From JudgeNet Tue Jun 8 03:28:48 1993 From: Brew Free Or Die 07-Jun-1993 0944 Subject: Kingston a success! I'd like to be one of the first to publicly express my extreme pleasure and satisfaction with the way the first round national competition judging event took place in Kingston, NY this past weekend. Keith Symonds, Bob Gorman, and Jay Hersh did a fantastic job of organizing the event and pulling it off. Though all three looked, at times, like they were about to explode in a flash and puff of stress, they maintained their composure and got the job done. The HMFICC T-shirts helped. ;^) Nat Collins is also deserving again of thanks for donating his time and his brewery space to the event. If you were at the BBC for last year's 1st round, you know that Koch did little more than have the door to the place unlocked so we could enter (and even that was done late sometimes). Nat's Woodstock Brewing Company was clean, spacious, well lit, odor-free (you listening, JK?), and Nat himself helped whenever and where ever possible to make sure Keith, Bob, Jay, and all the judges had everything they needed. The judging was a pleasure, lunch was delicious, and the Saturday night party was a blast. I still can't believe how much outstanding beer was available. And writing of that, I'm sure other judges have noticed this too, but isn't homebrew in general just getting unbelievably good? I judged 34 beers in total, and though I had to knock several for missing the intended style, none had very bad fermentation defects. Thanks again to everyone who made my weekend fun. On to Portland! -Dan Hall -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Tue Jun 8 03:28:48 1993 From: uupsi!techbook.com!gummitch (Jeff Frane) Subject: No-Shows Without being vindictive or anything... ahem, is there a policy, procedure, sanction, etc. to deal with judges/stewards who have promised to participate in a competition and fail to show? The last couple of years here at the Oregon State Fair this has been a minor to major irritation. Yesterday I had one judge, one steward and one best of show judge fail to show up. I really only missed the steward, but last year I had three or four judges fail to show and it was a real problem. Anyone have any ideas? - --Jeff Frane -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Jun 9 02:43:55 1993 From: "John E. Lenz" Subject: re: Jeff's no shows Jeff, Shoot 'em. Ooogy wawa, John -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Jun 9 02:43:55 1993 From: Steve Dempsey Subject: Re: No-Shows Jeff Frane sez: >Without being vindictive or anything... ahem, is there a policy, >procedure, sanction, etc. to deal with judges/stewards who have promised >to participate in a competition and fail to show? > >Anyone have any ideas? Funny you should ask this now; I had a similar problem at the NHC this past weekend. The solution is to plan for a small percentage of no-shows, having a couple of standby judges to fill in the gaps. At two well-attended sessions I was able to leave a Master or Honorary Master judge unassigned. I had them each work as a floating consultant to answer technical questions, provide an extra palate to break ties among deadlocked panels, etc. When I found panels short due to no-shows, the reserve judges were ready to take over. Even at smaller competitions, it seems there can never be too many judges. Those that you have on reserve can be used to further strengthen smaller panels beyond the minimum requirements. For those folks who didn't show, don't invite them to participate next time. ================================ Engineering Network Services Steve Dempsey Colorado State University steved at longs.lance.colostate.edu Fort Collins, CO 80523 ================================ +1 303 491 0630 -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Jun 9 02:43:55 1993 From: Jay Hersh Subject: Re: No Shows Gee Jeff, glad you brought this up. The one MAJOR problem we had in Kingston was about 15 no shows of an anticipated 100 or so judges and stewards. Some of them we knew would blow us off (certain digest moderator whose name will remain unmentioned :-), but others were expereinced judges whose help was sorely missed. We padded our own internal schedule iwth 30 minutes to allow for problems but it took 45 to juggle assignments to cover for no shows (had to keep experienced and inexperienced folks paired) and the judges got a little surly sitting around with no beers. Had we thought of it at the time we could have fed them a calibration beer to keep em quiet but we were busy juggling the assignments. SO the things we thought of were 1) Have judges send a $10 check when they pre-register. If the give 72 hours advance notice of bagging, or show up they get the check back. If the don't then they forfeit the $10 (it typically costs $15 to cancel checks so they're likely to not do this and just take the $10 for their lack of courtesy). Of course provision for illness, etc. can be made at discretion of the organizer. 2) Deduct a point from judges who pre-register and don't show. This might really teach em a lesson in manners, but I expect this might be controversial and the AHA might not want to administer something like this. Probably the only defense is to realy plan assuming as much as 10% no shows, though we had slightly more than that. JaH -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Jun 9 02:43:55 1993 From: "Rad Equipment" Subject: Congrats, Absenteeism Subject: Congrats, Absenteeism Time:7:34 AM Date:6/8/93 It is always nice to hear good reports of positive changes in ongoing events, I'd like to add my "Congratulations" to Jay, Bob, & Keith for the success reported by Dan Hall. It sounds like a full recovery has been made in the North East after last year's less than perfect experience. On to the Finals! As for Jeff Frane's request for ways to deal with truant judges, stewards, etc.: My suggestion is to first get an explanation from the culprits and if that does not seem adequate make the incident known to other organizers and remove the names from your invitation list for future events. We are a pretty small community on the local level and judges' reputations, especially bad ones, become widely known pretty quickly. Don't go off half cocked on this, I'd say one offence does not qualify for such treatment but repeat offenders certainly will. RW... Russ Wigglesworth (INTERNET: Rad_Equipment at radmac1.ucsf.edu - CI$: 72300,61) UCSF Dept. of Radiology, San Francisco, CA (415) 476-3668 / 474-8126 -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Jun 9 02:43:55 1993 From: chuck at synchro.com (Chuck Cox) Subject: Re: No Shows Jay Hersh sez... > > Gee Jeff, glad you brought this up. The one MAJOR problem we had in > Kingston was about 15 no shows of an anticipated 100 or so judges and stewards. > Some of them we knew would blow us off (certain digest moderator whose name > will remain unmentioned :-), but others were expereinced judges whose help > was sorely missed. Since you brought this up in a public forum, I shall defend myself here too. I NEVER said I would judge at Kingston, and I did NOT submit a judge registration form. I sent an email message to Bob stating that I would try to make it, but don't count on me. I also notified Bob about 48 hours in advance that I definitely wouldn't be able to make it. So nyah, nyah, nyah. Perhaps the problem here is exactly what constitutes a committment to attend. > 1) Have judges send a $10 check when they pre-register. If the give 72 hours > advance notice of bagging, or show up they get the check back. If the don't > then they forfeit the $10 (it typically costs $15 to cancel checks so they're > likely to not do this and just take the $10 for their lack of courtesy). > Of course provision for illness, etc. can be made at discretion of the > organizer. Are you serious? I, for one, would never pay a deposit to judge. If I were to show up without paying the deposit, would you allow me to judge? What would be the incentive to pay? > 2) Deduct a point from judges who pre-register and don't show. This might > really teach em a lesson in manners, but I expect this might be controversial > and the AHA might not want to administer something like this. This wouldn't be an AHA issue, but rather a BJCP issue. You would have to be careful about how you defined a no-show. As can be seen from my comments at the top of this message, there is obviously some confusion as to when a judge is committed to attend. > Probably the only defense is to realy plan assuming as much as 10% no shows, > though we had slightly more than that. Frankly, no-shows are a fact of life with any volunteer activity. Some folks actually have higher priority items in their lives like children, self-employment, or sheep romancing. I think trying to penalize judges will simply backfire. Perhaps organizers should concentrate on providing a competition that will encourage judges to attend. In other words, use the carrot, not the stick. Being self-employed, I rarely send in judge pre-registration forms because I know I can't commit. I have never been turned away from a competition because I didn't pre-register. Creating penalties for no-shows would simply increase the number of judges who don't pre-register. In addition, organizers should provide a mechanism for judges to un-register, like a phone number to call. In my case it is all moot anyway. I'm sure I will be stripped of all judging rank when the BJCP finds out I said nice things in public about the new "Miller Special Amber Ale Reserve" that is being test marketed here in Boston. - -- Chuck Cox SynchroSystems / Riverside Garage & Brewery - Cambridge, Mass. -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Jun 9 02:43:55 1993 From: "Daniel F McConnell" Subject: mead judges Subject: Time:1:41 PM OFFICE MEMO mead judges Date:6/8/93 We are still looking for few more judges for the Mazer Cup Mead Competition. First round will be held Friday, June 25 at 7:30-10 PM in Taylor Michigan. Final round will be Sunday, June 27. A second round will be added if needed, depending on the mead/judge ratio. Accommodations and food will be provided by merry meadmakers. Please let me know via e-mail if you are willing and able to attend. DanMcC -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Jun 9 02:43:55 1993 From: "Marlene Spears" Subject: No-Show Judges Monday, 7 June, Jeff Frane said, > Without being vindictive or anything... ahem, is there a policy, > procedure, sanction, etc. to deal with judges/stewards who have promised > to participate in a competition and fail to show? If the event was AHA or HWBTA sanctioned, and they sent in a judge/steward registration form, then send them a letter with a copy of that form, reminding them they broke a promise. Make sure the letter is cc: BJCP Administrator (or James Spence, if you like name-dropping, because he seems to be handling this matter for now). Even if it's just a form letter it will be put into the judge's file, and two complaints prompts a review of the judge's behavior by the Powers-That-Be, namely Pat Baker and Jim Homer. They've been fairly quiet so far, but if they receive enough complaints about No-Shows, that will change. Of course, you can always burn an effigy of the offending person, which will make you feel a little better right away. - -- - -------------- marlene at hopfen.rsi.com -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Jun 10 02:43:55 1993 From: Martin A. Lodahl Subject: Those Pesky No-Shows In JudgeNet Digest #595, Jay Hersh grabbed the bull squarely by the horns, and proposed: > SO the things we thought of were > > 1) Have judges send a $10 check when they pre-register ... I would never consider judging at a contest that asked this of me. Period. Judging isn't such a high priority in my life that I'd put up with that, and I suspect I have a lot of company. > 2) Deduct a point from judges who pre-register and don't show. There too, there's the potential for enough general grief to make the BJCP participation not worth the hassle. > Probably the only defense is to realy plan assuming as much as 10% > no shows, though we had slightly more than that. Agreed, that's about all you can do, besides make a mental note of who the "chronics" are, and only empanel them when you absolutely have to. If you have your "flakes" assigned as reserve judges, you won't need to do as much last-minute rearranging. Russ suggested: > My suggestion is to first get an explanation from the culprits and > if that does not seem adequate make the incident known to other > organizers and remove the names from your invitation list for > future events. We are a pretty small community on the local level > and judges' reputations, especially bad ones, become widely known > pretty quickly. Agreed. It also applies to judges who are needlessly intransigent, those who can't be persuaded to make their comments constructive, those who are rated National despite leaden palates (yes, there are such), etc. > Don't go off half cocked on this, I'd say one offence does not > qualify for such treatment but repeat offenders certainly will. Agreed. Anyone can have a bad day. Marlene suggested: > If the event was AHA or HWBTA sanctioned, and they sent in a > judge/steward registration form, then send them a letter with a > copy of that form, reminding them they broke a promise. Make > sure the letter is cc: BJCP Administrator (or James Spence, if > you like name-dropping, because he seems to be handling this > matter for now). Even if it's just a form letter it will be > put into the judge's file, and two complaints prompts a review > of the judge's behavior by the Powers-That-Be, namely Pat Baker > and Jim Homer. They've been fairly quiet so far, but if they > receive enough complaints about No-Shows, that will change. This isn't something I, as an organizer, would feel comfortable doing, unless the judge had established a pattern of this sort of thing. And if they had, I probably wouldn't be scheduling them anyway. > Of course, you can always burn an effigy of the offending person, > which will make you feel a little better right away. This, on the other hand, I'll institute right away! This last weekend we had all of the customary variations on this theme. We had a few no-shows, we had a very able judge appear when we didn't expect him (we were very glad he did), we had a steward leave in the middle of a flight without a word to anyone (her husband was judging, and like the pro he is, finished the flight before going in search of her), etc. Nothing except the vanishing steward caused more than a slight ripple. = Martin A. Lodahl Pacific*Bell Systems Analyst = = malodah at Pacbell.COM Sacramento, CA 916.972.4821 = = If it's good for ancient Druids, runnin' nekkid through the wuids, = = Drinkin' strange fermented fluids, it's good enough for me! 8-) = -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Jun 10 02:43:55 1993 From: Richard Stueven Subject: Re: No Shows >From: chuck at synchro.com (Chuck Cox) > >Creating penalties for >no-shows would simply increase the number of judges who don't >pre-register. On the other hand, if they don't pre-register but show up anyway, what's the problem? Pre-registration at least gives the organizer an idea (a _vague_ idea) how many judges to expect...without pre-registration, you don't have a clue. And if you do volunteer, SHOW UP fer cryin' out loud! Comments about the event here in California: this was the first time I've been involved in a competition as anything other than a competitor. Thanks to the great planning and organization done by Russ Wigglesworth, Brook Ostrom, Martin Lodahl, and many others, I HAD A BLAST! Count me in for next year... have fun gak Richard Stueven, Castro Valley CA gak & gerry's garage, brewpub and hockey haven -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Jun 10 02:43:55 1993 From: Jay Hersh Subject: Mutual Admiration Society, In fairness to Chuck >I'd like to add my "Congratulations" to Jay, Bob, & Keith for the success >reported by Dan Hall. It sounds like a full recovery has been made in the North >East after last year's less than perfect experience. On to the Finals! Well Russ I have to acknowledge your part in our success. You definitely gave us a big jump start by providing your Materials list and answering dozens of questions. I think with the kind of leg up you gave us almost anyone could have done a reasonable job, well maybe not almost anyone :-) Thanks again. >Since you brought this up in a public forum, I shall defend myself here >too. I NEVER said I would judge at Kingston, and I did NOT submit a >judge registration form. I sent an email message to Bob stating that I >would try to make it, but don't count on me. I also notified Bob about >48 hours in advance that I definitely wouldn't be able to make it. So >nyah, nyah, nyah. Perhaps the problem here is exactly what constitutes >a committment to attend. Well you definitely didn't fill out a registration form we'll concede that, but from your queries about room sharing we expected you to show. Hmmm Bob never mentioned receiving any mail from you or otherwise he wouldn't have bet against me when I said you wouldn't be there :-) Still we didn't think you'd make it since you seemed pretty iffy to start with and we basically planned around that. My apologies if you feel singled out. There were certainly far more egregious no shows than yourself, we are discussing publishing a list to shame these folks into not doing this again. Sort of like putting the names of deadbeat dads in the newspapers... WRT ideas about deposits or point deductions, these are ideas, I didn't say they were necessarily GOOD ideas :-), just stuff we were kicking around as we cursed the names and kin of those who blew us off. Seems that other than planning for a reasonable percentage of no shows there are no sanction options to make people who promise to attend actually do so. So in retrospect I wished we'd had some warning that we would have a no show rate of at least 5% ,and in reaility ours was closer to 15%!! Of course the only loss was some wasted time while we juggled assignments around. WRT your comments on the carrot, well we did do that. In addition to the points we threw a really kick ass party in which we had over 1/2 gallon of beer per person from both homebrewers and at least 1/2 dozen pubs and micros. We also raffled off dozens of prizes including Hunter Airstat, 50lb Bag of Grain, Yard Glass, Books, Sweatshirts, T-shirts, hats, etc.... and everyone got a pint mug as a door prize. Can't think of much more carrot than that, and we advertised this in advance. To those who didn't show well ya missed a great time. We did however make the contact information available on all paperwork we sent the judges, both the initial RSVP form, and the followup form to register what styles you couldn't judge. Still this didn't stop people from sending in both forms then blowing us off without the courtesy of notice. You can't legislate politeness either it seems. JaH -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Jun 10 02:43:55 1993 From: scott at gordian.com (Scott Murphy) Subject: lite stout At a recent contest, I judged the stout catagory. One of the entries was labelled 'Lite Stout.' It had most of the character of a stout, it just seemed a little watered down. We ended up judging it as a dry stout, and it didn't fair that well even though it was quite tasty. As judges, how do we judge beers like this? This was an AHA sanctioned event, and we were using the '93 style sheets. scott -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Jun 10 02:43:55 1993 From: bob at rsi.com (Bob Gorman) Subject: Re: No Shows [This bounced the first time, so here it is again...] Chuck "No Show Judge and Miller Beer Lover" Cox writes: > Jay Hersh sez... > > > Some of them we knew would blow us off (certain digest moderator whose name > > will remain unmentioned :-), but others were experienced judges whose help > > was sorely missed. > > Since you brought this up in a public forum, I shall defend myself here > too. ... I also notified Bob about 48 hours in advance that I definitely > wouldn't be able to make it. So nyah, nyah, nyah. Nay, your email date stamp was "Date: Fri, 4 Jun 93 5:35:33 EDT" and was received at my node on "Fri Jun 4 05:59:12 1993". And as other last minute no-showers found out I was not at home nor at work on Friday but on the road to Kingston to set things up. But at least you did attempt contact which is more than a few other could say. Bridge under the water ... :-) The only person it really pissed off was Bill Murphy who got bumped from his style of choice to fill your shoes. Cheers! Bob, HMFICC -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Jun 10 02:43:55 1993 From: sysop at partyline.com (sysop) Subject: Kingston/No Shows Jay Says - >Gee Jeff, glad you brought this up. The one MAJOR problem we had in >Kingston was about 15 no shows of an anticipated 100 or so judges and >stewards. >1) Have judges send a $1 check when they pre-register. If the give 72 hours >advance notice of bagging, or show up they get the check back. If he don't >then they forfeit the $1 (it typically costs $15 to cancel checks so they're >likely to not do this and just take the $10 for their lack of courtesy). >Of course provision for illness, etc. can be made at discretion of the >organizer. >2) Deduct apoint from judges who pre-register and don't show. This might >really teach em a lesson in manners, but I expect this might be controversial >and the AHA might not want to administer something like this. I like the $10 pre-registration idea. Frankly, I really lucked out last weekend, and I imagine it was due to the amount of no-shows. I needed some experience judging and I got it from the best source! I signed up as a steward for Kingston commenting that I'd really appreciate a chance to judge. I was paired with Greg Giorgo for the 1st round Porter judging and the panels on either side of me contained experts Roger Protz and Steve Cox from England as well as Nat Collins, our gracious host and owner of Woodstock Brewery. Saturday afternoon I stewarded for Greg and Nat in the 2nd round of Porter judging and got to see the final results of our morning session. Sunday I judged again, paired with a certified judge who was very patient and helpful. One question - I registered as a steward but judged 2 rounds, what sort of points will I get for this? Jay and Keith did a great job of organizing the judging, I was impressed and will be back next year! Chuck Says - >Are you serious? I, for one, would never pay a deposit to judge. If I >were to show up without paying the deposit, would you allow me to judge? >What would be the incentive to pay? >Being self-employed, I rarely send in judge pre-registration forms >because I know I can't commit. I have never been turned away from a >competition because I didn't pre-register. Creating penalties for What incentive is there to pay OR register? I registered as a steward, eagerly faxing my form in within a day of receiving it, adding a comment that I'd appreciate a chance to judge if possible. I was shocked when I found out that I'd be judging in the 1st round when I only expected to steward and when I asked Bob Gorman about it he said that because I was one of the 1st to return my registration form that I was high up on the list for judging. Gee, it's a good thing that all of us self-employed parental types aren't as non-commital and don't feel we can show up on a whim and expect to be fitted in. If you HAD pre-registered you would have received a letter with the phone numbers of people to call in case you couldn't make it. Jami Chism - --- Excalibur! Software The Party Line BBS - 717-868-5435 - 4 Lines, 14,400bps v.32bis -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Fri Jun 11 02:39:29 1993 From: Jay Hersh Subject: Re: Pesky No Shows >Agreed, that's about all you can do, besides make a mental note of >who the "chronics" are, and only empanel them when you absolutely >have to. If you have your "flakes" assigned as reserve judges, you >won't need to do as much last-minute rearranging. Well most of the no shows were folks we didn't know. With 115 folks signed up to judge & steward it's impossible to know them all. I've been judging around these parts for 6 years, but lots of folks also were out of towners. The worst group of no shows was the Pittsburgh crowd (except Greg Walz who did make it). Personally I feel in a group this large and fluid you really don't stand that good a chance of predicting the no shows. Personally I think public humiliation is the way to go :-) JaH -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Tue Jun 15 06:37:25 1993 From: "John DeCarlo" Subject: Re: Pesky No Shows >From: Jay Hersh >Well most of the no shows were folks we didn't know. With 115 folks >signed up to judge & steward it's impossible to know them all. Another issue is that the number of judges being accredited is increasing, at least in some areas. I know that for BURP (Washington DC area), there were always a limited number of judges and no competitions. So motivated people (Rick Garvin, especially, who taught classes) got a bunch of new judges taught and certified by the BJCP. Thus, there are a fair number of people out there with little or no experience, who probably aren't fully aware of the problems with running a competition or even the etiquette of judging. Where etiquette is concerned, I always try and give people the benefit of the doubt until I have carefully instructed them. After that, no punishment is too harsh :-). Though I have been semi-studying this for years, it wasn't until recently I ever was personally involved in a competition, as a steward. Now I have a deeper respect for those people who have the stamina to organize a competition and see it all through. Next announcement, include something like: "Etiquette demands that a phone call 48 hours in advance be made if you cannot attend. Remember, we know where you live ." John "I don't *trust* you, I know where you *live*" DeCarlo Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Tue Jun 15 06:37:25 1993 From: "Westemeier*, Ed" Subject: Chicago carrots With the current discussion of providing carrots to encourage judges to show up, I just want to say that the CBS did a fantastic job. The Siebel representative was full of genuinely interesting information, and was able to give good, complete answers to every question thrown at him. Pierre Celis is such a delightful person that it was a treat just to listen to him for a while. The midwest invitational brew-off entries were astounding. The most important points were: 1. Everything was extremely well organized, and the organizers were incredibly hard-working. 2. They gave me my favorite styles to judge ;-) ++ Ed Westemeier ++ Cincinnati, Ohio ++ ++ E-mail: westemeier at delphi.com ++ -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Wed Jun 16 02:27:31 1993 From: bickham at msc.cornell.edu Subject: Re: Pesky No Shows John writes: > Date: Mon, 14 Jun 93 09:16:16 EST > From: "John DeCarlo" > > Another issue is that the number of judges being accredited is increasing, > at least in some areas. I know that for BURP (Washington DC area), there > were always a limited number of judges and no competitions. So motivated > people (Rick Garvin, especially, who taught classes) got a bunch of new > judges taught and certified by the BJCP. That's what I thought also, but I recently organized an AHA-sanctioned competition and ended up with only 9 judges for 79 entries. That was after 5 judges cancelled in the 48 hours before the competition, so there were another 6 judging positions that were available, but went unfilled. > Thus, there are a fair number of people out there with little or no > experience, who probably aren't fully aware of the problems with running a > competition or even the etiquette of judging. I thought Jay, Bob and Keith did admirably well getting all of the entries judged, especially when trying to narrow down a category with 50 entries to the top three beers. Of course, only one bottle was submitted, so the only reasonable option was to save and recap half of each bottle for a second round and hope the characteristics didn't change. As far as no-shows, I just won't invite these scumbags to our next competition. Of course if they arrive and are qualified to judge, I probably can't turn them away, but they won't get as gracious a welcome as other judges who are more reliable. Scott - -- ======================================================================== Scott Bickham | LASSP and Materials Science Center | bickham at msc.cornell.edu ========================================================================= -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Wed Jun 16 02:27:31 1993 From: korz at iepubj.att.com Subject: Chicago System Last year in this forum, I reported a system that was used at the National Competition Midwestern 1st round judging to judge the REALLY big categories like Porter and Stout. We used this system again this year and I was involved in judging two styles which required this approach. For those of you that are unfamiliar with it, the system involves simultaneously judging large categories by two, three or four teams of judges. The top 2 (or 3) are passed on to a "second round" judging by the most experienced judge from each of the flights, who pick the top three. The beers were recapped and chilled immediately after opening in the "1st-round" tasting. This is a much better system than trying to get the same team of judges judge 31 Porters or to take the top beers numerically from different teams (this, I feel is the *worst* alternative, given that some judges always score high and some always score low). (By the way, I feel that a numerical winner system should be *forbidden* in all competitions -- especially AHA/HWBTA Sanctioned ones. I judged at one recently which did use this system and recieved a few beers with (1), (2) or (3) written in the corner of the sheets yet I did not receive an award. Others reported this too.) After speaking with the Midwest Site Director, Steve Hamburg, I found out that the plastic caps that we used to recap the beers after the 1st-level tasting, were provided by the AHA and that this system, dubbed the "Chicago System" was used at all four sites. I was assigned to judge two of the categories that required this system ("Porters" and "English Old/Strong Ales & Scotch Strong Ales") and given the responsibility of judging in the "second round" for these two categories also. I'm pleased to report that the plastic caps worked outstandingly and that the beers suffered very little degredation between the two "rounds." The retention of carbonation and the importance of chilling was demonstrated by the fact that, during cleanup, when the beers began to warm-up, several caps shot off the bottles (my recollection was that this seemed to come more from the Belgian table... not surprising). Also, I'd like to add that the organizers (Steve Hamburg, Tim Norris, Ray Daniels and Randy Mosher) did a fantastic job not only getting the judging to run smoothly, but also the Mini-Conference, Dinner, Invitational Brew-off, and Belgian Beer Tasting! It was good practice for Portland (keeping one's head clear while sampling hundreds of beers). From the effortless way that the judging went, you never would have known that there were 551 beers being judged... I've judged at competitions 1/5th the size which ran less smoothly. Al. -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Wed Jun 23 02:04:25 1993 From: uupsi!drutx.att.com!homer Subject: BJCP Co-Director There have apparently been some rumors about the BJCP and myself, this is a good forum to put the rumors to rest. I have resigned as Co-Director of the BJCP, effective December 2, 1993. After 7 years, it is time for me to do something else. I look forward to having more time to brew, judge and drink beer. I also look forward to studying to retake the BJCP exam :-(. My successor has not been named. Jim Homer BJCP Co-Director att!drutx!homer --------------------------------------