I'm just curious. I've never been to a major BBQ event, but I see these teams on TV, sweating over every detail, and they no doubt produce excellent BBQ.
But my question is, assuming the team that won the Royal or the Jack Daniels Invitational last year produced a pork butt that would rate a "10", how would the butt produced by a CS rate in comparison?
My family owned BBQ restaurants for almost 50 years and cooked exclusively over real wood. At it's best, I would give it a "10", but every day wasn't a "10", most days hitting about a "7". I can hit a "9" consistently with my CS, and literally do it in my sleep, until my remote therm goes off. I'm just wondering how much better the award winners can do it. I was cooking a butt last night watching Bobby Flay and the people sleeping on the floor of their rig and tending the cooker at night in the rain trying to hold temp. That must be some mighty fine butt because they have surely reached the point of diminishing returns if you ask me. I think the CS should get an award for being the most boring appliance ever made. One knob. No moving parts. No sound. Not internet capable. Consistent results with no fuss. YAWNNNN!!!!
We had a man that worked for us for over 40 years tending the pits, and I mean no disrespect to him at all, but if we could turn the clock back a couple of decades, he and the pit would both be replaced with about 6 of the SM360's. They'd pay for themselves in less tan a year in wood savings alone, and take up a fraction of the space the pit and the wood stacks occupied. Plus they'd never call in sick.
Anyway, back to the question; how much better is an award winning butt than a properly cooked butt on a CS? Nothing scientific required, just your opinions.
Original Post