determine how their 21 different criteria should be weighted, and why there are 21 meaningful categories instead of 20, or 22?  The highest weighted categories are strictly quantitative and can't possibly tell us anything about whether those smokehouses make meat worth eating, let alone paying money for.

Some of them are just laughable to read too, like "Hosted at Least 1 in Past 3 KCBS-Sanctioned Masters Series BBQ Competitions"  Sure, whether a city did that or not is an "objective fact", but it's kind of meaningless.  Why don't cities get any credit for hosting the events from the accolades section?

I tend to also believe a person could make quality barbecue without paying membership fees to the National Barbecue and Grilling Association.  Nor do they have to take time out of their schedules to travel to competitions.

Utter pseudoscientific claptrap.