flushed wrote:
My personal problem with WBC, is the list of rules that govern a top barista, have barely any relevence to the actually daily brilliant barista. But thats another thread.
I've gotta say that that's some of the biggest idiocy I've read recently, unless I have the wrong end of the stick. Which competition did you enter? For instance, even in Australia, Phil McKnight (AASCA Judge, great bloke), Hazel de los Reyes (knows more about coffee than anyone I've ever met before) and Scottie Callaghan are all Australian's who've done stellar work in improving coffee in Australia - Phil on Breville, Scottie with Belaroma 'educating the masses' and Hazel setting the bar of great coffee in Sydney. Watching the trickle-down from WBC to AASCA Nationals to AASCA State Comps to AASCA Local competitions like the Newcastle one really demonstrate that baristas improve not just through doing their routine but also through feedback. They end up better baristas than their friends, who then look to them for advice, and the whole scene improves. I've had competitors come back the next year and tell me "our cafe is doing an extra 10,20 kilos a week" and "thanks to what we've put into practice from feedback we've had, we've been able to expand to another 2 locations", etc/ - and that translates to customers drinking more, better coffee. The WBC may seem like an irrelevance, but the pyramid structure under it most certainly isn't. I'm aware that the organisations aren't perfect, but they're run by volunteers for the good of the coffee community. They're things to get involved in building up, not tearing down. Disclosure: I'm one of the few AASCA judges who doesn't work full time in the coffee industry.
