From synchro!judge-request at uu6.psi.com Mon Feb 20 05:54:15 1995 Status: O X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil t nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["23458" "" "20" "February" "1995" "05:14:37" "EST" "JudgeNet Administrator" "judge-owner at synchro.com" nil "496" "JudgeNet Digest #975 (Feb 20, 1995)" "^From:" nil nil "2" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.2) with X.500 id FAA20713; Mon, 20 Feb 1995 05:54:12 -0500 Received: from goodman.itn.med.umich.edu by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.2) with SMTP id FAA20709; Mon, 20 Feb 1995 05:54:11 -0500 Received: from uu6.psi.com by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA20650 (5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at umich.edu); Mon, 20 Feb 95 05:54:09 -0500 Received: from synchro.UUCP by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA13206 for ; Mon, 20 Feb 95 04:33:01 -0500 Received: by synchro.com (smail2.5) id AA01306; 20 Feb 95 05:14:37 EST (Mon) Reply-To: judge at synchro.com (JudgeNet) Errors-To: judge-error at synchro.com Precedence: bulk Message-Id: <9502200514.AA01306 at synchro.com> From: judge-owner at synchro.com (JudgeNet Administrator) To: judge-recipients at synchro.com (JudgeNet Recipients) Subject: JudgeNet Digest #975 (Feb 20, 1995) Date: 20 Feb 95 05:14:37 EST (Mon) JudgeNet Digest #975 Mon 20 Feb 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: BJCP independence (Ed Westemeier) TRASH V homebrew competition (RCBEER) BJCP suggestions (RCBEER) How To Study for BJCP exam ("PATRICK N. BAKER") My thoughts (why would you care?) ("Lee Bussy") Wichita Competetion ("Lee Bussy") Dr. Beer (Dennis Davison) Midwest Homebrewer of The Year (Dennis Davison) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 11:16:45 -0500 From: hopfen at iac.net (Ed Westemeier) Subject: BJCP independence To add a (regional) data point to the current debate, I was amazed to discover that this forum is not the only one discussing it. The message below was sent to Karen Barela, AHA President: - ---------------------------------- Dear Karen, I'd like to let you know about some grassroots sentiment regarding the BJCP. Please don't take this as criticism, because we obviously don't have all the facts. At the regular meeting of the Bloatarian Brewing League in Cincinnati last Friday, the subject of the end of the AHA-HWBTA partnership came up. With only about 10% of our membership actively involved in judging, I didn't expect much interest, but I was surprised. The members whose only involvement is sending their beers to competitions were just as concerned as the judges. The consensus is that the program won't have the same level of credibility if it's only an AHA activity. We all know that some microbrewers, brewpubs, and consultants routinely send samples to sanctioned competitions (without identifying them as such) for evaluation. They do that because the judging has a pretty good reputation. If it becomes "merely" an AHA program, that reputation may be diminished. We decided that a club statement to you would be appropriate. We drafted one, and it was signed by most of the 80 members in attendance, including three industry professionals: "We believe that the Beer Judge Certification Program (or whatever it may be called in the future) should be an independent organization, guided by democratically elected representatives. "We are very grateful for the AHA's support in the past, and we would be very happy to have the AHA as a major sponsor of the program in the future, but we feel that it would be more valuable to everyone as an independent, democratic organization, rather than as a creation of the AHA." As I said, this is grassroots sentiment, based only on those facts we're aware of. Since most of us are AHA members, we hope you'll give it some weight in your plans. - ---------------------------------- ****************************** * Ed Westemeier * * Cincinnati, Ohio * * E-mail: hopfen at iac.net * * Phone: (513) 321-2023 * ****************************** ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 10:53:48 -0500 From: RCBEER at aol.com Subject: TRASH V homebrew competition The Three Rivers Alliance of Serious Homebrewers will be hosting their fifth homebrew competition on may 20 in Pittsburgh Pa. The deadline for entries will be may 6.. Last year we had 180 entries and just enough judges. If you are interested in judging or entering this competition please send a message to me or call Greg Walz at 412-331-5645 and we will mail you an entry/judging packet. If you plan on entering and judging you can hand carry your entries if you pre register them before the competition deadline. Ralph Colaizzi rcbeer at aol.com or 75444,1225 at compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 19:43:56 -0500 From: RCBEER at aol.com Subject: BJCP suggestions I am posting this for a freind who is a national BJCP judge and has been = in the program a long time. His opinions are not nessecarily my own but any responses may be sent to me and I will forward them. I feel this is one o= f the sanest,logical proposal I've seen. Ralph Colaizzi , rcbeer at aol.com From: Gregory J. Walz, Pittsburgh PA (posted by a friend...) In regards to the AHA's dropping support of the BJCP: If this was the limit of the AHA's action I'd say what's the fuss - bid them goodbye and thanks for their help over the years, and let's get on with turning the BJCP into a independent, incorporated non-profit organization with elected directors and officers (like almost all other non-profits) and the total responsibility for judge certification and sanctioning. But the AHA plans to create its own judge program in competition with the BJCP. This should come as no surprise to anyone; why would the AHA part company with the competition sanctioning fees it gets and would lose if the BJCP became independent? Not to mention damaging their rather egotistical perception of themselves as the only legitimate homebrew organization. Remember, the AHA did not start out as an idealistic organization but as one man's vision of a way to turn a buck on his hobby. Let's stop thinking idealistically when dealing with the AHA and start thinking in terms of profit and ego the way they do. We need to first determine what's the best arrangement for judge certifi- cation and competition sanctioning, and then, if a compromise can't be worked out, act decisively and practically. I feel that giving the AHA the whole ball of wax, which is what letting them get away with taking 100% control of judge certification and competition sanctioning would do, would be a disaster of cataclysmic proportions. Till now we've had the HWBTA running interference with the AHA and keeping them from taking over everything. But this would give them complete control of all homebrewing activities. What's to stop them from demanding that all judges pay $25 yearly (or more) to maintain their active status (to "cover expenses")? I'd gladly pay this to an truly independent organization with elected officers, but I think CP and the AHA staff members have had enough free trips around the country and to Europe on our nickels and dimes without exacerbating the situation. In case any of you don't know it, it sometimes costs real money to accumulate judging points. My first 10 points cost over $100 each when the travel expenses (hotel, gas, airfare, etc) were factored in. Thus my current National status means a lot to me and represents a consider- able investment of my time and money. To have the AHA come in and rock the boat this way almost makes me wish I could take legal action. They will be devaluating my BJCP status by forcing me to choose between their program or the BJCP. This situation reminds me of the circum- stances leading to the current class action lawsuit brought by frequent fliers against the airlines that devalued their miles after the fact... But there's another alternative. If the AHA refuses to compromise and goes ahead and creates a competing judge certifying and sanctioning organization, we should consider a coordinated, organized boycott of the AHA and all related organizations like Brewers Publications and the Association of Brewers. Shocked? Radical? Maybe, but what else can we do? If you've been brewing more than a year or two you really don't need the AHA anyway. If the AHA remains recalcitrant to compromise I propose that we seriously think about a total boycott of all AHA / Association of Brewers competitions, publications, activities, memberships, etc. = Granted, this is radical step and should only be used as a last resort. = I hate to even propose something this extreme, but the AHA has to realize that a) They no longer speak for all or even most homebrewers; b) Most of us would be extremely uncomfortable giving them total control over all organized homebrew activities; and c) Many of us are tired of paying money to and taking orders from a group of paid staffers that's about as democratic as Saddam Hussein's Iraq. The AHA should keep in mind what happened to the Democrats last November: you can only push people so far before they get pissed off enough to take action. But this is a two-way street. Unless we grab the bull by the horns and make the BJCP into a decisive program that'll take the lead in sanctioning and certification, we might as well let the AHA have their way. This means WORK. It's one thing to write diatribes on Judgenet, but what we need now are people willing to put their precious hours into making the BJCP into the kind of organization we feel it should be. If you're one of those who wants to sit back until the dust settles you might as well come out on the AHA's side. The only way to guarantee that the BJCP becomes a workable independent program is to get involved NOW. The first step is to define what the BJCP will be, how it will be organized, and what it will do. My feelings (for what they're worth) is that the BJCP should: =FE Be a totally independent (no HWBTA influence, either) incorporated= non-profit (501-C-3 certified by the IRS) organization governed by an elected Board of Directors of at least 12 judges of Certified level or higher. Based on my experience with other non- profits, it would pay to structure the terms of office such that 1/4 to 1/3 of the board goes up for election each year. Divide the US and Canada up into four or five districts to guarantee that the Board consists of a mix of people from different locations, such as East, Midwest, South, West, and Canada. In many non- profit organizations the officers are elected from and by the Board, but direct election of officers is also workable. =FE Prepare a coherent set of Bylaws and a Mission Statement. Bylaws don't have to be written from scratch; take somebody else's and modify them appropriately. =FE The Board should meet at least twice a year. This will probably be the most difficult part to implement with directors from all parts of the country and Canada. On-line meetings might be a way around this problem. Pick an on-line service and use it to hold Board meetings. Doing this the Board could meet more frequently - maybe even once a month. One option - make the ability to participate in on-line meetings a pre-requisite for holding a Board seat or other office. =FE Offer two levels of membership: Associate and Regular. Associate members are those who've taken the exam and maintain an active status; no dues need be paid. Associates would receive a status (points accumulated) update free once a year. Regular members would pay a fee (say $20-$25) yearly and receive a quarterly newsletter and point update, and the right to vote for Board members and run for office. The fee would cover the costs of running the election and printing the newsletter. Becoming a Regular Member would be totally voluntary. =FE Income would come from test fees, volunteer membership fees, and sanctioning fees. I feel that there would be enough interest to keep the BJCP solvent based on this financial structure. =FE The BJCP would function as it now does with judge certification, but would also assume full responsibility for competition sanctioning. Points would only be earned at competitions sanctioned by the BJCP. =FE Score the BJCP exams faster and give back more meaningful feedback. This is a common complaint. Feedback on each question should be given individually. Yes, I know this means a lot of extra work, and I know how much work the scorers now put in grading exams. But if we don't do it the AHA will jump on this as one of their justifications for a competing program. =FE Consider having an over-the-weekend Annual Convention each year at the location of a selected Regional Competition. Pick a different competition each year. Keep the registration fees low (under $100) and invite all Associate and Regular Members. Start with a large regional (like the Dixie Cup) to get the ball rolling. This would give the competition selected the best judge panel possible, which would guarantee their active support (as an experienced competition organizer I know how hard it is to attract out-of-town judges). It would also be a way to hold an (open) face-to-face Directors Meeting. Seminars could be devoted to improving your judging skills (Dr. Beer lab, etc.). Extracurricu- lar activities, such as bus trips to micros/brewpubs, where the only expense is the chartered bus (participants pay their own way at the establishments visited) could also be done. =FE The AHA's real power lies in their centralized control of information - they're a clearinghouse for information for the homebrewing hobby. If most of us were on-line we wouldn't need this kind of clearinghouse, but that's wishful thinking and it never will happen. However, what's to stop the BJCP from also becoming something of an information clearinghouse? The BJCP will have a current list of judges, and should maintain a current list of homebrew clubs and contact with them, since clubs are the main sponsors of competitions. A yearly report and newsletter should be sent to all homebrew clubs. Clubs that run a competition (and pay a sanctioning fee) should also receive a one year subscription to the BJCP quarterly newsletter. Nice dreams - but once again none of this will happen without work on our part. It will be hard for a volunteer organization (which is what the BJCP will become) to compete with the AHA's paid staff, but it can be done. It all depends on us. The best solution is still a compromise with the AHA. I suppose it's too much to hope that a compromise can be reached, but maybe something can be worked out. One suggestion: the BJCP retains the responsibility for judge certification and gains the right to sanction competitions. = In exchange for the AHA not creating a competing program, the BJCP would give free sanctioning to the AHA Competition and would work with the AHA, paying them for mailing lists and other services on an as- needed basis. Or both BJCP and AHA could sanction competitions, with AHA providing the needed information to the BJCP to maintain point records free to the BJCP (the AHA could charge for this in their sanctioning fee so it wouldn't cost them anything). I feel that both parties involved here need to sit down (or get on- line) together and hash something out. It's easy to rally the troops, but a lot harder to develop workable win-win solutions that keep everybody pulling in the same direction. Are there any labor negotia- tors out there who might want to help out? Divisiveness benefits nobody, but if a compromise can't be reached doing nothing is worse. Enough of this. I hope I've planted some ideas. Let's get this thing off dead center. We don't have until April - we need to start NOW to define where we're going what we're doing. Gregory J. Walz February 17, = 1995 = = ------------------------------ Date: 19 Feb 95 20:15:29 EST From: "PATRICK N. BAKER" <74443.3040 at compuserve.com> Subject: How To Study for BJCP exam THIS IS BETTY ANN SATHER SPEAKING AGAIN! Dear Fellow Beeros, Just to prove that I can be a grind on more than one subject at once, let's talk about taking the BJCP exam. In my opinion, there are two parts to doing well. One is learning the right stuff and secondly planning your exam taking strategy. I'm not going to blat on about these now but.... think about it. "What was the most useful thing you did while studying for the exam?." The most useful thing I did during the study process was take the AHA styles guidelines and rearrange it from lowest to highest gravity. Write the names of all the styles in and look at how they relate to one another. I then took all the Michael Jackson books and tried to find three absolute classic examples of each style. I also looked at whether his s.g.'s jived with AHA and other sources. It's an interesting exercise. A note on classic examples. These, in my mind, are very important.. I do not think it is wise to use US examples as classics of European beers. To get a 90, you have to know what our Mikey says they are. Also, I think you are better off not using brewpub beers as classics of style, except for Kolsch and Alts and then use the classic GERMAN brewpub beers which are the keepers of the tradion in my opinion and Mikey's too BTW. You may as an aside mention US e.g.'s of these but defend you opinion as to why they do or do not fit the style properly. It may be argued that the tradition of American Brown ale is best kept by the brewpubs but make sure you defend your position with facts. So, does anyone else out there have a suggestion as a very useful studying tool? Cheers, Betty Ann Sather ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 19:56:45 +0000 From: "Lee Bussy" Subject: My thoughts (why would you care?) People. I have seen more bickering and more back stabbing in the last week than I ever have witnessed in my whole life. I am embarassed to be a part of an organization that has been reduced to such childish activity. John Dale, I do not know you, but I do respect anyone that has worked towards the betterment of the BJCP. Your letter didn't help anything, take that for what it's worth. Nobody will be served by fighting. Personal differences must be set aside and the greater good thought of. This sounds awfull altruistic but it must be our goal. We have been spouting off about a new BJCP, independant and strong. We need it but where are we going with all this? I worked hard for my certification as did all of you and I will not watch it go down the tubes. I stated in the past that I support an independant BJCP but I will not invest time and money in a group that can't get along. I have offered my time and support for the BJCP and the offer still stands. I will however in a couple of months decide what is best for me and I will encourage all of our local judges to support the organization that will support us. Let's get it together here before it's too late. Grow up. If the shoe fit, wear it. - -- -Lee Bussy | The 4 Basic Foodgroups.... | leeb at southwind.net | Salt, Fat, Beer & Women! | Wichita, Kansas | http://www.southwind.net/~leeb | ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 21:36:00 +0000 From: "Lee Bussy" Subject: Wichita Competetion This is probably one of the last notices about the Wichita Competition coming up in March (who was that cheering???!!) Date: March 25th, 1995 Deadine: March 17th, 1995 Classes: All Beer, Mead and Cider For info contact: Me (duh!) Judges seats still available, beds for brewers offered. - -- -Lee Bussy | The 4 Basic Foodgroups.... | leeb at southwind.net | Salt, Fat, Beer & Women! | Wichita, Kansas | http://www.southwind.net/~leeb | ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 20:47:22 -0600 From: ddavison at earth.execpc.com (Dennis Davison) Subject: Dr. Beer Just an observation on the Dr. Beer thread. The way the program is set is ideal from novice judges. Concentrations are high enough for them to really detect and relate to. For the more experienced judge, I would think a program that has different dilutions of the additives would be more appropriate. See at what ppm judges can detect. Serve the beers blind and mix them up. The only comment on a score sheet would be the defect. Personally, I think this would make sense in a judging exam. First get a cross section and see what the average ppm perception is then incorporate it into the BJCP/AHA/Whatever program. I'm also a Vintner. Our Wine club has a program that we produce once a year called STAR, Smell-Taste-Analize-Remember. It's a component tasting program over 6 weeks. Each week we take the main components of wine (Acid, Tannin, Sugar, Alcohol) and add them to water and to a control wine. The dilutions start out strong and end in weak concentrations by the 6th week. We do include blends. I've felt this is a long over due project for beer clubs. It may just be a great exam study group project. Onto the exam beers. I've seen commercial beers used, and Joe's homebrew when Joe was helping with the exam. But I feel Alberta Rager has the right approach in the beers served on exams that she gives. I just helped her again. Nothing can be more anonymous. We took 6 entries from the competition, blended the beers, took one taste and decided on a style to present them as. I found it amazing that you could take 6 stouts, blend them, call it a Robust Porter, and yes, score it at 40. Or taking 6 Calif. Common, calling them an Am. Pale, because of the Cascade character, and scoring in the mid 30's. Yes, it would be nice to see more defects and the blends of the other 2 beers served, had just that. I think it's a bit hard for some proctors to be objective in scoring commercial examples. - -- Dennis Davison ddavison at earth.execpc.com Milwaukee, WI ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 21:42:42 -0600 From: ddavison at earth.execpc.com (Dennis Davison) Subject: Midwest Homebrewer of The Year I'd like to congratulate Ray Daniels of the Chicago Beer Society for being The 1994 Midwest Homebrewer of the Year. Ray accumulated 63 points in last years five competitions. Those competitions included Kansas City Bier Meisters, Kenosha Bidal Society, Madison Homebrewer & Tasters Guild Big And Huge, Chicago Beer Society Spooky Brew, St. Louis Brews Happy Holidays. This year the competitions are off to a great start with Kansas City once again. There is still time to accumulate points in the following competitions. Brewers of South Suburbia (BOSS), Kenosha, Chicago, and St. Louis. It's open to all homebrewers in the Midwest, and those interested can contact me directly for additional information. Previous Winners include: 1993 - Dennis Davison (Chicago Beer Society) 1992 - Brian & Linda North (Brewtown Brewmasters) 1991 - Ray Daniels (CBS) / Art Stienhoff (Kenosha Bidal Society) 1990 - Jackie Rager (Kansas City Bier Meisters) - -- Dennis Davison ddavison at earth.execpc.com Milwaukee, WI Director Midwest Homebrewer of the Year Program ------------------------------ End of JudgeNet Digest ************************