From synchro!judge-owner at uu6.psi.com Sat Feb 25 06:28:15 1995 Status: O X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil t nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["17320" "" "25" "February" "1995" "05:12:53" "EST" "JudgeNet Administrator" "judge-owner at synchro.com" nil "399" "JudgeNet Digest #980 (Feb 25, 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 GAA16115; Sat, 25 Feb 1995 06:28:03 -0500 Received: from goodman.itn.med.umich.edu by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.2) with SMTP id GAA16111; Sat, 25 Feb 1995 06:28:02 -0500 Received: from uu6.psi.com by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA10764 (5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at umich.edu); Sat, 25 Feb 95 06:28:10 -0500 Received: from synchro.UUCP by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA13935 for ; Sat, 25 Feb 95 06:19:44 -0500 Received: by synchro.com (smail2.5) id AA02610; 25 Feb 95 05:12:53 EST (Sat) Reply-To: judge at synchro.com (JudgeNet) Errors-To: judge-error at synchro.com Precedence: bulk Message-Id: <9502250512.AA02610 at synchro.com> X-Status: From: judge-owner at synchro.com (JudgeNet Administrator) To: judge-recipients at synchro.com (JudgeNet Recipients) Subject: JudgeNet Digest #980 (Feb 25, 1995) Date: 25 Feb 95 05:12:53 EST (Sat) JudgeNet Digest #980 Sat 25 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: Re: #2(3) JudgeNet Digest #978 (Feb 23, 1995) (GSMITHBEER) Re: AHA survey for judges (Spencer.W.Thomas) KC Bier Meisters' Competition Results? (Lynn Danielson) Hudson Valley Homebrewers Annual Competition (Greg Holton) RESPONSE TO JOHN DALE'S CALUMNY ("PATRICK N. BAKER") ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 24 Feb 95 05:47:44 PST From: GSMITHBEER at eworld.com Subject: Re: #2(3) JudgeNet Digest #978 (Feb 23, 1995) Hey, Brews Stevens I think all options are worth exploring (really) I just wonder if the current proposal for the judge guild is a little unwieldy in regards experience. And what will you do with a judge (no matter the level who insists he/she already has that number of styles sampled? Does everyone start from ground zero. I think your current system will limit the number of people you'll get. On your second note I agree. The Beast rooms will be freed on 3 March G. Smith ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Feb 95 10:27:04 EST From: Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu Subject: Re: AHA survey for judges I was talking to a brewing/judging buddy the other day about this. I asked "what would you like to see in a judge organization?" He said "Just one!" I tend to agree. For example, if there are 2 or 3 (as now seems possible), will I, as a competition organizer, have to sanction with ALL of them in order to attract the greatest number of (and best) judges? Seems like a recipe for anarchy, to me. Sigh. =Spencer in Ann Arbor, MI ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 13:33:30 -0700 (MST) From: lynnd at ihs.com (Lynn Danielson) Subject: KC Bier Meisters' Competition Results? Could someone please post or mail me the results of last weekends Kansas City Bier Meisters competition? Thanks in advance, Lynn Danielson lynnd at ihs.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 11:00:07 -0500 (EST) From: greg at kgn.ibm.com (Greg Holton) Subject: Hudson Valley Homebrewers Annual Competition Hudson Valley HomeBrewers,inc. AHA Sanctioned 5th Annual Homebrew Competition Saturday March 25th, 1995 at River Station Restaurant 25 Main Street Poughkeepsie, New York 12601 Schedule of Events 8:00 River Station opens to Judges and Stewards 9:00 Calibration Beer, Judging to follow 12:30 Break for Lunch - Restaurant opens 10am to Public 1:00 Resume Judging 3:00 Best of Show - Judging Area Open to Public 3:30 Announcement of Raffle Winners 3:45 Competition Prizes to be Awarded 4:00 Distribution of Remaining Beer Entries for Sampling Participation Open to All Non-Commercial Brewers How to Enter: Entries accepted: March 1st to March 18th, 1995 (5pm) 3 bottles: 10-14 Ounces (No raised glass or labels) per entry (Entry Information and Restrictions inside) PRIZES 1st, 2nd and 3rd places in each category: Ribbons and Certificates. 1st in each category: Hudson Valley Homebrewers Tee-Shirt & $15 Gift Certificate from Hudson Valley Homebrew Supply, ltd. 2nd in each category: $7.50 Gift Certificate from Mountain Malt and Hop Shop 3rd in each category: $5.00 Gift Certificate from Mountain Malt and Hop Shop 1st, 2nd and 3rd in Club Awards: $30 for 1st, $20 for second, and $10 for 3rd (Gift Certificates donated by Party Creations). BREWMASTERS CUP Trophy and Brewing Session at Metthew Vassar's Brew House Best of Show: 1st - Case of Alexanders Malt donated by Party Creations, Gift Certificate to the Culinary Institute 2nd - Woodstock Brewing Company Sweatshirt and glasses, Colonna Capper & Corker donated by Science and Hobby Emporium 3rd - Case of Brewferm Malts Donated by Circle Beverage Top Hudson Valley HomeBrewers Club Member (Total Points) - $100 Family Portrait from Concept Photography RAFFLE FOR EVERYONE ATTENDING - $1.00 a Chance (Selection of Beers and Beermaking Supplies) Raffle prizes donated by Fishkill Beer and Soda, Party Creations, Hudson Valley Homebrewers, inc, Science & Hobby Emporium, Circle Beverage, Hudson Valley Homebrew Supply, ltd , Wm. & Rob Haiber, Lou Timperio & Concept Photography, Mountain Malt and Hop Shop, Bathtub Brews. Please patronize our sponsor Party Creations RD 2 Box 35 Rokeby Road Red Hook, NY 12571 (914) 758-0661 Hours:11am - 7pm Tues. thru Friday 11am - 4pm Saturday CLOSED SAT. MARCH 25th Hudson Valley Homebrew Supply, Ltd. Cherry Hill Plaza Route 299 New Paltz, NY 12561 (914) 255-BREW Hours:11am - 8pm Monday thru Saturday 11am - 5pm Sundays Circle Beverage 10 Washington Ave. Ext. Kingston, N.Y. 12401 (914) 331-2935 FAX: (914) 331-6104 Hours: 10am - 9pm Mon. - Thurs. 9am - 10pm Friday and Saturday 12pm - 7pm Sundays Fishkill Beer & Soda 159 Main Street Fishkill, N.Y. 12524 (914) 897-9807 Hours: 9:30am - 4pm Mt. Malt & Hop Shop 29 Vassar Road (Red Oaks Mill) Poughkeepsie, N.Y. 12603 (914) 463-HOPS Hours: 11am - 7pm Monday - Friday 10am - 6pm Saturday 12pm - 6pm Sunday Entries may be UPS directly to Party Creations only Entry Information & Restrictions ENTRY REQUIREMENTS 1. Entry must be home brewed ... NO commercial brew allowed, Amateurs only! 2. Entry fee is $5.00... five(5) or more entries are $4.00 for each entry. Make all checks payable to Robert Carter. 3. Brewers may enter only one (1) beer per SUBCATEGORY. 4. Brewers must submit 3 (three) bottles, 10-14 ounces per entry with no distinguishing marks, raised glass (NO GROLSCH) or labels (painted or otherwise).Caps should be plain or any writing blacked out. 5. Each bottle must have a completed bottle tag fastened by rubber bands only. NO TAPE ALLOWED! 6. Please fill out only one entry/recipe form per entry. 7. If subcategory indicates multiple styles (e.g. Pilsener, Bohemian or German) please indicate which style you would like it judged as on the brewers comment line on the recipe form. 8. Entries should be dropped off or shipped to addresses listed on cover page. All entry fees, and recipe forms must accompany entries when submitted No entry will be returned and all entries become the property of the Hudson Valley Homebrewers, inc. 9. ENTRY DEADLINE IS 5:00PM, SATURDAY, MARCH 18, 1995. This allows time for settling and processing of your entry. Call ahead for any other entry or delivery arrangements. CONTEST RULES 1. All forms required by the rules must be completed by entrant. 2. Beers will be judged in the category entered. Reassignment of beers entered in wrong categories is prohibited. 3. Decision of the judges is final. 4. Only beers rated GOOD (scoring 25 points or higher) will qualify for awards and prizes. 5. Categories with less than six (6) entries will be collapsed to category that most closely resembles its style. 6. First place winners in each category will compete for Best of Show. 7. Club quality awards will be calculated from the top three winners of each category. 8. Score sheets will be returned as soon as possible - Including a self-addressed, stamped envelope will speed them on their way to you. 9. Any entry not meeting the above guidelines will be disqualified. SHIPPING PACK YOUR ENTRIES WELL! We recommend shipping by United Parcel Service. If asked the contents of your package by UPS tell them Bottles, but they are double-boxed and well padded. Be sure to ship them to Party Creations with the required entry fee, recipe form and bottle labels rubber-banded. Competition questions should be directed to: Robert Carter 34 Townsend Ave. Newburgh, N.Y. 12550 (914) 565-3921 Judging questions should be directed to: Paul Stolarski 37 Shaker Lane Hyde Park, N.Y. 12538 (914) 229-7316 1. LIGHT BEERS 1A) American Light: Light color and body, high carbonation, delicate hop bouquet, corn and/or rice used as adjuncts. 1B) German Light Lager: (includes Dortmund/Export & Munich Helles) light gold color, medium malty body, low to medium bitterness, Noble hop bouqet and flavor, with underlying malty sweetness and high carbonation. 1C) Pilsener: (includes German and Bohemian) pale to golden color, high bitterness, medium Noble hop flavor and aroma, low to medium maltiness with crisp finish 2. WHEAT BEERS 2A) German Weizen/Weissbier: Pale to golden, light to medium body, clove and slight banana character, may be mildly sour and cloudy, low bitterness, no hop aroma/flavor. Effervescent. 2B) German Style Dunkel- Weizen and Weizen Bock: Amber to dark brown, medium to full body, may have roasted malt flavor, stronger than Weizen, malty, low bitterness, clove and slight banana character, no hop aroma/flavor. 2C) American Wheat Golden to light amber, light to medium body, low to medium bitterness, Malt, hop flavor and aroma ok, lager or ale yeast used, no phenolic character. 3. PALE ALES 3A) Bitter: (Includes Ordinary, Special and Extra Special) Gold to copper color, low carbonation, bitterness and malt relevant to the style. 3B) Pale Ale: (Includes American and Classic English) - Pale to copper/amber color, well hopped with a hint of malty sweetness, some noticable esters. 3C) India Pale Ale (IPA) Similar to Pale Ale except high hop bitterness and aroma with stronger alcohol strength. 4. AMBER BEERS 4A) - Oktoberfest: (Includes Munich, Vienna and Marzen) Pale copper to amber color, medium body, malty, low hop flavor and aroma. 4B) - Steam Beer: Fermented with lager yeast at ale temperatures, malty body with hop bitterness and aroma. 4C) - Scottish Ale (Includes Light, Heavy and Export) Gold to dark brown, Low bitterness, hop/aroma & flavor, medium to high maltiness. 5. BROWN BEERS 5A) - English Brown: medium to dark brown color, caramel finish, not strongly carbonated, just a hint of hops in taste. 5B) - Continental Dark: (Includes Munich Dunkel and Schwarzbier) dark color, hoppier than brown ales with high carbonation 5C) - American Brown: Medium to dark brown color, higher alcohol and hopping than English brown 6. PORTER 6A) Robust Porter: medium to black color, no roasted barley character, noticable use of black grains, malty with medium bitterness. 6B) Brown Porter medium to dark brown color, no roast or burnt malt character, light to medium body, low to medium maltiness, medium bitterness. 7. STOUTS 7A) Dry: (includes Foreign) black color, assertive bitterness, dry finish, with roasted barley (coffee-like) character, malty and no hop flavor/aroma. 7B) Sweet: like dry stout but with an overall sweet character. 7C) Imperial rich, strong hop bitterness, malty and high alcohol strength 8. BOCK 8A) Traditional deep copper to dark brown color, sweet and malty finish, lightly hopped 8B) Helles golden color, less caramel flavor, slightly more hopped than traditional 8C) Dopplebock light to very dark color, full body, intense malt sweetness and ow hop bitterness and aroma 9. STRONG BEERS 9A) - Barley Wine: copper to medium brown color, malty sweetness, fruity and estery with medium to high hop bitterness, strong alcoholic strength. 9B) - Strong Scotch Ale: deep copper to very black color, low hop bitterness, strong malty character with noticable esters. 10. SPECIALTY BEERS 10A) - Fruit Beer: made with the addition of fruit to the usual beer. Contains a distinctive fruit aroma, palate and finish. 10B) - Belgian Beers: (Includes Flanders, Tripple, Lambic, Faro, Gueze and White) refer to the AHA style guide if unsure. Give specific style attempted in brewers comments. 10C) - Novelty/Odd beers: (includes herb, smoked, fowl, etc) any non-classic style not fitting in any of the above catagory descriptions. Give specific style attempted in brewers comments 11. Mead/Cider (includes Sparkling/Still) 11A) - Traditional Mead with honey only, no other flavor discernable 11B) - Any other Mead (includes melomel, cyser, pyment and metheglin 11C) - Cider (includes Still/Sparkling, New England and Specialty) ------------------------------ Date: 23 Feb 95 15:38:55 EST From: "PATRICK N. BAKER" <74443.3040 at compuserve.com> Subject: RESPONSE TO JOHN DALE'S CALUMNY It is probably as tiresome for you to read this as it is odious for me to prepare it, but the slanders and lies in John Dale's February 10 post must be answered, particularly since John is an AHA appointee and is their representative on the BJCC. John has accused me of refusing to comply with a BJCC order to do anonymous grading of exams, and accused me of scoring exams dishonestly. Dishonest scoring is a serious charge, since I have scored some 1100 of the 1800 or so exams given over the last ten years, and have signed off on the scoring of perhaps 200 more. The BJCP has an appeal procedure which applies whenever anyone has a serious question about the accuracy of a test score. The BJCC then blind scores the questioned exam. There have been perhaps 15 to 20 appeals over the years, and in each case the BJCC has confirmed the directors' scoring. If anyone has any indication of overscoring of anyone's exam or dishonest scoring, it has never been brought forward. If John Dale or the AHA have any substance for their accusation, and operate on normal ethical standards, they should bring it forward or retract their accusation. John Dale accuses me of refusing to comply with a directive of the BJCC regarding anonymous scoring. This is a flat lie. The only record of discussions on this topic is in the minutes of the 1992 BJCC meeting in Milwaukee and I quote "Committee agreed that exam takers will be given a code making the grading process an anonymous one." There was general agreement that grading should be anonymous and that coding the exams was a good idea. Regarding exam procedures, these minutes state "Committee agreed that Pat Baker and Jim Homer should agree amongst themselves on the way exams are given and scored and write up an exam procedures "how to" list." This was in conformance with BJCP By-Laws which specifically state that the BJCC is responsible for financial and strategic planning of the program, and administration of the by-laws, while the Directors have specific responsibility and authority to administer the test program. Procedures were developed where the actual exams were coded, with the list of names of takers kept separate during the scoring procedure. Then what is John talking about when he said that I refused to comply with a BJCC order? As indicated above, the minutes do not indicate a request was made by the BJCC to the Directors regarding anonymous scoring. What happened was that John Dale tried to order the Directors to have the list of takers sent directly from the exam administrator to the Program Administrator. I refused for several reasons: 1. The most important reason was tthat this action was tantamount to an AHA takeover of the program. In the by-laws, the Program Administrator works for the BJCC and Directors. Doing what John requested would have made the Directors beholden to the Program Administrator, AKA the AHA. Since the By-laws state that the Directors had total authority to manage the examination program, and that the Program Administrator had only clerical responsibilities, but no program authority, I refused what I felt was in illegal and improper request. 2 In addition to disgust at the attempt by the AHA to take control of the program, there were practical reasons for refusing John Dale's request. Feedback forms are an important part of the BJCP, and knowing if an exam is a first effort or a retake is crucial in giving proper guidance to the exam taker. 3 It takes anywhere from three to five weeks from date of finalizing exam scoring for the judge to receive notification by mail from the Program Administrator in Boulder. In order to comply with the target twelve week turn around of exams, it has been this Director's practice to notify the exam organizer of the results of the exam by phone, which requires the names of the takers to go along with the scores.While it would have been mechanicly possible for the Directors not to have possession of the taker's list during scoring, and yet get the names afterward, it that would have vastly complicated an already cumbersome procedure. 4. Finally, John Dale's request suggested that the Director's might be dishonest in the scoring and was insulting. I am very proud of the work done by the various Directors and judges in administering the exam program over the years, which is what makes John Dale's and the AHA's behavior particularly disgusting. Patrick N. Baker, Co-Doirector, BJCP ------------------------------ End of JudgeNet Digest ************************