From synchro!judge-request at uu6.psi.com Sun Apr 17 06:43:10 1994 X-VM-Attributes: [nil nil nil nil nil] Status: RO Received: from uu6.psi.com by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA14746 (5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at hendrix.itn.med.umich.edu); Sun, 17 Apr 94 06:43:05 -0400 Received: from synchro.UUCP by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA02928 for ; Sun, 17 Apr 94 05:42:23 -0400 Received: by synchro.com (smail2.5) id AA19051; 17 Apr 94 05:14:36 EST (Sun) Reply-To: judge at synchro.com (JudgeNet) Errors-To: judge-error at synchro.com Precedence: bulk Message-Id: <9404170514.AA19051 at synchro.com> From: judge-request at synchro.com (JudgeNet Administrator) To: judge-recipients at synchro.com (JudgeNet Recipients) Subject: JudgeNet Digest #741 (Apr 17, 1994) Date: 17 Apr 94 05:14:36 EST (Sun) JudgeNet Digest #741 Sun 17 Apr 1994 THE BEER JUDGE DIGEST Chuck Cox , digest administrator Michael Hall , archive administrator digest submissions to judge at synchro.com administrative requests to judge-request at synchro.com send rank updates to the administrative address messages sent to the wrong address will be ignored FTP archive information in /pub/judge/README on cygnus.ta52.lanl.gov Sponsored by SynchroSystems and the Riverside Garage & Brewery Contents: Style reclassifications, Stroud Style (WESTEMEIER) Re: porter/stout, wit, etc. (Jeff Frane) Duplicate Digests (Chuck Cox) Porters, CA Common Beer (Bob Guerin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 16 Apr 1994 08:51:48 -0400 (EDT) From: WESTEMEIER at delphi.com Subject: Style reclassifications, Stroud Style I'm for 'em. Steve Stroud's suggestions for some small changes in the style categories were all excellent, in my opinion -- every one of them. Please put me on the record too as supporting his ideas. - -- Ed Westemeier - -- Cincinnati, Ohio - -- westemeier at delphi.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Apr 1994 16:37:32 -0700 (PDT) From: gummitch at teleport.com (Jeff Frane) Subject: Re: porter/stout, wit, etc. > From: Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu > > I disagree. Robust Porter has a definite black malt note, and does > not have a roasted barley note. Stout DOES have roasted barley. > That's easy. > I have a real problem with this simplistic a definition of stout. As I recall, the AHA used to define the distinction between porter and stout pretty much along these lines: stout = roasted barley and porter = black malt. Unfortunately for such a view, I think there are a hell of lot of stouts around that do not use roasted barley, or at least not in such quantities that it is distinguishable. And, although I may get hooted down for referring to the historical record, H L Hind's book makes it pretty clear that black malt is a perfectly appropriate ingredient for stouts -- in lieu of roasted barley. I have proven it to myself, incidentally, at least to *my* satisfaction. It's true that some people gots to have roasted barley in their stout, but not *everyone* likes that flavor, and I do not at all think it is essential for a good stout. Rick Garvin writes: > > 5 - Drop the herb/fruit/specialty categories :-). Now there's a suggestion > > that Rick Garvin could endorse!!!! > > Alleluia! > > Or, replace it with a National herb/fruit/specialty only contest. Call > it "Needle in a hay stack" in honor of the probability of finding a > potable one. I only drinkk specialty beers from people I know. And never > anything with more than one line of ingredients in the description. > Yes. And Puhleeze, do not ask me to judge any of those boogers, either. This was punishment detail for the last several years at the Oregon State Fair, even after we broke out the fruit beers (actually, we broke out the berry beers; that's all Oregonians brew). Jim Busch writes [in regard to moving the wits] > > Heresy! Wits are sacrilege, and fundementally different from thier German > "cousins". > > Well, they may be sacrilege, but (in my mind) no more so than American Blande Ales (alias American Wheat). I've lost the original attribution, but I agree with whomever Jim is disagreeing with. To me it's another variation of the wheat beer, and much, much closer to German-styles than the American is. I know, I know, the American Wheat has been kicked out of the wheat category (hasn't it?), but still... we can't go on endlessly creating categories, and this is a better place to stick the witbier than in amongst the abbey biers. And I've lost Al Korzonas' commentaries on Belgian ales, but "me, too." Pretty much. - --Jeff ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 16 Apr 94 19:06:24 EST From: chuck at synchro.com (Chuck Cox) Subject: Duplicate Digests Due to a soft disk failure and subsequent restoration, you may have received two copies of the previous digest. - -- Chuck Cox SynchroSystems / Riverside Garage & Brewery - Cambridge, Mass. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Apr 1994 17:12:57 -0800 From: bguerin at orincon.com (Bob Guerin) Subject: Porters, CA Common Beer Tom, Jeremy and Al made some good points in JND 738 regarding my comments about historical porter. However, I stand by my statement that how porters were made is not important compared to how they are made now. But clearly, homebrewers (and not just commercial brewers) help determine the "how they are made now". Therefore, if sufficient numbers of homebrewers start making historical porter, then fine - let's make a new subcategory. ********** Steve Stroud suggests: > ... get rid of the 'California Common Beer' as a separate category. The > correct place for it is as a _subcategory_ under American ales. Anchor Steam > drinks like a pale ale and in a blind tasting would be virtually > indistinguishable from many other American pale ales. I strongly disagree (and not because it's an American original). First off, this category falls under the general heading "Mixed Style (Lager-Ale)". This is clearly where it belongs, not under ales. Secondly, I disagree that Anchor Steam (tm) drinks like a pale ale. The hop aroma is, to me, less intense than most American pales, and the character of the lager yeast is noticeable. If you give me an Anchor and a Sierra Nevada Pale side-by-side in a blind tasting, I will correctly tell them apart ten times out of ten. Bob Guerin (bguerin at orincon.com) ------------------------------ End of JudgeNet Digest ************************