From synchro!judge-owner at uu6.psi.com Fri Mar 17 09:33:07 1995 Status: RO X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["10918" "" "17" "March" "1995" "07:20:24" "EST" "JudgeNet Administrator" "judge-owner at synchro.com" nil "281" "JudgeNet Digest #999 (Mar 17, 1995)" "^From:" nil nil "3" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.10/2.2) with X.500 id JAA22261; Fri, 17 Mar 1995 09:33:05 -0500 Received: from goodman.itn.med.umich.edu by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.10/2.2) with SMTP id JAA22252; Fri, 17 Mar 1995 09:33:04 -0500 Received: from uu6.psi.com by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA05124 (5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at umich.edu); Fri, 17 Mar 95 09:33:00 -0500 Received: from synchro.UUCP by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA10265 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 95 09:21:31 -0500 Received: by synchro.com (smail2.5) id AA28486; 17 Mar 95 07:20:24 EST (Fri) Reply-To: judge at synchro.com (JudgeNet) Errors-To: judge-error at synchro.com Precedence: bulk Message-Id: <9503170720.AA28486 at synchro.com> From: judge-owner at synchro.com (JudgeNet Administrator) To: judge-recipients at synchro.com (JudgeNet Recipients) Subject: JudgeNet Digest #999 (Mar 17, 1995) Date: 17 Mar 95 07:20:24 EST (Fri) JudgeNet Digest #999 Fri 17 Mar 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: AHA Sanctioning (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583) (Tom Clifton) Quality of Judges (brewing chemist Mitch) Questions concerning the "New BJCP" ("JOHN A. JR. CARLSON ") Quality Control for Judges... (Andrew Patrick) What 'ja doing this weekend? (David Klein) Quality Control ("Rad Equipment") Quality Control Time:3:16 PM Date:3/16/95 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 16 Mar 95 09:17:00 -0600 From: korz at iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583) Subject: AHA Sanctioning Greg writes: >* The AHA's 26-29 beer category/subcategory system is far >superior to any I've seen come from the HWBTA. Of course >you're going to collapse categories, but starting as fine as >possible gives you greater options when the time comes to >collapse. and: >* A complete package of instructions, and all forms, pre- >printed and ready to copy, given to the organizer after paying >the sanctioning fee. Forms should include category/subcategory >list, category/subcategory written descriptions and guidelines, >judge registration, judge point registration and criticism, >judge waiver, recipe, bottle, beer judging, and mead judging. I have never sanctioned a competition through the HWBTA, but would assume that the HWBTA Nationals (at which I judged this year) were. The style guidelines they provided us with appear to be similar to the AHA guidelines from about two years ago. I'm just about to hold the BOSS competition and the organizer package I got from the AHA in January contained the 1994 AHA style guidelines! I promptly replaced these with the 1995 guidelines, which while not perfect, are far better than the 1994 ones. Take a look at both the 1994 AHA and this last years HWBTA National's Classic Dry Stout guidelines: "malty sweetness?!" Look at the IBUs for Duesseldorf Alts: "25-35?!" I recently recieved an entry packet from an AHA Sanctioned competition and sure enough... 1994 guidelines! I suggest that any of you who are involved in a club that's about to hold a competition, please, please take a long look at the guidelines they are about to send out. Encourage them to use the 1995 guidelines. Al. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Mar 95 10:29 EST From: Tom Clifton <0002419419 at mcimail.com> Subject: Charles Wettergreen (chuckmw at mcs.com ) asks about Belgian wit beers... For all it is worth our BJCP study group has a Hoegaarden origional white ale last Sunday night and my notes only indicate bananna, vanilla, plum and apple flavors with a dense head and light body. I don't have anything in my notes about lactic sourness (but I may have not written it down if it was there). Talking about descriptions. We started off with two Biere de Garde examples. We had Jenlain which was golden color, sweet with clove/phenolic light to medium body and a sweet finish. This contrasted to Castelain which was highly carbonated - deep golden/copper mmedium body with medium hoppiness, some caramel fruity estery smell and taste and notable lactic sourness. It was a splendid beer - but really different from the Jenlain. Which one is "right" Extracted from the '95 AOB rules and guidelines: (f) White -- Unmalted wheat and malted barley. Oats OK. Often spiced with coriander seed and dried bitter orange peel. Hop flavor and aroma "noble-type" desired. Low to medium bitterness. Low to medium body. Dry. Low diacetyl OK. Low to medium fruity esters. (g) Biere de Garde -- Deep golden to deep copper/light brown. Medium to high malt flavor. Light to medium body. Medium hop bitterness. Light to medium hop flavor and aroma. May have light to medium fruitiness, esteriness. Lager yeast may be used. Earthy, cellarlike, musty aromas OK. Traditionally, a French-style beer that improves with some aging. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1995 09:53:20 -0600 (CST) From: gellym at aviion.persoft.com (brewing chemist Mitch) Subject: Quality of Judges The reprint of the BJCP Quality Control for Judges outline by Pat Baker in #998 outlines a good procedure for handling complaints about judges. I hope that whichever organization prevails here will have as good of a complaint department [personal interest mode on] My only proposal regarding it is that we should retitle the section: Quality ASSURANCE for judges. QC is out. QA is in. Sorry, it's my one of my peeves. When you write up the new constitution be sure to incorpoate that change for me, okay ? Remember, you don't want to control/restrain/restrict Quality, you want it to run rampant and free. You want to assure that it is there. [personal interest mode off] Alright, I admit that was a slight waste of bandwidth for most. Quality Assurance is my job, and I carry my attention to detail and quality home to my brewery, to competitions, and everything else I do. Enter the nineties. Quality Assurance, please. Also, if anyone is keeping tabs, pencil me in for BJCP, please. Mitch - -- | -- Mitch Gelly -- |Beavis and | |software QA specialist, unix systems administrator, Usenet admin,| Butthead | |zymurgist, BJCP beer judge, president of the Madison Homebrewers | are not | | -- gellym at aviion.persoft.com -- |role models| ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1995 10:45:42 -0700 (MST) From: "JOHN A. JR. CARLSON " Subject: Questions concerning the "New BJCP" Given the recent movement of the BJCP to an independent program I have several questions. 1) Is a massive vote planned for all current BJCP judges to determine if they want to continue under the revised BJCP? 2) If you judge in an AHA competition will the points count for the revised BJCP program? (What about nationals?) 3) How will the new program be funded? Will someone be available during the week to answer questions re competitions, sanctioning, and all the other stuff the AHA currently does. 4) Will the program change the rank and point structure or keep it the same as it is now? 5) When will the changes take place? With only ten percent of the BJCP judges on Judgenet how is the new program going to communicate with its members? This gets back to question #3 (where is the money going to come from to pay for mailings, phone calls, and other administrative items). 6) If the first step for the revised BJCP was to appoint a new BJCC, what will the second step be? With change comes opportunity, I look forward to seeing some leadership and actual steps forward to make this revised program work. I guess I'll have to wait and see. jcarlson (recognized) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1995 12:53:33 -0600 (CST) From: Andrew Patrick Subject: Quality Control for Judges... I agree that there should be quality contol on BJCP judges, and the procedures that Pat Baker outlined in today's JudgeNet sound fine... But these are merely procedures for _making_ a complaint.... I think John's original point was that there should be an explicit "code of conduct" defining what is/is not "acceptable behavior" for a BJCP Judge. (e.g. BJCP Judges shalt not write "this beer SUCKS - you are a terrible brewer, you silly dufus" on a score-sheet, that sort of thing....) Is this addressed anywhere in the existing program by-laws?? I am not aware of such a definition. Speaking of which, where can I obtain a copy of the current program by-laws that everybody keeps talking about? Shouldn't all judges have copies of the rules that pertain to the BJCP? Is this on-line somehwere? Andrew Patrick Brewmaster, Harlem Brewing Co, Inc. Founder, HomeBrew U BBS Network (Chicago/Milwaukee/Houston) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1995 11:45:09 -0800 (PST) From: David Klein Subject: What 'ja doing this weekend? Just a note to invite all judges to come by, and help us out with the prelims to the World Cup of Beer this weekend. We have a good number of entries, and don't quite have enough judges to prelim. Prelims will be on Saturday and Sunday morning starting a bit after 9 am and going to about noon. The judging will be at Barclay's, a pub in the Rockridge area of Oakland, Ca. Email me for further info, or call me (David Klein (510) 527-4508 (home) or (510) 486-6817 (work)) or our judging director (David Sapsis (510) 655-6637) for further info Dave Klein ------------------------------ Date: 16 Mar 1995 15:38:35 U From: "Rad Equipment" Subject: Quality Control Subject: Quality Control Time:3:16 PM Date:3/16/95 Pat Baker made the following comment: >The committee also recommended to the AHA and the HWBTA that the score sheets used in the sanctioned competitions of each have a note saying that if the score sheet is unsatisfactory to the brewer, to write to the Administrator, who will forward the comments to the Co-Directors. The annual mailing to all judges will have a similar note to handle complaints about one judge against another. Unfortunately, the AHA did not respond to this request, and the Administrator did not include this policy in the annual mailing.< I have a copy of the annual mailing to the BJCP participants dated February, 1994. It clearly lists the quality control policy and quotes it verbatim. Also, the most recent AHA Sanctioned Competition packet I received mentions the quality control policy in the cover letter to the competition organizer. The only place I have not seen the AHA comply with the BJCC's recommendation is on their score sheets. But, the copies of score sheets I have are dated with a revision date of 4/93. RW... Russ Wigglesworth (INTERNET: Rad_Equipment at radmac1.ucsf.edu - CI$: 72300,61) UCSF Dept. of Radiology, San Francisco, CA (415) 476-3668 / Home (707) 769-0425 ------------------------------ End of JudgeNet Digest ************************