January Forum Comp - American Pale Ales

[Leon103]

Where you judging to style guidelines or just taste?

 

[Ghillie]

Where you judging to style guidelines or just taste?

Both really. Ultimately the beers that won were the ones that tasted the best. Beers that scored poorly were ones that had flaws, regardless of style really, they would still have been flawed.

 

[samale]

SamAle – No boil, No chill







Aroma 3/12 Low malt and low hop notes, strong phenols coming through? Infection possibly?



Appearance 2/3 Excellent strong white head which lasted. Hazy but a lot of wheat so makes sense.



Flavour 8/20 Bready flavour. Drying towards end of pallete which was nice. Low hop flavour, very much light malt flavour coming through if nothing else.




Mouthfeel 3/5 Dry mouthfeel, rather thin if anything. Not particular faults per style.



Overall Impression 4/10 An alright beer, but the phenols (yeasty/fungal like) spoilt it too much for us bud. Sorry.



Total 20/50

That was my first attempt at a raw ale. It contained 250g of hops centennial, Chinook and equinox. The grain bill was 3 kg minch malt, 2 kg of wheat and 1 kg of Munich. The beer itself was far from perfect but I didn't pick up the yeasty/ fungal taste you described. The beer was sent to two other forum members and another home brewer and they didn't pick up this either. With this being my first raw ale I really had nothing to compare it to, I agree with it being thin and lacking a big aroma. Over all its a learning experience. I have another raw ale fermenting only this time its a malt forward beer so I will see how this turns out.
Thanks for the feed back.

 

[Ghillie]

SamAle – No boil, No chill







Aroma 3/12 Low malt and low hop notes, strong phenols coming through? Infection possibly?



Appearance 2/3 Excellent strong white head which lasted. Hazy but a lot of wheat so makes sense.



Flavour 8/20 Bready flavour. Drying towards end of pallete which was nice. Low hop flavour, very much light malt flavour coming through if nothing else.




Mouthfeel 3/5 Dry mouthfeel, rather thin if anything. Not particular faults per style.



Overall Impression 4/10 An alright beer, but the phenols (yeasty/fungal like) spoilt it too much for us bud. Sorry.



Total 20/50

That was my first attempt at a raw ale. It contained 250g of hops centennial, Chinook and equinox. The grain bill was 3 kg minch malt, 2 kg of wheat and 1 kg of Munich. The beer itself was far from perfect but I didn't pick up the yeasty/ fungal taste you described. The beer was sent to two other forum members and another home brewer and they didn't pick up this either. With this being my first raw ale I really had nothing to compare it to, I agree with it being thin and lacking a big aroma. Over all its a learning experience. I have another raw ale fermenting only this time its a malt forward beer so I will see how this turns out.
Thanks for the feed back.

There was, to the two of us tasting anyway, a weird taste that was almost like old dough, yeasty, off-like flavour. Certainly one that we felt shouldn’t have been there. It may have just been the one bottle, it may have been from the bottle itself. Something picked up along the way possibly? No experts and don’t claim to be, but got a weird taste that I wouldn’t want in a beer.

No boil and no chill, no room for error when it comes to being sanitary so entirely possible?

Wasn’t a beer we particularly enjoyed, whether that was because there was indeed phenols there caused by some form of bacteria or just because we didn’t enjoy it - that was really it.

Ultimately the questions we were asking ourselves when judging were:

-Would I finish this?
-Would I pay for it?
-Would I brew it myself/be happy if I brewed it.

We both picked up on the same thing bud though, so there’s something there that doesn’t taste right. Sorry.

 

[Ghillie]

I don't think it was a very high scoring month by the looks of it. Out of interest what was the score of the beers placed.

First place was tied with both entrants scoring a respectable 27/50.

 

[Nicks90]

Have you another bottle to try, would be interested to see what you’re general impression would be? We just weren't getting a strong aroma as expected from an APA, especially a Punk that you're drawing similarities too!

I've kept 4 back and just opened one, and I am seriously disappointed. You are entirely correct good sir!
Whilst it's pleasant, it is nowhere near as punchy as it was. Amazing to think how 4 weeks can change a beer!

 

[RichardM]

Amazing to think how 4 weeks can change a beer!

When I brew bitters and darker ales they are always at their best just as I get to the end and I think "Why couldn't I leave it alone for a month before trying it, it's amazing how 4 weeks can improve a beer"

 

[Nicks90]

Agreed, bitter is my go to drink and I always try to leave them as long as I can.

 

[samale]

There was, to the two of us tasting anyway, a weird taste that was almost like old dough, yeasty, off-like flavour. Certainly one that we felt shouldn’t have been there. It may have just been the one bottle, it may have been from the bottle itself. Something picked up along the way possibly? No experts and don’t claim to be, but got a weird taste that I wouldn’t want in a beer.

No boil and no chill, no room for error when it comes to being sanitary so entirely possible?

Wasn’t a beer we particularly enjoyed, whether that was because there was indeed phenols there caused by some form of bacteria or just because we didn’t enjoy it - that was really it.

Ultimately the questions we were asking ourselves when judging were:

-Would I finish this?
-Would I pay for it?
-Would I brew it myself/be happy if I brewed it.

We both picked up on the same thing bud though, so there’s something there that doesn’t taste right. Sorry.

As I said it was entered for the learning experience, I had other beers that would of scored better but I wanted feed back on the raw ale.

 

[Ghillie]

As I said it was entered for the learning experience, I had other beers that would of scored better but I wanted feed back on the raw ale.

That’s what it’s all about, feedback and a means to keep improving at the hobby we love!

 

[user 23602]

Might possibly be the lowest scoring beer.

Aroma 3/12 No hop aroma, no malt aroma. Smelled like love hearts/sweet sugary kind? Sickly.
Appearance 2/3 Clarity sound but head fell away quickly.
Flavour 3/20 Far too sweet, sickly so. What was the FG? Stalled fermentation or addition of lactose? Un-fermentables? Low OG potentially? Unsure until recipe known.
Mouthfeel 2/5 Light mouthfeel with a cloying finish.
Overall Impression 3/10 Far too sweet. Didn't reach FG or too much unfermentable additions? Kit beer possibly with unnecessary tinkering.
Total 13/50

However, everything that wasn't liked, is what I enjoy. A Milkshake APA attempt. So I guess a lot of it can be personal preference, but I'm chuffed with it and drinking a couple this evening in celebration.

 

[Oneflewover]

Might possibly be the lowest scoring beer.

Aroma 3/12 No hop aroma, no malt aroma. Smelled like love hearts/sweet sugary kind? Sickly.
Appearance 2/3 Clarity sound but head fell away quickly.
Flavour 3/20 Far too sweet, sickly so. What was the FG? Stalled fermentation or addition of lactose? Un-fermentables? Low OG potentially? Unsure until recipe known.
Mouthfeel 2/5 Light mouthfeel with a cloying finish.
Overall Impression 3/10 Far too sweet. Didn't reach FG or too much unfermentable additions? Kit beer possibly with unnecessary tinkering.
Total 13/50

However, everything that wasn't liked, is what I enjoy. A Milkshake APA attempt. So I guess a lot of it can be personal preference, but I'm chuffed with it and drinking a couple this evening in celebration.

I think he liked it.......

 

[user 23602]

I think he liked it.......

Hahaha it was still nice to receive someone else take on it, I appreciate the feedback regardless.

 

[Leon103]

Both really. Ultimately the beers that won were the ones that tasted the best. Beers that scored poorly were ones that had flaws, regardless of style really, they would still have been flawed.

Not really. Depends what flaws you found. Seems like all the beers had no or very little flavour or aroma. You wouldn't expect a APA to be a massive hop bomb.

 

[Ghillie]

Not really. Depends what flaws you found. Seems like all the beers had no or very little flavour or aroma. You wouldn't expect a APA to be a massive hop bomb.

Not really what Leon, I don’t understand what you’re getting at? Notable flaws were picked up in a number of beers and feedback given to the brewers.

No I wouldn’t expect every APA to be a massive hop bomb, of course not. But overall the aroma and flavour for the bulk of entries was generally lacking. There were beers that were “good” as per the score and there were beers that were problematic due to huge flaws. That’s the way it was, the way it is and how we perceived the beers. Nothing stood out as great.

You never entered a beer Leon, so not sure why you’re contesting something which doesn’t concern you?

 

[Leon103]

Not really what Leon, I don’t understand what you’re getting at? Notable flaws were picked up in a number of beers and feedback given to the brewers.

No I wouldn’t expect every APA to be a massive hop bomb, of course not. But overall the aroma and flavour for the bulk of entries was generally lacking. There were beers that were “good” as per the score and there were beers that were problematic due to huge flaws. That’s the way it was, the way it is and how we perceived the beers. Nothing stood out as great.

You never entered a beer Leon, so not sure why you’re contesting something which doesn’t concern you?

Not contesting anything, I haven't tasted all of the beers that were sent.
I was just asking if you were judging to style or to taste as they are two different things. I was only asking because it seems strange that all the beers were low scoring, especially as a couple of the entrants are award winning brewers.

Perhaps the delay in judging could be one of the reasons.

 

[Ghillie]

Not contesting anything, I haven't tasted all of the beers that were sent.
I was just asking if you were judging to style or to taste as they are two different things. I was only asking because it seems strange that all the beers were low scoring, especially as a couple of the entrants are award winning brewers.

Perhaps the delay in judging could be one of the reasons.

Even with the delay (which was only a few weeks) - it wouldn’t make all that much difference. It’s not like the beers were judged months and months after being bottled.

Award winning? Scoring was fair and honest I felt. No point in scoring a beer as good or great if it just isn’t. Good and fair was where the majority of beers landed. I would say that’s accurate.

 

[JonBrew]

As long as the beers were judged to style and the same scoring methodology was applied throughout the judging, then the actual scores themselves are somewhat irrelevant. I didn't enter a beer so have nothing at stake but going by the scores of the winning beers I'd venture a guess that, in general, the scoring was a little on the harsh side by comparison with your average BJCP competition.

 

[Ghillie]

As long as the beers were judged to style and the same scoring methodology was applied throughout the judging, then the actual scores themselves are somewhat irrelevant. I didn't enter a beer so have nothing at stake but going by the scores of the winning beers I'd venture a guess that, in general, the scoring was a little on the harsh side by comparison with your average BJCP competition.

I agree about the scoring, in terms of it being irrelevant. The best beers won regardless what number was put against it.

As regards to being harsh, no - we weren’t. There just wasn’t any outstanding, excellent or very good beers... Not going to score a beer as excellent if it simply wasn’t...

 

[Mrhandsome]

As long as the beers were judged to style and the same scoring methodology was applied throughout the judging, then the actual scores themselves are somewhat irrelevant. I didn't enter a beer so have nothing at stake but going by the scores of the winning beers I'd venture a guess that, in general, the scoring was a little on the harsh side by comparison with your average BJCP competition.

Say it was someone else judging and they were more generous with their point scoring it still amounts to the same result, just with higher points.

I actually think all the points about my beer were very much in line with what I thought about it too, and therefore that the judging was very fair. I'm actually impressed that the faults I knew about from brewing were picked up just from tasting with no other info.