IPA and APA

[Ceejay]

I'm loving this discussion.

"An organistion that collates different styles from different countries" - Isn't that EXACTLY what the BJCP does? The fact that the US homebrewing industry got to it first is irrelevant, and perhaps even a bit embarrassing as a Brit.

I don't see why BJCP guidelines have no relevance to British Brewing. How is British brewing any different to any other country, when some of our finest breweries are producing excellent "Strong, incredibly hoppy ales that are pale in colour, in the American style", and things like Munich Helles, Hefes, Saisons etc etc?

For me, it all comes down to finding an easier way to define a beer. Some beers will never be defined, but the BJCP generally classifies these as "speciality beers".

 

[graysalchemy]

The problem with Americans is that they take something take over and make it how they think we think it should be.

CAMRA isn't much better. :rofl: :rofl:

 

[chrig]

I just don't under stand the logic.

And if I google "American Indian"
http://www.google.com/search?q=american ... AYQ_AUoAQ#

Not very PC ! Did they brew much ale?

 

[Ceejay]

Lol! They must've brewed something I guess.

Navajo Porter perhaps?

 

[Aleman]

BJCP is an American organisation isn't it?

And there lies the problem.
I rest my case M'lord.

Surely there is a case for a British classification/judging standard? It's not like we don't have beer here... :wha:

As Aid Said there is one, the NGWABJ . . . I think they have a total of a whole 8 styles defined . . .And none of that foreign muck :nono: :nono:

While I disagree with a few of the style guidelines of the BJCP they are just that . . . GUIDELINES, and to be fair the BJCP have done a pretty thorough job of getting down the basic styles from around the world . . . something that the NGWABJ have not achieved even though they have been around longer.

I for one, will be working toward, and studying for, the BCJP judge certification . . . If you look at the last National Comp of the 485 beers entered if we had used the NGWABJ styles then 80% of them would have been entered in the 'Speciality' category . . . and how the blazes do you judge what is best between a Chocolate Vanilla Bourbon Oak Aged Imperial Brown Stout Porter and a Pilsner?? . . . The only way to do that is to judge against the style guidelines . . .oh Wait the 'style' is Speciality :wha: :wha:

The CBA decided to adopt the BJCP style guidelines for the National Comp primariliy because they are more or less complete. We now actually have a CBA member who sits on the BJCP style panel, so we now have some hope that we can change the BJCP style guidelines to match what is really happening in British Ales.

SIBA and CAMRA 'style' categories are actually even worse as they are based around 'commercial' guidelines.

Oh and the I in a lot of US 'styles' stands for Imperial not India

Anyway, I'm climbing back off the soap box and climbing into it and closing the lid again . . .

Incidentally what does the W stand for in NGWABJ . . . . . Gives you a clue as to it's origin and what was important when it was formed

 

[calumscott]

Insightful as ever Tony and thoroughly reasonable, thanks.

The danger, I suppose, with the BJCP guidelines is that they are blindly adopted in the absence of anything else. Personally I would like to see a full British catalogue of beer styles (not a catalogue of British beer styles), where the emphasis is on the British ones, the same from Belgium, Germany, France and erm every other decent beer making nation. Even if that starts with the BJCP stuff, rips out what we don't agree with, adds the stuff that's missing and evolves from there...

THEN you can get those organisations together to thrash out a true-as-it-can-be international standard judging catalogue.

But then, I was show secretary for an aquarium society when I was 14 ( :geek: ) and I know just how hard it can be even to get two local clubs to agree a judging standard for a single fish species!!!

This thread is a wonderfully huge can of worms... :twisted: Love it!

 

[NickW]

Just butting in here..

We are all for a catalogue of Beer styles, done by the British... why don't we make one?

Admitedly (sp?), I probably wouldnt have much input as I'm new to brewing in general - but why can't we cultivate one on here?

It may never be published or recognised - but as a reference to people on this forum and newcomers to the craft, it could be very beneficial :hmm:

Make it an ever evolving sticky..

Just my two pence

 

[calumscott]

Sort of a crowd-sourced THBF-amended version of the BJCP guidelines?

It's do-able I suppose, but the potential for it descending into a total ruck is quite high. We'd have to figure out some rules by which contributions could be accepted, debated, accepted and rejected first.

Surely some other forum has done this in another field that we could *cough* borrow their framework?

I agree that even if fruitless it would be a good bit of fun - maybe too much to take on in a single thread but could be organised such that each style could be done in turn maybe? Or run a whole category at once? :hmm:

 

[NickW]

Or run a whole category at once? :hmm:

This!

 

[calumscott]

Well I, for one, quite like the idea. Not an easy thing to try to do though, it takes a bit of commitment particularly from the mods and admins to keep pushing things along.

I think it could be a lot of fun researching the history of styles and pooling all that together...

 

[Dr Mike]

I think it could be a lot of fun researching the history of styles and pooling all that together...

Two starters for 10 :

http://barclayperkins.blogspot.co.uk/
Lots of recipes!

http://zythophile.wordpress.com

The idea that British styles must be made with British ingredients appears to be quite recent. Prior to WWII, lots of british recipes include US and European hops and malt. It's true that uses of American hops tend to be just bittering (the Cluster variety - was this the first 'high alpha' Hop?) but I've seen one IPA recipe dating back to the late 1800s which has shed loads of Saaz as flavour and dry hops.

Another surprising thing is that in the 1800s almost all styles (except Porter and Stout) were pale. Crystal malt was not widely used before the 1900s and roasted malts were largely restricted to Porter & Stout. The 'traditional' styles of copper-red coloured bitter and dark mild are mid to late 20th century developments.

If you want to start an argument, try the following :

What's the difference between Porter and Stout ?
What's the difference between Pale Ale and bitter ?
What should a 'traditional' mild be like ?

 

[Good Ed]

Thanks to Tony once again to put some perspective on things, but I really don't like the anti American comments on this thread.

 

[london_lhr]

Hi all,

just to put a little different perspective on the whole issue of what an IPA is, this makes interesting reading

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_Pale_Ale

Barry.

 

[Ceejay]

Whilst I think it's an interesting concept, I'd urge everyone to have a really good look at the BJCP guidelines. They pretty much cover every beer style, as they apply to modern brewing (or at least a view from 2008). I am not a judge, or American, and I don't have any kind of affiliation. I do however think you'd be hard pushed to make any major amendments. Unless of course you don't agree with the term American IPA. :whistle:
Why do we even need a Britain-centric version?

I agree, there's a danger of a bit of anti Americanism creeping in here. Our beer enjoyment has been much improved by their craft and homebrewing scene.

 

[zgoda]

In Netherlands they have their own style guide because BJCP rejected their bokbier (top fermented bock). Anyway I see BJCP guide as a helper for judges, not for brewers.

 

[Vossy1]

"An organistion that collates different styles from different countries" - Isn't that EXACTLY what the BJCP does? The fact that the US homebrewing industry got to it first is irrelevant, and perhaps even a bit embarrassing as a Brit.

I have no real opinion of BJCP, AFAIC they can only be a good thing...however that does not include giving 'cudos' to styles that have no right to be....ie, India this and India that :nono: :lol:

The danger, I suppose, with the BJCP guidelines is that they are blindly adopted in the absence of anything else.

a very good point, though I'm sure they're adopted in 'good faith'

Oh and the I in a lot of US 'styles' stands for Imperial not India

and there in lies an real bloody irony.....thanks to the EU forcing Metricity on us the Americans will soon be the only ones who can brew Imperially....fgs...what is the world coming too :lol:

Thanks to Tony once again to put some perspective on things, but I really don't like the anti American comments on this thread.

TBH I feel that's quite a derisory comment. Most of the US comments have been qualified and those that haven't are in jest....whether they are in poor taste is another matter, I'd read the comments and not take them too seriously as I'm not looking at them as insulting, but that's just me and another topic altogether.

amendments. Unless of course you don't agree with the term American IPA. :whistle:
Why do we even need a Britain-centric version?

Do you really have to ask why.

EDIT....if any of the US comments cause offence than please let the admin or mod team know, I have edited one post. There's no reason for a perfectly good discussion to be side tracked by anything 'other' than the topic in hand :thumb:

 

[bobsbeer]

Anyway I see BJCP guide as a helper for judges, not for brewers.

I totally agree. I brew beer for the taste. It may be 'in the style of' a particular beer, but made to my recipe, which may not be a true example of the guideline style. It may not win me competitions, but to me I don't brew for competitions. I do it to drink and enjoy. Good luck to those who brew to create a perfect example of a style. But even that is arbitrary.

 

[graysalchemy]

So I seem to have offended people with my anti American comments, they were meant to be taken tongue in cheek.

The terms India and Imperial are historical terms and thus reflect a style from a particular era and thus IMHO the style should reflect this and not deviate. CAMRA and most British breweries are the biggest offenders of this in my mind. These so called IPA's should just simply be called Pale Ales as that is what they are they bare no resemblance to an IPA. One of my favourite Pale Ales is St Austels Proper Job which they describe in name as an IPA, but if you look at the hops and hopping schedule it is quite clearly an APA, perhaps not served like a true APA :whistle: :whistle: .

And so to American Pale Ales. They are a unique style of beer which i am very partial too, but they are not an IPA. I know America is often seen as not having as much heritage as Europe, hence why thousands of Americans come over to the UK in search of some heritage and probably why beers are termed American Imperial ............. or American India............, but they have heritage right there in their own style, one which they should be proud of. :thumb: :thumb:

 

[calumscott]

hey have heritage right there in their own style, one which they should be proud of.

This! I got into Brewdog (OK, OK, I was caught by the marketing hype) and grew curious of the collaborations they were getting up to with American breweries so got curious about them and, well, it's a good job I like hops...! :lol:

The ONLY thing that gets my goat is that the American craft beer scene, while it forges its own innovative path in terms of recipes and ingredients, isn't marketing on those merits. Devalues it IMO, obviously not over there though hey...

 

[graysalchemy]

The only thing i don't like about American craft Ales is the gas :lol: but thats personal taste i suppose.