Message Board Brewing Competition announcement thread.

[strange-steve]

This is a quick draft, based on the BJCP scoresheet but I've tried to make it clean and simple. If there's anything missing let me know. This is a google drive link where it can be seen better. Also I hope HBF don't mind me using their logo :whistle:

 

[DoctorMick]

This is a quick draft, based on the BJCP scoresheet but I've tried to make it clean and simple. If there's anything missing let me know. This is a google drive link where it can be seen better. Also I hope HBF don't mind me using their logo :whistle:

Looks good, I'd probably add brewer name as we don't all name out beers.

It's a good point about the logo, it might be worth someone seeing what we have to do to make this official, any volunteers? I guess @Austin still runs the site so would be able to give an answer.

 

[strange-steve]

Looks good, I'd probably add brewer name as we don't all name out beers.

It's a good point about the logo, it might be worth someone seeing what we have to do to make this official, any volunteers? I guess @Austin still runs the site so would be able to give an answer.

That's true, brewer name added. I've also done a compact version with 2 scoresheets per A4 page to save on paper HERE.
Hopefully one of the mods can find out about the officialness.

 

[strange-steve]

Oh and I'll put my name forward for the wheat beers in December, it's a style I'm pretty familiar with, I've assisted judging this category in a BJCP comp. It's not a style I'm planning on brewing soon so I'd happily judge. I know a few brewers and beer enthusiasts who I can get to help me out with this one too.

 

[DoctorMick]

Oh and I'll put my name forward for the wheat beers in December, it's a style I'm pretty familiar with, I've assisted judging this category in a BJCP comp. It's not a style I'm planning on brewing soon so I'd happily judge. I know a few brewers and beer enthusiasts who I can get to help me out with this one too.

Ta, it's probably easiest that the months are allocated on a first come first serve basis so that's IPA and Wheat Beers gone, still plenty left to choose from tho. It's probably worth limiting judging to once per person for now just so anyone who is interested gets a chance. I've edited the post with the draft calendar in it to show who is judging.

 

[dan125]

It would be great if people could volunteer to:

- Create a template judging sheet
- Create a template entry form
- Create a template feedback form (I'm not convinced sharing the judges scores would always be constructive)
- Create a competition sub forum on here (@MyQul :))
- Create a fairly broad definition for one or more of the monthly categories
- Offer to judge one of the forthcoming categories/months

Once we've got sub forum we can create some stickys for:

- Competition calendar
- Entry form
- Entry rules (such as number of bottles to be submitted and when etc but nothing too strict)

Obviously there will be a lot of fine details to iron out so the more input we can get here the better. We can refine things as we go and as we learn from each competition.

Oh, and it's looking good for a sponsored prize too! :thumb:

I don't mind having a crack at the entry form if it helps?
:

 

[peteplus1]

I've come up with a draft schedule:

Oct-16 IPA - DoctorMick
Nov-16 Pale Ale
Dec-16 Wheat Beer - strange-steve
Jan-17 Stout/Porter
Feb-17 Double IPA
Mar-17 Belgian Ale
Apr-17 Bitter
May-17 Mild
Jun-17 Saison
Jul-17 Lager
Aug-17 Imperial Stout
Sep-17 Brown Ale
Oct-17 IPA
Nov-17 Barleywine
Dec-17 Lambic/Sour
Jan-18 Stout/Porter
Feb-18 Scottish Ale
Mar-18
Apr-18 Bitter
May-18
Jun-18
Jul-18 Lager
Aug-18
Sep-18


The idea is that IPA, Stout/Porter, bitter and lager are regular categories, repeated each year, as I thought they'd be the most popular. Other than that everything is up for grabs for one offs, I filled in the first year using the BJCP style guide but I'm completely open to suggestions.

If nobody has any objections we can go ahead with the inaugural competition being in October (entries to be submitted by the end of that month) and I'll sort out judging (it is merely coincidence that the first category is my favorite beer type!).

It would be great if people could volunteer to:

- Create a template judging sheet
- Create a template entry form
- Create a template feedback form (I'm not convinced sharing the judges scores would always be constructive)
- Create a competition sub forum on here (@MyQul :))
- Create a fairly broad definition for one or more of the monthly categories
- Offer to judge one of the forthcoming categories/months

Once we've got sub forum we can create some stickys for:

- Competition calendar
- Entry form
- Entry rules (such as number of bottles to be submitted and when etc but nothing too strict)

Obviously there will be a lot of fine details to iron out so the more input we can get here the better. We can refine things as we go and as we learn from each competition.

Oh, and it's looking good for a sponsored prize too! :thumb:

I'd be happy to be involved in the judging regarding the stout/porter in Jan :)

 

[DoctorMick]

I don't mind having a crack at the entry form if it helps?
:

That'd be great. :thumb:

 

[DoctorMick]

I'd be happy to be involved in the judging regarding the stout/porter in Jan :)

:thumb: I've put your name down.

 

[The Idiot]

I don't mind putting together some of the style definitions if no one has tackled that yet.

 

[DoctorMick]

I don't mind putting together some of the style definitions if no one has tackled that yet.

That'd be great. :thumb: Just fill in the ones you're comfortable with and we can fill in any blanks after.

 

[The Idiot]

Before I go in too deep, with regard to style guidelines I'm guessing that what is needed is a general description rather than an analytical breakdown. Bearing in mind that some judges won't be able to judge to style at a high level, and many entrants won't be brewing to competition styles, I was thinking of something that offers generic guidance rather than a bunch of hard and fast rules.

Is the following example too generic? Do we need more specifics?

IPA
(Includes British IPA, American IPA, Black/Brown IPA, Rye IPA, Speciality IPAs. Does not include Double IPAs)
IPAs should have an OG of between 1.050 and 1.070 and an IBU of 40+. Beers should exhibit a hop-forward flavour/aroma typically (but not limited to) using spicy or citric hops. IPAs should be drier with a light to medium body. British IPAs can exhibit fruitier malt flavours. IPAs should be light in colour (Black and Brown variants accepted). Darker IPAs should not have a burned or astringent flavour but should be balanced with enhanced malt character.

Pale Ale
(Includes Pale Ale, Golden Ale, Blonde Ales, Belgian Pale Ales. Does not include IPAs or Double IPAs)
Pale Ales should have an OG of between 1.035 and 1.055 and 20-50 IBUs. Beers should exhibit a medium hop flavour/aroma with hops of any type, and malt should be medium and balanced (Belgian Pale Ales may have more malty and bready flavours with some caramel influence). Some degree of fruitiness is acceptable. Pale Ales should be drier with a light to medium body. They should be light in colour.

Once I get a bit of feedback I'll get on with them!

 

[DoctorMick]

They look spot on to me. :thumb:

 

[jceg316]

There are so many good styles to choose from, but I won't hog them all just yet :whistle:

I'm gonna go for Double IPA in Feb 17th.

 

[strange-steve]

I was just thinking if maybe the judge shouldn't know the brewers name, to keep some anonymity. If each entry only had a beer name then the 3 top scoring beers could be posted by the judge in the appropriate forum and the brewers of those could then reveal themselves.

If the other entrants wanted their feedback then they can pm the judge with their beer's name, hey I brewed "Fosters Clone" how come I didn't win, something like that and the scoresheet could be forwarded on.

It would keep it impartial and save embarrassment.

 

[DoctorMick]

I was just thinking if maybe the judge shouldn't know the brewers name, to keep some anonymity. If each entry only had a beer name then the 3 top scoring beers could be posted by the judge in the appropriate forum and the brewers of those could then reveal themselves.

If the other entrants wanted their feedback then they can pm the judge with their beer's name, hey I brewed "Fosters Clone" how come I didn't win, something like that and the scoresheet could be forwarded on.

It would keep it impartial and save embarrassment.

You've raised a really good point, last thing we'd want is people feeling the results were biased against them. I'd imagine the vast majority would want feedback tho. How about a process where by all entry forms are submitted by PM to one of more people, the entrant is then provided a number to send with their brew so the judge knows nothing of who has submitted the entry? Then the judge could send all feedback to whoever collected the entry forms and they could then forward on the feedback?

On that note, I'd also suggest the entry form doesn't disclose how the brew was made so we can't be biased against kits, extract or AG.

 

[The Idiot]

They look spot on to me. :thumb:

I'll get on with them!

 

[MickDundee]

You've raised a really good point, last thing we'd want is people feeling the results were biased against them. I'd imagine the vast majority would want feedback tho. How about a process where by all entry forms are submitted by PM to one of more people, the entrant is then provided a number to send with their brew so the judge knows nothing of who has submitted the entry? Then the judge could send all feedback to whoever collected the entry forms and they could then forward on the feedback?

We could just have people submit beer with a name, then the judge would leave the feedback for every beer in one thread and the entrants can collect their own feedback without anyone knowing.

 

[DoctorMick]

We could just have people submit beer with a name, then the judge would leave the feedback for every beer in one thread and the entrants can collect their own feedback without anyone knowing.

That seems a lot more simplistic! :lol: Only possible problem, how would we know who the winner was? I know we will be able to trust people to be honest but I wouldn't like to take the risk if it can be avoided.

 

[strange-steve]

You've raised a really good point, last thing we'd want is people feeling the results were biased against them. I'd imagine the vast majority would want feedback tho. How about a process where by all entry forms are submitted by PM to one of more people, the entrant is then provided a number to send with their brew so the judge knows nothing of who has submitted the entry? Then the judge could send all feedback to whoever collected the entry forms and they could then forward on the feedback?

On that note, I'd also suggest the entry form doesn't disclose how the brew was made so we can't be biased against kits, extract or AG.

I think that is a better idea, although it does mean extra work for the person sorting the entry forms and feedback. I'm sure volunteers will present themselves for the task though :thumb: