From synchro!judge-owner at uu6.psi.com Sun Feb 26 06:40:54 1995 Status: O X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil t nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["15298" "" "26" "February" "1995" "05:12:44" "EST" "JudgeNet Administrator" "judge-owner at synchro.com" nil "335" "JudgeNet Digest #981 (Feb 26, 1995)" "^From:" nil nil "2" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: by totalrecall.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.3) with X.500 id GAA14324; Sun, 26 Feb 1995 06:40:52 -0500 Received: from goodman.itn.med.umich.edu by totalrecall.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.3) with SMTP id GAA14320; Sun, 26 Feb 1995 06:40:50 -0500 Received: from uu6.psi.com by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA20387 (5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at umich.edu); Sun, 26 Feb 95 06:40:48 -0500 Received: from synchro.UUCP by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA26534 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 95 06:24:04 -0500 Received: by synchro.com (smail2.5) id AA25138; 26 Feb 95 05:12:44 EST (Sun) Reply-To: judge at synchro.com (JudgeNet) Errors-To: judge-error at synchro.com Precedence: bulk Message-Id: <9502260512.AA25138 at synchro.com> From: judge-owner at synchro.com (JudgeNet Administrator) To: judge-recipients at synchro.com (JudgeNet Recipients) Subject: JudgeNet Digest #981 (Feb 26, 1995) Date: 26 Feb 95 05:12:44 EST (Sun) JudgeNet Digest #981 Sun 26 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: #978 Guild post got clipped (BrewsMead) Re: Guild upgrades and more? (BrewsMead) Re: Spencer's concern about sanctioning (BrewsMead) Re: Democracy, Task Force or Appointee? (BrewsMead) Perspective (TMartyn) BJCP (PLFROG) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 25 Feb 95 06:50:19 PST From: BrewsMead at eworld.com Subject: Re: #978 Guild post got clipped More Notes on the Guild got clipped the other day and I wanted to get the rest of it out for comment. Please let me know what you all think of this ? We feel that sanctioning fees are bullsh*t and don't need to be paid to the Guild. The coffers will be swelling with monies from special events and conventions as all fraternal and professional societies do to raise cash. If you run a competition using our classic style guide, judge beers accurately and review judges performance to "certify" quality work then you have a respectable event that brewers will wish to enter. Not that other sanctioned events are less credible ; but when this gets into full swing , no fees are required and ours is independant, why would you go elsewhere? The winning is still a roll of the dice based on the variability of judges attitudes toward styles and experience levels , but we will work toward making the results uniform over time. We have plenty of that and beer will be made for years to come , so start sanctioning your event with us instead of the AHA or HWBTA. I'd still like to have some volunteers from other regions get involved and help put together the style guidelines and categorization of them ( so that we have a working document to send to organizer's soon). We will meld the existing guides and adapt them to our views of the classic styles and emerging variations . I liked Scott's suggestion for giving byes to judges for experience and would support such review at a detailed level. If we decide that 25 or 35 is the level for Master's and 10 or15 is correct for the Journeyman category , then there will need to be some review of the existing National and Certified judges (on an individual basis to see if they meet the experience criteria for Master level. For example I have passed the (existing) test with and 81 yet have 44 points from organizing and judging . How do we go about categorizing me? Do I get the Master rank or do we review the comps I've judged (based on memory) to see if I meet the 30 substyle cert level? Notice the varying point level requirement and the permutations for categorization? This won't be easy but it will be done and done ethically. We need to think about these possible scenarios and set a mark of excellence that is achievable yet lofty. If 25 of those points were from organizing and then I've only done 8 substyles ,I'd put me in as a Journeyman. In reality ,I still need experience to reach the Master level but I feel confident that in time I will reach it under this system. I'm not so sure that the politics and permutations of the other plans would ever allow me to get there even if I deserve to?The test will be formulated and we are looking for volunteers to do that (Didn't Ginger Wotring offer to start a data bank of objective Q+A?) portion of this program . We need to make it fair to pass yet detailed enough to set a level of expertise beyond reproach. Some of our fellow brewers are great judges but not in the program .Under these guidelines , they are apprentices and can judge at competitions . They can accumulate expertise and get around to taking and passing the test as they develop at their own speed , maybe never to be a Master but to be considered a peer with experience and insight into good beer. I hope that some of this diatribe alleviates some concerns and provokes thought into the concept behind a truly independant peer reviewed basis for analytical judging . The potential is great and we can truly progress quickly with your insight and help in this forum. Send in your questions over the next couple of issues. Stand up and be counted . Quit lurking and offer some thoughtful critique ! Regards , Bruce Stevens - Maine Ale + Lager Tasters ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Feb 95 06:50:43 PST From: BrewsMead at eworld.com Subject: Re: Guild upgrades and more? Hey Gregg Smith, You haven't had the chance to discuss this with us directly since you've moved out west and we haven't seen you for awhile . We look forward to it at the Beast if you're coming East for it. Your queries are perfectly reasonable but the conclusions you infer are not what we want nor expect to happen. When an individual petitions for an upgrade to the higher level based on actual experience , we intend to make a quick check of the existing records with our friendly AHA or BJCP administrator before making the official change. The judge in question should have the basic decency to not lie since "most" of us in the existing program don't. We want to have judges who are qualified to be Masters snd the more the merrier. It is better for the whole homebrew arena to see Masters doing scoring at comps , especially when they've been trained properly under this program and know what they're talking about. So all the existing Master judges are at the same level in our system and some of the lower levels will be bumped up based on experience. All of the judges in the BJCP are in our database and are part of this association NOW. So we have over 1200 judges . We will have the apprentices who now judge or steward in our program as well soon . When they get the word that there is a program that accepts them as is ,they will join us. There's no need to be treated as second class citizens just because they haven't passed some memorization test. We want brewers who have good reason and good noses. The styles are in the book and a refresher before the judging starts works for me and most others I know now. Why do you have to memorize the details according to the AHA to score a 90 on the test ? In the real world before you make a judgement and decide where to place your work in the pile , (more to do, research req'd or complete / ready to build) you consult your reference books to be professional and give it the polish expected . Why should our work as judges be done in any less of a manner? So we think that our judges will have the self repect to do their work thoroughly and professionally and if they don't they are subject to recall and demotion. Does that exist in the existing program and has it ever happened? I doubt it . Well the next time someone sits down with me and starts off with the holier than thou" You know , I've been to Rochester and Cream ales aren't really like the Genny we get in the bottle here routine".....I'm going to write them up and tell em to judge to the style guidelines in the competition forms or risk demotion . Why do people have to try to impress + bully other judges anyway? What is the mentality behind such aggressive behaviour? This is not the Winston Cup and we're not playing for millions of dollars. This is a friendly pairing of 2-3 people to evaluate some brew made by a person that cared enuf for our opinion to spend 5 or more dollars. When that persons respect is on the line for me ,I double check my references and the comp guidelines that day to see what the category limits are. If it is within the limit defined I give the score 100%. If the body is thin to medium but the entry is full , I give it 1-2 . If it's medium or thin I give it 4-5 depending on the mouthfeel . Why do people say the body is in style and give me a 3 ? I hate that and so do most brewers when they read the report. Why do big beers win so many comps? Remember that brouha? Enough said for today .You get my gist and we all want to welcome you to the Guild , please send me email or hard copy if you want to be deleted from our list. You are a member until you disconnect! Bruce Stevens ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Feb 95 06:50:52 PST From: BrewsMead at eworld.com Subject: Re: Spencer's concern about sanctioning For all of you who are concerned about getting involved in the Guild due to this query, please note that the Guild point system will allow you to credit your experience in other sanctioned events as long as there are more than 6 entries in a substyle. If you judge Euro Lights and have 8 Bohem Pils ,1 Dort and 2 Helles , guess you only have enuf experience to satisfy the Bohemian area? Are we reasonable or what? Now if you do British bitters that afternoon in second round and there are 4 ESB's and 7 Special's...... guess what ? You get another hash mark in your Recorder for the Special substyle. If you have any more questions let me know directly ......... Bruce Stevens ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Feb 95 06:51:20 PST From: BrewsMead at eworld.com Subject: Re: Democracy, Task Force or Appointee? Jim Cave makes some very good points about the AHA in his post and I wonder why it isn't clear to the rest of you as well. Some of you have interests in one program or the other , but aren't we really all interested in an independent system??? The BJCC has indicated that nominations have been accepted. I for one nominated no one and I surely didn't get a chance to second or discuss the motions before this deliberation of appointees is made. So we have the old BJCC with AHA and HWBTA appointees fighting over control of the system and appointing interested parties with no democratic review . I suppose the concept is to dilute the strengths of both sides and make it more democratic but for who???? The AHA says it wants to have a democratically elected sytem or a atsk force in the interim( which I believe you usually appoint) and sometimes interim measures become staid and part of the bureaucracy? Not for me . I don't like the appointee concept no matter how good the intentions or personal integrity of those selected. This is big time politics if not outright god damn war my friends and some people sure seem intent to win and control the new BJCP. Now if you want an electoral process and some peers to deal with , join us in the formation of this new order . Even Pat and John and Russ and Des and Greg and the rest of the BJCC are members, they're just not in charge. You'll have to elect them as your Regional rep at one of your regional competitions or conventions in the near future when we all get to see the rest of our non email peers and see what they think about all this crap. Bruce Stevens at Guild of Brewers and Judges ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Feb 1995 12:05:24 -0500 From: TMartyn at aol.com Subject: Perspective Dearest Electro-zymurlogical Compatriots, As new to both the BJCP and Judge-Net, I've been following the news the last several weeks with a mixture of interest, disgust and confusion. I received the AHA survey yesterday - sounds great, but the consensus on-line seems to be that the AHA is less than sincere in their interest in our opinions. What I'm not getting from the AHA cover letter, not surprisingly, is the full story. I read about the AHA's concerns with the growth of the BJCP, lack of timeliness of reporting of exam scores and feedback (for sure!), etc. etc. But what I haven't seen addressed is why the existing AHA/HWBTA sponsored BJCP can't and/or won't handle these challenges. I have the distinct impression that the AHA's "reasons" aren't the reasons. So what are they? I have the impression that at least some of the issue has to do with control. There wouldn't be any egos involved here, would there? I also haven't seen anything posted from the HWBTA about their position and side of the story. While the AHA's action may be a fait accompli, under the terms of the original joint venture agreement, I would appreciate more background about the source and nature of the problem, before I respond to the AHA, which I will do.. The bottom of the glass for me is that I will continue to brew, drink, judge a nd enjoy beer, whether there are one or twenty competing sanctioning/certifying programs. Looking through the crystal bottom of that glass, I can envision a day when the AHA, the new MALT Guild, and several other programs meet to discuss combining their efforts into a more integrated whole. Wait a minute.... isn't that where we are today, or at least where we were a couple of months ago? Maybe it has to happen that the judging universe has to fracture before it comes back together, but it seems to me worthwhile to keep in mind our common thirst as we go through the process. So, as I totter down to the basement to bottle my latest, I'd love to have some more information about what the real roots of this problem are. Trying to keep a good Head going, Tom Martyn ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Feb 1995 12:12:56 -0500 From: PLFROG at aol.com Subject: BJCP Greetings to all members of the BJD! (Special greetings to Pat Baker, Gregg Smith and Alan Wax) As a "recognized" judge with the AHA-HWBTA BJCP, a journalist covering the commercial beer industry since 1981, and a homebrewer since 1975, I would like to take this band-width to offer my oservations on the BJCP situation . The BJCP, so far, has maintained credibility because it is a co-operative effort, and the only show in town. Now the credibility of the BJCP is in danger. Why? Despite the protestations of both the AHA and HWBTA, and in the immortal words of Louis Renault (prefect of police in Casablanca), (and I paraphrase); "I am shocked to learn that there is MONEY being made here!!!" Yes, it all comes down to money. Obviously, the AHA, is a "non-profit" organization. (The United Way and the NAACP are also "non-profit". I suggest you review recent litigation involving both of those organizations to put "non-profit" in perspective.) The HWBTA is a trade association of merchants who are in business to make money. That said, let's "cut the shuck and jive" (if C.P. hasen't got that phrase under copyright). The above organizations both have money and prestige on the line. Both of these assets will be threatened with more than one "judge" organization. Heed the words! "The line has been drawn. The die has been cast. The first one now will later be last." sincerely, Peter LaFrance Brooklyn, NY (plfrog at aol.com) ------------------------------ End of JudgeNet Digest ************************