From synchro!judge-request at uu6.psi.com Thu May 5 07:06:04 1994 Received: from uu6.psi.com by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA14136 (5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at hendrix.itn.med.umich.edu); Thu, 5 May 94 07:05:58 -0400 Received: from synchro.UUCP by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA02993 for ; Thu, 5 May 94 06:37:24 -0400 Received: by synchro.com (smail2.5) id AA12484; 5 May 94 05:23:53 EDT (Thu) Reply-To: judge at synchro.com (JudgeNet) Errors-To: judge-error at synchro.com Precedence: bulk Message-Id: <9405050523.AA12484 at synchro.com> From: judge-request at synchro.com (JudgeNet Administrator) To: judge-recipients at synchro.com (JudgeNet Recipients) Subject: JudgeNet Digest #752 (May 05, 1994) Date: 5 May 94 05:23:53 EDT (Thu) JudgeNet Digest #752 Thu 05 May 1994 THE BEER JUDGE DIGEST Chuck Cox , publisher 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 Published by SynchroSystems and the Riverside Garage & Brewery Contents: re: Score Sheets (John DeCarlo x7116 ) re: Score Sheets (The Rider) (Michael Fetzer) Virtual Beer ("Rad Equipment") Virtual Beer Time:10:37 AM Date:5/3/94 the Matrix (Bruce Feist) BJCP Exams (Norman Farrell) JudgeNet Digest #751 (May 04, 1994) Scoring (Ed Hitchcock) Re: Virtual Beer [Warning: mild flame on] ("Roger Deschner ") Cabbage in wheat beers ("Phillip Seitz") Spirit of Belgium contest call for judges ("Phillip Seitz") Competition Scoring ("Norman Dickenson") More Matrix (Bruce Feist) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 4 May 94 08:09:31 EST From: John DeCarlo x7116 Subject: re: Score Sheets Hmmm. OK, after only judging two contests, I haven't seen the same problems Bruce has (and they were the same contests he judged!!!). Basically, we all gave a 24 to those really great beers that were not in style, then in the overall category wrote something like (while judging bitters, for example): "This would make a great porter or great IPA--it is an excellent beer but is not a bitter and therefore can't get better than a 24". I don't even mind lying a little bit here to encourage the brewer, so even if I mentioned a stale oxidized flavor above, I can still write this here . It is true that you can also be more specific--the hop bitterness level is out of style for a bitter, or the lack of spiciness from phenols makes this wheat beer not a weizen, or whatever. So the first step I take when thinking of the overall score is to determine if it is in style, and that (like everything else we do) is somewhat subjective. So, once you think a beer started out in style, but has defects, you are left with the regular scale to use. I like to think of the out-of-style but drinkable beer as a little break where you drink a good beer and don't have to worry about the score. John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 May 1994 11:08:31 -0300 From: Ed Hitchcock Subject: Scoring Michael Fetzer writes: > ...I'm told, common curtesy is to not judge beers >lower than 19 since part of the purpose of the BJCP is to tactfully point >out flaws in homebrewed beers, to educate the brewing public and to promote >better overall products without unduly discouraging brewers. This once again brings up the problem of limited range scoring. In other words, why have 19 possible scores which will never be used? The answer, of course, has to do with all our perceptions of what constitues a passing grade, and that there needs to be a passing grade. In this case, a "pass" is 20/50, and a "fail" is anything less than 20. I argued before that the problem exists at the other end as well, that very few beers at any competition are over 40 (well, for the sake of the AHA national, we'll say a very small percentage), which leaves only a 20 point range out of 50 for evaluating entries. So either 20 points are sufficient, in which case why not judge out of thirty, or 20 points is insufficient, in which case let's judge between 50 and 100, with a 40 point spread for those fair to middlin' products, and still have 10 points at the top for those masterpieces. Anything infected can get 49. If one were to go with a thirty point scale, with a non-marked catagory of "problem - not judgeable" for infected brews it would make sense, except some poor newbie will produce a perfectly drinkable brew but be discourage for life because he got a 6 out of 30. Or a 1 out of 30. This I understand, but it bugs me that we base our score on marks we can't give. With the 50 - 100 mark scheme, each section could start with 1/2 marks, and then points could be added for positive features, and points subtracted for off flavours or style deviations. Thus, a glass of water would be 50/100, an infected beer would be below 50. In this way one could still point out positive features (if detectable), but still give it a non "passing" score. Even a low score, since I would rather get 40/100 than 18/50. Example: Aroma(10) 5 +2 good malty aroma +2 wonderful hop aroma -3 Cascades not normal for Scottish Ale ------ =6/10 ____________ Ed Hitchcock ech at ac.dal.ca | Oxymoron: Draft beer in bottles. | Anatomy & Neurobiology | Pleonasm: Draft beer on tap. | Dalhousie University, Halifax |___________________________________| ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 10:43:28 CDT From: "Roger Deschner " Subject: Re: Virtual Beer [Warning: mild flame on] Virtual beer? What a terrible idea! Why do I put up with all this hare-splitting about styles, scoresheets, and the other drivel we carry on about here, at contests, at conferences, and the countless other time-consuming and expensive things we do? Because I like to drink the beer. Take that away, and there is no point. No point at all. Roger Deschner University of Illinois at Chicago R.Deschner at uic.edu =============== "Civilization was CAUSED by beer." ===================== ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 May 94 10:56:04 -0400 From: "Phillip Seitz" Subject: Cabbage in wheat beers While judging Bavarian wheats at the recent Spirit of Free Beer, we ran into a remarkable string of beers that all had a very pronounced cooked vegetable character (you name it--cabbage, parsnips, rot, etc.). Since all of these beers appear to have come from different brewers, we were wondering what they could have had in common. I'm not an expert in rotten cabbage tastes, but the AHA checklist suggest that it comes from underpitching, i.e. that bacterial and spoilage organisims initially flourish but are later killed by the alchohol levels in the finished beer. Ok, but why should this happen to so many beers as once? One possibility that occurred to us was the use of the new Wyeast wheat yeast. I'm not knocking the yeast, but it occurred to me to wonder whether these brewers had either made inadequate starters or had failed to use a starter at all. This could be a particularly serious problem, as the yeast comes in the Advanced pack. I'm just wondering if anybody else has encountered this so far. Now that wheat beer season is coming up, it might be worth looking out for. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 May 94 10:50:23 -0400 From: "Phillip Seitz" Subject: Spirit of Belgium contest call for judges On Saturday, November 12 Brewers United for Real Potables (BURP) will sponsor the Spirit of Belgium contest, which will be devoted entirely to Belgian beer styles. We hope you'll help us judge. This call is going out early to give you extra time to plan your visit to the Washington, D.C. area. November 12 is in the middle of Veteran's day weekend (with Friday off), so out-of-towners will have a better than average opportunity to make convenient travel plans. Washington is quite nice in the fall, and by mid-November the tourist population will have diminished significantly. As in the past, BURP members will provide lodging for guest judges. If you're interested in Belgian beer and want to learn more, this will be your opportunity. In June BURP will be hosting an intensive advanced Belgian beer course for local judges, all of whom will be working at the contest as judges and resources people for anyone who wants to learn more. In addition, there is a possibility that we will have some special imported guest judges for that extra touch of authenticity. Since this is the first time a contest of this type will be held we're still not sure what the response will be. The AHA has informally agreed to sanction this contest, and papers for the formal sanctioning will be filed shortly. At the moment we're planning for 100 entries, but there are members among us who expect as many as 200. In either case there will be plenty of time for Belgian beer fans to get together for some excellent beer and company. To encourage and prepare brewers for the contest BURP will be distributing information on Belgian brewing techniques and sources for specialty ingredients. Along with this material, information and entry materials for the contest will be distributed over the next few months via internet, club newsletters and snail mail. Out-of-town judges will be receiving all necessary travel and lodging information as well. If you'd like to receive more information about judging for this contest, contact Judge Coordinator Tim Artz at ARTZ_TIM at BAH.COM, and more detailed information will be sent to you as soon as it's available. I will be serving as contest coordinator, and will be happy to answer any general questions. ------------------------------ Date: 4 May 1994 09:04:14 U From: "Norman Dickenson" Subject: Competition Scoring Subject: Time:8:19 AM OFFICE MEMO Competition Scoring Date:5/4/94 Michael Fetzer states: Phew! I've been around for a number of years and have never heard of this *common courtesy*! But then, that may be a commentary about my consciousness. It seems that I'll need to write to Miss Manners for advisement on a humane judging protocol. Not that I disagree with a tactful and encouraging approach to judging. But, there is no *official* comment on the concept of score inflation by the BJCP. I have personally judged beers which justly deserved scores far lower than 20 (undrinkable) and given such an appropriate score. It seems to me that the real issue here is whether the 50 point judging scale works or not. In practice, few judges ever give less than a 20 points. Also, few judges ever give more than 40 points. Thus, the most prevalently used scoring range spans only 20 points (20-40). A very poor beer scores 20 and an absolutely great beer scores 40. Admittedly, I am one of those California aberrants who prefers, uses and promotes a 20 point judging scale. A comparatively wider span of this range is actually used by judges (7-20) and it is easier to work with. -Norman- norman.dickenson at sonoma.edu ------------------------------ Date: 04 May 94 16:06:10 -0500 From: Bruce.Feist at f615.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Bruce Feist) Subject: More Matrix j> From: mfetzer at ucsd.edu (The Rider) (Michael Fetzer) j> Combining these two ideas you end up with: Beer is rated soley on how well j> it fits the style, not how good/bad it is to drink. Off flavors are j> considered *deviation* from style just as the presence of extra hops, malt, j> etc. are deviations from style. The more I think about this, the more I like it. It's certainly simple; the difficulty then becomes in getting judges to actually ignore subjective interpretations of 'good beer' as opposed to 'on style'. The summary at the bottom of the sheet could probably be reworded a bit to emphasize the fact that off-flavors need to be treated much as any other off-style charactaristic;intuitively they seem to be significantly worse. This interpretation could also be used to *severely* downgrade beers with off-flavors. For instance, a given judge might consider skunked beer to be vastly off-style for *anything*, and automatically give any skunked beer a 15-19, no matter how well it otherwise conforms. Is this appropriate? I don't know. Bruce - --------- Fidonet: Bruce Feist 1:109/615 Internet: Bruce.Feist at f615.n109.z1.fidonet.org ------------------------------ End of JudgeNet Digest ************************