbq. If yours is not "falling apart", then
I'd say you don't have enough heat (or it hasn't cooked long enough). With
what you've said, I'd kick the temp up 25 or even 50 degrees.

Elaine, too

"notbob" > wrote in message
...
> On 2005-05-30, kilikini > wrote:
>
> > I absolutely agree, notBob.
>
> I knew you would. Hell, I learned it from TFM.
>
> nb

Well, 'nuff said then. :~) My man can cook!

kili

"Damsel" > wrote in message
...
> "kilikini" > said:
>
> >This was the LAST time we cook for someone on request, because most
people
> >don't understand how it works. We'll willingly cook, if WE invite the
> >guests; not be the invited guests so everyone can eat we can cook.
>
> Some friends, huh? I think you've made a good decision.
>
> Carol
>

Thank you, my dear. It's TFM®'s step-dad's family that do this. They only
invite us to holidays and events because we're expected to cook the meat.
It's getting really old.

kili

kilikini wrote:
> "Damsel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "kilikini" > said:
>>
>>> This was the LAST time we cook for someone on request, because most
>>> people don't understand how it works. We'll willingly cook, if WE
>>> invite the guests; not be the invited guests so everyone can eat we
>>> can cook.
>>
>> Some friends, huh? I think you've made a good decision.
>>
>> Carol
>>
>
> Thank you, my dear. It's TFM®'s step-dad's family that do this.
> They only invite us to holidays and events because we're expected to
> cook the meat. It's getting really old.
>
> kili

Let *them* get old while the meat cooks properly

Jill

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
. ..
> kilikini wrote:
> > "Damsel" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> "kilikini" > said:
> >>
> >>> This was the LAST time we cook for someone on request, because most
> >>> people don't understand how it works. We'll willingly cook, if WE
> >>> invite the guests; not be the invited guests so everyone can eat we
> >>> can cook.
> >>
> >> Some friends, huh? I think you've made a good decision.
> >>
> >> Carol
> >>
> >
> > Thank you, my dear. It's TFM®'s step-dad's family that do this.
> > They only invite us to holidays and events because we're expected to
> > cook the meat. It's getting really old.
> >
> > kili
>
> Let *them* get old while the meat cooks properly
>
> Jill
>
>

True, Jill. The step-dad's mom is still alive in her 90's and she always
brings her little old, evil dog with her. We can start with them!

kili

Thank you everyone for your insight. Heat and patience it is!

- cm

"Executive Crackhead" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Hello friends. I've been experimenting with the charcoal smoker for
> about a year now. Often, I try 'pulled pork' sandwhiches; they always
> turn out pretty good, but almost never will the cuts of pork simply
> pull apart with a fork.
>
> Here is my usual routine, can anyone tell me where I may be going off
> course:
>
> 1) Buy Boston butt pork shoulder in ~ 3lb chunks.
> 2) Rub with paprika / salt / sugar mixture, leave for ~ 1 hr.
> 3) Start the smoker with charcoal briquettes and wood chips. Keep the
> temperature in the chamber ~ 200 for between 5 and 8 hours, adding more
> charcoal to the smoker and wood chips every hour or so.
> 4) Even after 8 hours, the chunks of pork still needed a knive to carve
> up.
>
> I have considered breaking the pieces of boston butt into smaller
> sections before cooking; but it seems like I've seen other pieces the
> same size as mine come out pull apart tender. Could this also be a
> quality of meat issue?
>
> Any insight is appreciated.
> Thanks.
>
> - cm

My guess would be that your temp is too low, so you're not giving it long
enough time to cook. I usually do a 4-5 lb shoulder in about 5-7 hours @
300*. It happens suddenly, IME, that difference between needing a knife and
pulling apart easily. You'll check it and 20 minutes later it's falling
apart at the slightest nudge. Up your temp a little and try again. Also get
a disposable aluminum pan and put it on the grate beside the meat and fill
with apple cider and water (I use 1:1). The added moisture and flavor are
worth the occasional checking and refilling. The bottom line though, is it
isn't done until it falls apart

kimberly

"Executive Crackhead" > wrote in
oups.com:

> 3) Start the smoker with charcoal briquettes and wood chips. Keep the
> temperature in the chamber ~ 200 for between 5 and 8 hours, adding more
> charcoal to the smoker and wood chips every hour or so.
> 4) Even after 8 hours, the chunks of pork still needed a knive to carve
> up.

Here's a tip I learned cooking at BBQ contests: If you're cooking for, say,
6 hours, lightly baste the meat with lemon and wrap tightly in foil after 4
or 4.5 hours. Unwrap the meat about 15 minutes before you're ready to serve
and the meat will be falling off the bones and easily pull apart.

Lou wrote:
> On 30 May 2005 12:24:30 -0700, "Executive Crackhead"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>Hello friends. I've been experimenting with the charcoal smoker for
>>about a year now. Often, I try 'pulled pork' sandwhiches; they always
>>turn out pretty good, but almost never will the cuts of pork simply
>>pull apart with a fork.
>
>
> The secret to be able to pull the pork is to monitor internal
> temperature of the meat with a thermometer for the purpose.
> You have to get the internal temp of the meat above 190 degrees
> if you want to pull it.
>
> I cook pork butts at temperatures of up to 350 degrees so
> the 225 degree theoretical cooking temperature is not really
> gospel.
>
>


I just cook it until I can pull the bone out without using a knife. I
don't really know what the temperature is, but it's pretty high (higher
than "well done".) 190° sounds about right, but you don't really need
the thermometer.

Best regards,
Bob

Bubbabob > wrote in
.30:

> Barry Bean > wrote:
>
>
>> Here's a tip I learned cooking at BBQ contests: If you're cooking for,
>> say, 6 hours, lightly baste the meat with lemon and wrap tightly in
>> foil after 4 or 4.5 hours. Unwrap the meat about 15 minutes before
>> you're ready to serve and the meat will be falling off the bones and
>> easily pull apart.
>
> That's steamed pork, not barbecue. Foil has no place in real barbecue.

Interesting, since I learned the trick from other competition cookers at
the World Championships, BBQ restauranteurs, and caterers. This technique
halped me fill a small closet with BBQ trophies and build a reputation as a
BBQ chef. But what would guys like us know?

Bubbabob > wrote in
. 3.30:

> The meat will stall out at 160F internal. It stays at this plateau for
> several hours as the connective tissue is turned into gelatin. If you
> stop at this point you get tough pork.

This is, quite simply, wrong. I encourage anyone reading this to prove it
to themselves.

"Barry Bean" > wrote in message
.. .
> Bubbabob > wrote in
> . 3.30:
>
>> The meat will stall out at 160F internal. It stays at this plateau for
>> several hours as the connective tissue is turned into gelatin. If you
>> stop at this point you get tough pork.
>
> This is, quite simply, wrong. I encourage anyone reading this to prove it
> to themselves.

I've proven it right many times. The evaporative cooling from the
transitional change of collagen holds it at that temperature. Evidently you
have not done this, but I have on pork and briskets.
--
Ed
http://pages.cthome.net/edhome/

"Barry Bean" > wrote in message
>
> Interesting, since I learned the trick from other competition cookers at
> the World Championships, BBQ restauranteurs, and caterers. This technique
> halped me fill a small closet with BBQ trophies and build a reputation as
> a
> BBQ chef. But what would guys like us know?
>

The problem is, many of the contest entrants and judges are all trying to
achieve the same thing. They tend to like sweet sauces and mushy pork ribs.
You may have done well in satisfying the judges, but that does not mean it
is good barbecue. You can have the best Yugo in the world, but that does
not make it a Porsche

"Edwin Pawlowski" > wrote in
:

>
> "Barry Bean" > wrote in message
>>
>> Interesting, since I learned the trick from other competition cookers
>> at the World Championships, BBQ restauranteurs, and caterers. This
>> technique halped me fill a small closet with BBQ trophies and build a
>> reputation as a
>> BBQ chef. But what would guys like us know?
>>
>
> The problem is, many of the contest entrants and judges are all trying
> to achieve the same thing. They tend to like sweet sauces and mushy
> pork ribs.

Hardly. As competitor, judge, and critic, I can assure you that sweet
sauces are the exception to the rule (most use a dry rub of some sort or
a vinegar based baste), and that mushy isn't a word I would associate
with any of the BBQ prepared at contests (or by the restauranteurs and
caterers I've worked with).

> You may have done well in satisfying the judges, but that
> does not mean it is good barbecue.

Because, after all, thousands of BBQ chefs, judges, restauranteurs,
caterers, and fans culdn't possibly know what good bbq is, could they?

"Edwin Pawlowski" > wrote in
:

>
> "Barry Bean" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> Bubbabob > wrote in
>> . 3.30:
>>
>>> The meat will stall out at 160F internal. It stays at this plateau
>>> for
>>> several hours as the connective tissue is turned into gelatin. If
>>> you stop at this point you get tough pork.
>>
>> This is, quite simply, wrong. I encourage anyone reading this to
>> prove it to themselves.
>
> I've proven it right many times.

ROTFLOL!

"Barry Bean" > wrote in message


>
>> You may have done well in satisfying the judges, but that
>> does not mean it is good barbecue.
>
> Because, after all, thousands of BBQ chefs, judges, restauranteurs,
> caterers, and fans culdn't possibly know what good bbq is, could they?

Right, they have accepted the renditions offered by the chain restaurants as
being the "good barbecue" to emulate. Hardly any of these people have ever
been to a real bbq doing a whole hog over coals, or even whole shoulders.
If they had that opportunity, they would never be satisfied with some of the
ribs offered for sale at a chain restaurant.

I have no desire to compete, but I've been to many competitions as I do have
friends that compete. I've had some wonderful foods, I've has some real
crap from the contestants. I also know that some of the competitors enter
(and win with) food that they would never cook for their own families. they
are good at meeting the criteria of the judges, even if they don't agree
with it.
--
Ed
http://pages.cthome.net/edhome/

"Edwin Pawlowski" > wrote in
:

>
> "Barry Bean" > wrote in message
>
>
>>
>>> You may have done well in satisfying the judges, but that
>>> does not mean it is good barbecue.
>>
>> Because, after all, thousands of BBQ chefs, judges, restauranteurs,
>> caterers, and fans culdn't possibly know what good bbq is, could
>> they?
>
> Right, they have accepted the renditions offered by the chain
> restaurants as being the "good barbecue" to emulate.

You've never actually been to a BBQ contest, restaurant, or catered
event, have you?

> Hardly any of
> these people have ever been to a real bbq doing a whole hog over
> coals, or even whole shoulders.

Given that two of the three categories in MIM sanctioned contests are
whole hog and shoulder, and that shoulders and butts are the standard cut
of meat for BBQ restaurants across the South, I'd say you're more than a
little bit off base. You really should visit a real BBQ contest of joint
sometime.

> If they had that opportunity, they
> would never be satisfied with some of the ribs offered for sale at a
> chain restaurant.

Who said anything about chain restaurants? There aren't any around here.
When I eat ribs, they're either off my grill or from a local BBQ
restaurant where the owner is in the back (Strawberry's, Alford's,
Bill's, Hornet's Nest, or the Wardell Food Center).

> I have no desire to compete, but I've been to many competitions as I
> do have friends that compete. I've had some wonderful foods, I've has
> some real crap from the contestants. I also know that some of the
> competitors enter (and win with) food that they would never cook for
> their own families. they are good at meeting the criteria of the
> judges, even if they don't agree with it.

So your argument is that the opinions and experience of established,
trained, and published BBQ chefs, competitors, judges, organizations,
writers, and critics should be ignored, because they don't know "real
BBQ", but that since you have friends who compete your opinion is the
gold standard?

"Barry Bean" > wrote in message
> So your argument is that the opinions and experience of established,
> trained, and published BBQ chefs, competitors, judges, organizations,
> writers, and critics should be ignored, because they don't know "real
> BBQ", but that since you have friends who compete your opinion is the
> gold standard?

No. that is not what I said. Perhaps you should go to a real barbecue.
http://www.bobinga.com/
http://www.velvitoil.com/Announce.htm

Barry Bean wrote:
> "Edwin Pawlowski" > wrote in
> :
>
>
>>"Barry Bean" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>
>>>>You may have done well in satisfying the judges, but that
>>>>does not mean it is good barbecue.
>>>
>>>Because, after all, thousands of BBQ chefs, judges, restauranteurs,
>>>caterers, and fans culdn't possibly know what good bbq is, could
>>>they?
>>
>>Right, they have accepted the renditions offered by the chain
>>restaurants as being the "good barbecue" to emulate.
>
>
> You've never actually been to a BBQ contest, restaurant, or catered
> event, have you?
>
>
>>Hardly any of
>>these people have ever been to a real bbq doing a whole hog over
>>coals, or even whole shoulders.
>
>
> Given that two of the three categories in MIM sanctioned contests are
> whole hog and shoulder, and that shoulders and butts are the standard cut
> of meat for BBQ restaurants across the South, I'd say you're more than a
> little bit off base. You really should visit a real BBQ contest of joint
> sometime.
>
>
>>If they had that opportunity, they
>>would never be satisfied with some of the ribs offered for sale at a
>>chain restaurant.
>
>
> Who said anything about chain restaurants? There aren't any around here.
> When I eat ribs, they're either off my grill or from a local BBQ
> restaurant where the owner is in the back (Strawberry's, Alford's,
> Bill's, Hornet's Nest, or the Wardell Food Center).
>
>
>>I have no desire to compete, but I've been to many competitions as I
>>do have friends that compete. I've had some wonderful foods, I've has
>>some real crap from the contestants. I also know that some of the
>>competitors enter (and win with) food that they would never cook for
>>their own families. they are good at meeting the criteria of the
>>judges, even if they don't agree with it.
>
>
> So your argument is that the opinions and experience of established,
> trained, and published BBQ chefs, competitors, judges, organizations,
> writers, and critics should be ignored, because they don't know "real
> BBQ", but that since you have friends who compete your opinion is the
> gold standard?
>


By any chance are you the same guy that was arguing with Bob Pastorio
last week about searing meat to seal in the juices?

I would believe a fanatical amateur could be a more authoritative expert
than professional chefs, published critics, judges, contest winners,
etc. The pros often can be a very inbred group, copying each other's
style. Maybe that style is good, or maybe it's bad, but after a while
they are all making the subtle variations on same thing and declaring it
to be the gold standard without necessarily any bearing on authenticity.

For example, I looked at the winning recipes published at chili.org a
while ago, and they all look edible, but they all look pretty much the
same. Beef chuck, tomato sauce, commercial chili powder, onion powder,
MSG, canned beef broth, chicken bouillon, and a little fresh jalapeno or
serrano pepper. I'm pretty sure my chili is better (made with dried
chile peppers and usually has no tomatoes) but it would never win a
contest because it doesn't look and taste just like everybody elses.

Best regards,
Bob

"Edwin Pawlowski" > wrote in news:5_Pne.691$Ao2.481
@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com:

>
> "Barry Bean" > wrote in message
>> So your argument is that the opinions and experience of established,
>> trained, and published BBQ chefs, competitors, judges, organizations,
>> writers, and critics should be ignored, because they don't know "real
>> BBQ", but that since you have friends who compete your opinion is the
>> gold standard?
>
> No. that is not what I said.

That's exactly what you said, and its what one of the websites you posted
argues.

zxcvbob > wrote in
:

> By any chance are you the same guy that was arguing with Bob Pastorio
> last week about searing meat to seal in the juices?

No, not me.

> I would believe a fanatical amateur could be a more authoritative
> expert than professional chefs, published critics, judges, contest
> winners, etc.

On that we disagree.

> The pros often can be a very inbred group, copying each
> other's style. Maybe that style is good, or maybe it's bad, but after
> a while they are all making the subtle variations on same thing and
> declaring it to be the gold standard without necessarily any bearing
> on authenticity.

How do you define "authenticity"? I'd argue that the collective
experience and succes of the group above is pretty convincing. Also,
given the tremendous variety within the group above and the BBQ they
produce, endorse, and recognize, your suggestion that they're an inbred
group with a uniform product doesn't hold up.

> I'm pretty sure my chili is better (made
> with dried chile peppers and usually has no tomatoes) but it would
> never win a contest because it doesn't look and taste just like
> everybody elses.

Maybe you should try sometime and find out.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

>"Barry Bean" > wrote in message
. ..
>
>
>>Bubbabob > wrote in
8.3.30:
>>
>>
>>
>>> The meat will stall out at 160F internal. It stays at this plateau for
>>>several hours as the connective tissue is turned into gelatin. If you
>>>stop at this point you get tough pork.
>>>
>>>
>>This is, quite simply, wrong. I encourage anyone reading this to prove it
>>to themselves.
>>
>>
>
>I've proven it right many times. The evaporative cooling from the
>transitional change of collagen holds it at that temperature. Evidently you
>have not done this, but I have on pork and briskets.
>
>
Ed,
I use a remote thermometer on most any piece of meat thick enough to
hold it, and I've never seen any time lag at any temperature.

Bubba

--
You wanna measure, or you wanna cook?

"Bubba" > wrote in message
> Ed,
> I use a remote thermometer on most any piece of meat thick enough to hold
> it, and I've never seen any time lag at any temperature.
>
> Bubba

This method is not for ANY meat, it is for barbecue. If you cook a pork
chop, chicken, yes, you are correct. Pork butt, brisket, cooked at a low
temperature, then you will see the lag. This is how you tenderize a tough
piece of meat that has a lot of collagen. Collagen breaks down a about 160.
It does not apply to grilling or most roasting.

This was written by Kurt Lucas, a professional chef.

STRUCTURE


Muscle Fibers;

Lean meat is composed of long, thin muscle fibers bound together in bundles.
These determine the texture or grain in a piece of meat. Fine-grained meat
is composed of small fibers bound in small bundles. Course-textured meat has
larger fibers.



Feel the cut surface of a tenderloin steak, and compare its smooth texture
to the rough cut surface of brisket or bottom round.



Connective Tissue;

Muscle fibers are bound together in a network of proteins called connective
tissues. Also, each muscle fiber is covered in a sheath of connective
tissue. It is very important for the cook to understand connective tissue
for one basic reason: connective tissues are tough.



1. Meats are highest in connective tissue if



a. They come from muscles that are more exercised. Muscles from the legs,
for example, have more connective tissue than muscles in the back.



b. They come from older animals.



2. Meats high in connective tissue can be made more tender by using proper
cooking techniques.

There are two kinds of connective tissue; collagen, which is white in color,
and elastin, which is yellow.



A: Collagen
Long slow cooking in the presence of moisture dissolves collagen by turning
it into gelatin and water. Of course, muscle tissue is about 75% water, so
moisture is always present when meats are cooked. Except for very large
roasts, however, long cooking by a dry-heat method has the danger of
evaporating too much moisture and drying out the meat.



Other factors also help tenderize collagen:

Acid helps dissolve collagen. Marinating meat in an acid mixture helps to
tenderize.



Enzymes are naturally present in meats. They break down some connective
tissue and other proteins as meat ages.



Tenderizers are enzymes such as papain (extracted from papaya), which are
added to meats by the cook or injected into the animal before slaughter.
Exercise care when using enzyme tenderizers. Too long an exposure at room
temperature can make the meat undesirably mushy.



B: Elastin
Older animals have a higher proportion of elastin than younger animals.



Elastin is not broken down in cooking. Tenderizing can only be accomplished
by removing the elastin (cutting away any tendons) and by mechanically
breaking up the fibers, as in

Pounding and cubing

Grinding

Slicing the cooked meat very thin against the grain.





The following is from Kit Anderson, Doctor, scientist, bbq aficionado



Collagen




Meats are made of muscle, connective tissue, fat and bone. Muscle contains
proteins and glycogen. As the temperature of the meat increases, glycogen, a
long chain sugar, is reduced to simple sugars. This caramelizes and is
responsible for one of the flavor components.



Proteins (flavorless) are denatured to amino acids, which not only have
flavors themselves, but also undergo Maillard browning reactions, which adds
another flavor component.



While bone adds no flavor itself, the marrow is rich in methyglobulin and
other proteins. This reacts with smoke nitrites to give us the smoke ring.
You may have heard that "the sweetest meat is next to the bone". The
proteins are reduced to amino acids. Nutrasweet is an amino acid.



Fat is very simple cells which breakdown to sugars, fatty acids, and
triglycerides at low temperatures.



Collagen is proteins that have lots of side chain bonds. This makes them
elastic. It takes more energy to denature them than the simpler proteins of
muscle tissue. Energy in the form of heat will denature these proteins into
the flavorful amino acids.



If the temperature is too high, the water in the muscle cells and the fat is
rendered out before the collagen melts. This results in dry, tough meat. Too
low and you risk bacterial activity.



Tough cuts of meat like brisket and pork butts benefit from low temperature
cooking as the collagen adds flavor to the meat. Less tough, more expensive
cuts do not need this phase and can be cooked at high temperatures for
shorter periods. That is why ribs take only a few hours and briskets take
20.



Kit Anderson

On 2005-06-03, Edwin Pawlowski > wrote:

> This method is not for ANY meat, it is for barbecue.


I wonder how it'd work on buffalo or beeffalo? That's one tough meat.
If it's cooked one degree beyond med rare, it turns to shoe leather.
I wonder if bbq could make it tender. Anyone have experience bbq'ing
this meat?

nb

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

>"Bubba" > wrote in message
>
>
>>Ed,
>>I use a remote thermometer on most any piece of meat thick enough to hold
>>it, and I've never seen any time lag at any temperature.
>>
>>Bubba
>>
>>
>
>This method is not for ANY meat, it is for barbecue. If you cook a pork
>chop, chicken, yes, you are correct. Pork butt, brisket, cooked at a low
>temperature, then you will see the lag. This is how you tenderize a tough
>piece of meat that has a lot of collagen. Collagen breaks down a about 160.
>It does not apply to grilling or most roasting.
>
>This was written by Kurt Lucas, a professional chef.
>
>
>
Good info! However....barbecue (mainly, as you say...shoulder and
brisket) is mostly where I use the thermometer. Roasting, too, but I'm
not sure I see a difference except, perhaps, for the heat source. I
agree about the collagen, but fail to see what that has to do with a
temperature lag. Makes sense in theory, heat adsorption and all that
but, as I said....I've never seen a notable change in the rate at which
temperature advances.

Bubba

BTW....I thought you were arguing "against" the professional chef types?

--
You wanna measure, or you wanna cook?

notbob wrote:

>On 2005-06-03, Edwin Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>
>
>>This method is not for ANY meat, it is for barbecue.
>>
>>
>
>
>I wonder how it'd work on buffalo or beeffalo? That's one tough meat.
>If it's cooked one degree beyond med rare, it turns to shoe leather.
>I wonder if bbq could make it tender. Anyone have experience bbq'ing
>this meat?
>
>nb
>
>
No, but if you'll send me some I'll be glad to give 'er a go! :-)
Buffalo's kinda hard to come by in N. Fl.

Bubba

--
You wanna measure, or you wanna cook?

"Bubba" > wrote in message
>>
> Good info! However....barbecue (mainly, as you say...shoulder and
> brisket) is mostly where I use the thermometer. Roasting, too, but I'm
> not sure I see a difference except, perhaps, for the heat source. I agree
> about the collagen, but fail to see what that has to do with a temperature
> lag. Makes sense in theory, heat adsorption and all that but, as I
> said....I've never seen a notable change in the rate at which temperature
> advances.

A sirloin or rib roast, no, it makes no difference. Every brisket I've ever
done has lagged for a long time in the 165 range, give or take a few
degrees. I cook my briskets at about 250 for 12 to 16 hours.