From synchro!judge-request at uu6.psi.com Tue Jan 17 06:34:07 1995 Status: O X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil t nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["7457" "" "17" "January" "1995" "05:17:49" "EST" "JudgeNet Administrator" "judge-owner at synchro.com" nil "146" "JudgeNet Digest #944 (Jan 17, 1995)" "^From:" nil nil "1" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.2) with X.500 id GAA13421; Tue, 17 Jan 1995 06:34:04 -0500 Received: from goodman.itn.med.umich.edu by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.2) with SMTP id GAA13417; Tue, 17 Jan 1995 06:34:03 -0500 Received: from uu6.psi.com by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA05034 (5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at umich.edu); Tue, 17 Jan 95 06:34:00 -0500 Received: from synchro.UUCP by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA27643 for ; Tue, 17 Jan 95 05:32:25 -0500 Received: by synchro.com (smail2.5) id AA29608; 17 Jan 95 05:17:49 EST (Tue) Reply-To: judge at synchro.com (JudgeNet) Errors-To: judge-error at synchro.com Precedence: bulk Message-Id: <9501170517.AA29608 at synchro.com> From: judge-owner at synchro.com (JudgeNet Administrator) To: judge-recipients at synchro.com (JudgeNet Recipients) Subject: JudgeNet Digest #944 (Jan 17, 1995) Date: 17 Jan 95 05:17:49 EST (Tue) JudgeNet Digest #944 Tue 17 Jan 1995 THE BEER JUDGE DIGEST digest submissions: judge at synchro.com administrative requests: judge-request at synchro.com send cancellations & rank updates to the administrative address messages sent to the wrong address will be ignored FTP Archives: guraldi.hgp.med.umich.edu in /pub/judge WWW Archives: http://guraldi.hgp.med.umich.edu/Beer/Judge Gopher Archives: guraldi.hgp.med.umich.edu Editor: Chuck Cox Archivist: Spencer Thomas Publishers: SynchroSystems and the Riverside Garage & Brewery Contents: Identifying "special" ingredients (Bob Paolino Research Analyst) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 00:40:56 EST From: Bob Paolino Research Analyst Subject: Identifying "special" ingredients Okay folks, get ready for a long one.... I have some questions about the circumstances in which brewer-specified "special" ingredients should (or should not?) be identified for the judges. I intend for this to start a discussion, but I'm sure there are also some aspects for which there are "factual" answers somewhere in the rules. BJCP people? ....I know Pat Baker and (probably) James Spence are out there, perhaps others. For the fruit, herb, and specialty categories: Obviously, you identify the "special" ingredient that defines the category, but what about others? Shouldn't an organiser/registrar, when preparing the list given to the judges, identify _all_ "special" ingredients listed by the brewer? For example, a Maple Coriander Apricot Bock could presumably qualify as a Specialty, Herb, or Fruit beer at the entrant's discretion (and a classic-style one, to boot, if s/he so chose)--six possible subcategories. Now, if that beer is entered as an herb beer, are the judges told only about the coriander (and bock, if entered as classic style herb beer), or do they get to know about the maple and apricot also, if listed by the brewer? (You can figure out the other two scenarios without my spelling them out.) Needless to say (or I wouldn't have brought up the subject), I would hope the answer is the more inclusive one. I imagine that a beer like that (ugh) would more likely be entered as a fruit beer or specialty beer than as an herb beer, depending on which "special" ingredient is more prominent, but if it's entered as an herb beer, it's not my place as organiser to second-guess the brewer in choice of category. Similarly, it's not my place to withhold information from the judges merely because it's not the defining ingredient of the style category. I suppose you _could_ say that definition of the Specialty category explicitly states (and I hope I'm right because I don't have a style sheet with me :-)) that fruits and/or herbs may also be used, but it's the unusual ingredient or technique that defines the category...and, therefore, it should be entered as a Specialty rather than Fruit or Herb. I suppose someone might say that, but I hope not. What if the brewer feels that it's the apricot that really makes the beer shine? Then I'd say s/he should enter it as a fruit beer (either subcategory). I organised a competition in the fall in which someone entered, as a classic style fruit beer something identified as a "Belgian Fruit Weizen" (strawberry and cherry). I don't know what to make of that, and the judges probably didn't either. Is it a Weizen brewed by a Belgian, or a Belgian ale brewed by a German?? It wasn't clear what the classic style was. If I had to pick one, I'd say Weizen because it's a noun and Belgian is an adjective, but am I to second guess the entrant? No. I put it on the list as it was identified by the brewer. It didn't occur to me then, and I can't look at the recipe now, but let's say that it might have been a Fruit Weizen fermented with a Belgian yeast. (It wasn't on the special ingredients line, but could have been in the recipe) I'm not sure how that could be a Weizen, but I'm not going to substitute my judgment for that of the brewer--it's his entry and he can define it as he wants--I just give it to the judges as it was entered. It wasn't in this case, but what if the type of yeast was included on the list of "special" ingredients? Would the unusual technique (using a Belgian yeast for a weizen) qualify it as a Specialty beer (I would think so) if that's how the brewer decided to enter it? Even as a classic style fruit beer (again, I'm not second-guessing the brewer on the classic style part), if the brewer indicated the kind of yeast on the same line with the strawberry and cherry, do I let the judges know about the yeast as an ingredient? I would say yes, but would that be a universal response among competition organisers? Here's another example, this time with me as the entrant and someone else running the competition. I've given this example in this forum in another context. This one goes to both ingredients and style. As you know, Saisons are not included among the Belgian subcategories. Depending on whose definition of a Saison you choose (contrast Rajotte and Jackson, for example), you might make the stretch to enter it as a Belgian Strong Ale (for those who define Saison as a higher gravity style) or maybe as a Belgian Ale (for those who don't define it as a higher gravity style). Either way, it's not really true to the style category whichever one you choose. Now, here are two scenarios. 1) You do enter it as one of the subcategories in category #2. Should the brewer get to identify the _specific_ style and have the judges informed of it? 2) You enter it as an herb beer on the basis of the coriander, orange peel, and perhaps other spices. Do you get to have it identified to the judges both for the herbs _and_ as a saison? Do you get to list the yeast along with the spices as a special ingredient and have the judges informed? (When I did it, I went with (2), except I named the style but didn't say anything about the yeast. In this case, not only was the style apparently not given to the judges, but based on what was written in the corner of the score sheet, the judges were only informed of a couple of the spices I listed and the most prominent one--the coriander--wasn't given. The judges decided that it was infected (it was not, but if you're not told you're judging a Belgian style and you've never had any, I can see how you might come to that conclusion), and one proceeded to recommend more appropriate spices for a good yuletide brew (!?!??) (Remember the Christmas beer thread from a couple months ago....) Had the judges been informed of the style, they would have had appropriate criteria by which to judge it (or if they were unfamiliar with the style, they would at least know to ask for help). That doesn't mean that even if it had been a great saison that it's going to be one of the top three herb beers, but at least I would have gotten an intelligent critique in exchange for my beer and entry fee.) PART TWO COMING UP.... Now go have a beer, Bob Paolino / Disoriented in Badgerspace /uswlsrap at ibmmail.com ------------------------------ End of JudgeNet Digest ************************