Beer Judging

[alikocho]

Looking at those BJCP qualification examples etc. they have a much easier way og faking up off flavours....



Flavor Adulterant Quantity
Sour/Acidic USP lactic acid 0.4 ml (1/3. tsp of solution of 1/8 tsp lactic acid plus 3/8 tsp distilled water)
Sour/Acidic White wine vinegar 3/4 tsp
Bitterness iso-hop extract 1 or 2 drops, to taste
Sweetness sucrose (table sugar) 1/4 tsp dissolved in 1/2 tsp water
Astringency Grape tannin 2 tsp. of solution of 1/8 tsp tannin dissolved in 5 Tbsp water
Phenolic Chloroseptic 0.4 ml (1/3. tsp of solution of 1/8 tsp Chloroseptic plus 3/8 tsp distilled water)
Clovelike Clove solution Make solution of 8 cloves soaked in 3 oz. of beer and add liquid to taste (about 4 tsp)
Sulfitic Potassium metabisulfite* Make solution of one tablet dissolved in 3 oz. of beer and add to taste (about 1/2 tsp)
Alcoholic Ethanol 2 tsp (increases alcohol by 2.7%). 3 tsp vodka may also be used
Sherry-like Dry sherry 3/4 tsp
Nutty Almond extract 0.1 ml (1/8 tsp of solution consisting of 1/8 tsp. almond extract plus 5/8 tsp. distilled water)
Papery/Stale N/A Open bottles to air, reseal, and keep at 100 F or warmer for several days
Winey White wine 2 Tbsp
Diacetyl Butter extract 4-5 drops
Estery Banana extract 6-7 drops
Lightstruck N/A Expose commercial beer in green bottles to sunlight for 1-3 days.

And there's some pretty good advice in Randy Mosher's, Radical Brewing on doctoring or identifying off flavors

 

[Swazi]

I've just read through the rest of this thread and enjoyed it. To the dude (sorry about the lack of ). I tend to agree that the judging process, when it gets down to the best beers at the event that the decision is subjective. By this stage the beers are all very good, who's to say which one is the best.
:ugeek: Said that he likes to participate and that winning is not the most important thing.
Taking these to comments into account I'd like to add that Winning is everything, modesty is for losers and that the judge is the person we (the entrants) all agreed to make that decision for us.
Competitions are also the most enjoyable drinking sessions ever :grin:

 

[Moley]

I hear by crown you king of THBF society of pedants

HEREBY, you numbskull!

 

[robsan77]

I hear by crown you king of THBF society of pedants

HEREBY, you numbskull!

hA HA

 

[unclepumble]

I hear by crown you king of THBF society of pedants

HEREBY, you numbskull!

I hereby Crown You Sir Moley, "all seeing eye, master of grammer, great sage of THBF", Emperor of Pedants!!!!!
:thumb: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

UP

 

[Moley]

I hear by crown you king of THBF society of pedants

Finally, recognition. That should be hereby btw

Not so fast Big Pud, I never noticed that reply

 

[unclepumble]

I hear by crown you king of THBF society of pedants

Finally, recognition. That should be hereby btw

Not so fast Big Pud, I never noticed that reply

I think you might have a little bit of competition, from these young upstarts, but based on past form I think the award go's to the correct party .

Keep up the good work "O Great Sage" :clap: :clap: :


UP

 

[Moley]

based on past form I think the award go's to the correct party

goes :whistle:

 

[TheMumbler]

(snip) I think you might have a little bit of competition, from these young upstarts, (snip)

Hey I'm not getting into an arse kicking competition with a hedgehog. All hail King Moley :)

 

[unclepumble]

(snip) I think you might have a little bit of competition, from these young upstarts, (snip)

Hey I'm not getting into an arse kicking competition with a hedgehog. All hail King Moley :)

Hedgehog? :wha: :wha: :wha: :wha: :wha: :wha:

Moley = A MOLE

All hail King Moley Pedant extraordinaire


UP

 

[lancsSteve]

Methinks this discussion is starting to show that those who like judging are pedants which isn't so good for the idea of judging being a "not bad" thing...

Swazi show's why Saffirs hate losing at Rugby or Cricket whereas the Brit's just rely on the "it's the taking part" mantra of medicrity, we just need an American to come in now and show us what competition and BJCP is REALLY all about...

ANyone know who's was #304 in lager class at Spring Thing? Just tried one of the bring-homes and found it a little ascetic and slightly sour - not pronounced but not flawless. Washed it down with one of Aleman's winning ehtries and verily t'was a flawless lager.

 

[Che Banana]

Yes but without referees you wouldn't have football..... hang on that's an argument for no judges.

 

[TheMumbler]

Hedgehog? :wha: :wha: :wha: :wha: :wha: :wha:

Moley = A MOLE

Isn't that a common phrase? I just meant a foolish competition to get involved in - hedgehogs having a spiney arse.

Methinks this discussion is starting to show that those who like judging are pedants which isn't so good for the idea of judging being a "not bad" thing...

Swazi show's why Saffirs hate losing at Rugby or Cricket whereas the Brit's just rely on the "it's the taking part" mantra of medicrity, we just need an American to come in now and show us what competition and BJCP is REALLY all about...

Isn't pedantry aka attention to detail important for judging? Maybe there is a connection...

The idea that not emphasising winning *necessarily* leads to mediocrity is nonsense. It is easy enough to imagine a brewer who is obsessed with winning but makes poor beer and his counterpart a brewer who only doesn't enter competitions but still makes excellent ales.

Of course a bit of healthy competition can be a good thing, if nothing else it is a way of getting unbiased feedback. However encouragement and enjoyment are important factors in skill development that have no necessary connection to formal competition, and can be hampered by it.

The advertising and discussion around the Bristol comp. makes me feel that bringing bottles for tasting will be tolerated, but the event is all about being a winner or a loser. I find that off-putting. Personally I preferred the NCBA approach of making sure that there were plenty of tasters thus focussing the event around tasting each other's beers and socialising. As ever on t'interwebs YMMV

 

[alikocho]

The advertising and discussion around the Bristol comp. makes me feel that bringing bottles for tasting will be tolerated, but the event is all about being a winner or a loser. I find that off-putting. Personally I preferred the NCBA approach of making sure that there were plenty of tasters thus focussing the event around tasting each other's beers and socialising. As ever on t'interwebs YMMV

As the organiser of the Bristol competition, might I chime in here? The event is a competition, and inevitably that leads to there being winners, but the focus is much more on people being able to get honest and impartial feedback.

The approach of there being 'plenty of tasters' has its challenges. Firstly, those bottles need to be stored somewhere, and we don't have the capacity to do that. The NCBA event last year attracted 209 entries, which equates to around 1200 bottles of beer.

It should be noted that there will be an opportunity for people to socialise and share beer when the doors open for the announcement of results. The tastings will just not be formally organised.

 

[TheMumbler]

Chime away, I'm not saying that the event will be bad, or that you don't have your reasons for the way that it is being run. I think it is great that there is a national as opposed to none. However I don't see anything in your reply that suggests that my instincts about emphasis are wrong.

 

[lancsSteve]

The idea that not emphasising winning *necessarily* leads to mediocrity is nonsense.

TRhe analogy of sport and gentle mocking of cultural stereotypes was paramount there - we're medicore at football but still obsessed with winning the world cup so my argument fails, however I think the nation is more accepting of Andy Murray / Timn Henman / Eddie the Eagle Edwards / A summer batting collapse than our winning-obsessed southern hemisphere cousins. However this digresses.

It is easy enough to imagine a brewer who is obsessed with winning but makes poor beer and his counterpart a brewer who only doesn't enter competitions but still makes excellent ales.

There's a long tradition of making beers you don't like just to be the only entrant in a category so you 'win' it whcih the BJCP breadth of styles and organisational/competition rules seems to encourage (unintentionally). However it depends if you buy into that and focus on winning or feedback.

The advertising and discussion around the Bristol comp. makes me feel that bringing bottles for tasting will be tolerated, but the event is all about being a winner or a loser. I find that off-putting.

I think it has a heavy dose of BJCP with all the benefits (lots of categories forexample) that brings and the problemns as well (lots of categories). I'll be interested to see if a British interpretation of the BJCP rules will win out as we move to seeing the best features of this (the first event of it's kind I think? certainly on this scale and on BJCP rules) vs the traditional NGBWJ approach as used at NCBA. My hope is that we can find a happy fusion of the best of the two but sticking with out-of-the-box tried-and-tested formulas will hope.

And I'm reassured by alikocho's posts. The information on the site looks a lot like that on other BJCP upcoming dates http://www.bjcp.org/apps/comp_schedule/ ... hedule.php (is it mandated/boilerplate text?) so seems to have a lot of the influence of "the way BJCP events are run" but the way the experience happens will be more guided by the people attending and the intetntions and attitudes they bring to it. I'm sure the attitude one takes in will shape the experience more than the BJCP structure, advertising or promotion: if you go in to win and don't you may emerge disappointed, if you go to taste and get feedback and catch up wth a bunch of others of these forums you'll probably have a fantastic time, if you go to get pi$$ed and try beers and have a laugh you'll almost certainly emerge the biggest winner!

 

[alikocho]

It is easy enough to imagine a brewer who is obsessed with winning but makes poor beer and his counterpart a brewer who only doesn't enter competitions but still makes excellent ales.

There's a long tradition of making beers you don't like just to be the only entrant in a category so you 'win' it whcih the BJCP breadth of styles and organisational/competition rules seems to encourage (unintentionally). However it depends if you buy into that and focus on winning or feedback.

Entering a beer on the notion that you'll be the only one and will therefore win won't necessarily work. If things don't attract many entries they will be collapsed with other categories (sensibly, however). Beers falling short of 21 points will also not be awarded placings.

And I'm reassured by alikocho's posts. The information on the site looks a lot like that on other BJCP upcoming dates http://www.bjcp.org/apps/comp_schedule/ ... hedule.php (is it mandated/boilerplate text?) so seems to have a lot of the influence of "the way BJCP events are run" but the way the experience happens will be more guided by the people attending and the intetntions and attitudes they bring to it. I'm sure the attitude one takes in will shape the experience more than the BJCP structure, advertising or promotion: if you go in to win and don't you may emerge disappointed, if you go to taste and get feedback and catch up wth a bunch of others of these forums you'll probably have a fantastic time, if you go to get pi$$ed and try beers and have a laugh you'll almost certainly emerge the biggest winner!

It's not mandated, but one does need clear rules and this has been based on other competitions. There are certain BJCP rules that need to be adhered to, but much of the information has to do with practicalities (how many bottles etc). It's certainly not a one size fits all, but I modeled it on something that I know works. It will have a feel to it, and who knows, people may like it!

 

[TheMumbler]

There's a long tradition of making beers you don't like just to be the only entrant in a category so you 'win' it whcih the BJCP breadth of styles and organisational/competition rules seems to encourage (unintentionally). However it depends if you buy into that and focus on winning or feedback.

Sorry how does this relate to the issue of whether or not an emphasis on winning necessarily leads to mediocrity? It seems like a good illustration of how a focus on competition can cause problems though.

 

[lancsSteve]

Sorry how does this relate to the issue of whether or not an emphasis on winning necessarily leads to mediocrity? It seems like a good illustration of how a focus on competition can cause problems though.

It doesn't - that was about national stereotypes and sporting achievement and Britains post-colonial Buzz Aldrinesque malaise that "second comes right after first", though anyone would take you as a Liverpool fan though after in your tenacious desire to consider the link between 'focus on winning' and 'mediocrity' :whistle:

Thanks Ali for clarifying rules and prevention methods against making an infected beer and calling it a 'lambic'!

 

[alikocho]

Thanks Ali for clarifying rules and prevention methods against making an infected beer and calling it a 'lambic'!

There was a legendary comment once made on a BJCP scoresheet - "Just because it's infected does not mean it's Belgian". This wasn't the limit of the feedback given, but it does illustrate the point well.