From synchro!judge-owner at uu6.psi.com Tue Mar 21 09:51:05 1995 Status: O X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil t nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["11803" "" "21" "March" "1995" "07:17:56" "EST" "JudgeNet Administrator" "judge-owner at synchro.com" nil "303" "JudgeNet Digest #1003 (Mar 21, 1995)" "^From:" nil nil "3" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: by truelies.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.2) with X.500 id JAA08797; Tue, 21 Mar 1995 09:51:03 -0500 Received: from goodman.itn.med.umich.edu by truelies.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.2) with SMTP id JAA08786; Tue, 21 Mar 1995 09:51:01 -0500 Received: from uu6.psi.com by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA05729 (5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at umich.edu); Tue, 21 Mar 95 09:50:57 -0500 Received: from synchro.UUCP by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA06162 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 95 09:26:39 -0500 Received: by synchro.com (smail2.5) id AA19196; 21 Mar 95 07:17:56 EST (Tue) Reply-To: judge at synchro.com (JudgeNet) Errors-To: judge-error at synchro.com Precedence: bulk Message-Id: <9503210717.AA19196 at synchro.com> From: judge-owner at synchro.com (JudgeNet Administrator) To: judge-recipients at synchro.com (JudgeNet Recipients) Subject: JudgeNet Digest #1003 (Mar 21, 1995) Date: 21 Mar 95 07:17:56 EST (Tue) JudgeNet Digest #1003 Tue 21 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: Judging Wish List (John DeCarlo ) Meaningful Subject: Lines (John DeCarlo ) Admin note about archive (Spencer.W.Thomas) Another archive note (Spencer.W.Thomas) Penalties (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583) Biere de Garde "style"? (Spencer.W.Thomas) Annual Mailing (Polly Goldman) Pat's biere de garde comment (Ed Westemeier) Dock the lazy shiftless buggers ! (BrewsMead) Barley Wine style limits (BrewsMead) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 20 Mar 95 07:21:41 EST From: John DeCarlo Subject: Judging Wish List Yes, a clear code of conduct is a good idea. Yes, a clear complaint/*comment* procedure is good for quality assurance. In addition, it might be nice to consider other possible procedures, such as having a master judge at a competition randomly check a couple of the beers and judging sheets (assuming there is some left to judge). And, I personally wouldn't mind putting my e-mail address on the judging sheet, in case the brewer wants to complain, ask a question, or otherwise just communicate after the fact. John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 95 08:11:07 EST From: John DeCarlo Subject: Meaningful Subject: Lines >Date: Fri, 17 Mar 1995 12:31:50 +0000 >From: leeb at southwind.net >Subject: Re: JudgeNet Digest #999 (Mar 17, 1995) > >I have a little teeny quesion for the quorum: > >Our competition here will be March 25th. We are recognized this year >by the HWBTA.... who do I send the judge stuff to? Do I still send >it through Jackie Rager to Pat Baker or does it go to Chuck or what? > > >- -- > -Lee Bussy | The 4 Basic Foodgroups.... | > leeb at southwind.net | Salt, Fat, Beer & Women! | > Wichita, Kansas | http://www.southwind.net/~leeb | Lee, sorry, but you failed the Subject: line test. So I had to skip over your message content . Hey, get with the program!!!!! Watch out for Chuck getting really nasty! John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 95 09:34:51 EST From: Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu Subject: Admin note about archive Since we just hit issue 1000, I have renamed the files in the 1995 directory in the archive with a leading 0, so that the alphabetical listing is still in order. Thus, if you want to retrieve digest 962, for example, you should get the file /pub/judge/1995/0962. =Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI (Archive maintainer) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 95 09:44:07 EST From: Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu Subject: Another archive note The file 0985 in the archive really contains digests 985, 986, and 987. That's because I didn't receive the original digests, and Chuck resent them all "mashed" together. =S ------------------------------ Date: 20 Mar 95 09:32:00 -0600 From: korz at iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583) Subject: Penalties Kieran suggests penalties for confirmed judges who don't show. While I feel that judges who do this on a regular basis should be penalized, I don't agree that there should be any automatic docking of points for this. Think about it: If you knew that you would get penalized for not showing and were only about 75% sure that you were going to make it, wouldn't you be more likely to not register (i.e. confirm)? I think that the numbers of judges registering (confirming) would drop if something like this were instituted. Those judges who confirmed and did not show should get a scolding letter from the BJCP administrator and be told that repeated offenses would result in point penalites. This would maybe help reduce the problem without scaring judges away from pre-reg registering. Al. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 95 11:23:32 EST From: Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu Subject: Biere de Garde "style"? Regardless of whether the "locals" are aware of a "BdG" style or not, my perception, based on the samples I've had here, is that there is some commonality in the beers. Particularly in the light-colored, strongish ales. Maybe "BdG" is too broad of a term. Compare, e.g., Castelaine, Jade, Moinette, and 3 Monts. They are as alike as, say, Shepherd Neame Bishops Finger, Fullers ESB, and Batemans XXX (all (loosely) "bitters"). =S ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 1995 07:24:10 -0500 From: Polly_Goldman at f615.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Polly Goldman) Subject: Annual Mailing In Judgenet 1001, greg at kgn.ibm.com(Greg Holton) said, re: Annual BJCP mailing jm> I have still not received my annual mailing, but have seen others jm> refer to it in this digest. Does anyone know what's going on with jm> that? According to my records, my status should have changed from jm> recognized to certified last June, but I have never received any jm> acknowlegement of that. All of this talk about independence, jm> democracy, etc., in my mind is secondary to basic record keeping and jm> timely communication. I finally emailed James Spence and was told that there never was an annual mailing this year; it was just a rumor. Like you, I "graduated" this year, but have never received confirmation. I sent James a listing of all competitions and what I judged, and he said that he will look into it. - --- MacWoof 1.5.3 * Origin: Point of Enlightenment (1:109/615.2 at fidonet) SEEN-BY: 109/13 615 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 1995 18:40:49 -0500 From: hopfen at iac.net (Ed Westemeier) Subject: Pat's biere de garde comment In JudgeNet Digest #1002, Pat Baker wrote: >no one in Flanders or northern France is >aware of Biere de Garde as a beer style. This seems to be a Michael Jackson >concept that has been enshrined by the AHA. According to Castelain, the only >thing Biere de Garde means is that the beer has been stored a bit, and that it >might be slightly higher than normal in alcoholic strength. It can be light or >dark, it can be an ale or lager. I suspect we have a major style glitch here >and should eliminate Biere de Garde as a style designation. All that may well be true, but I would be VERY reluctant to give it up as a style of its own. Actually, this is one of my very favorite categories, and I only wish I could get (and afford) more of it. But OK, let's reconsider biere de garde as a style. It couldn't be properly placed as a Belgian ale. I feel as if I know that style better than the average bear, since I had the distinct honor and privilege of judging that category with Philippe Perpette at the Spirit of Belgium conference. Much to my amazement, my reaction to the entries matched perfectly with Philippe's in almost every case, and he was very quick to set me straight whenever there was confusion. By the way, Philippe really should get one of those rubber stamps with "more malt!" on it (in French, of course). It doesn't fit any of the other standard categories we have. I love the earthy, musty aroma notes that come from this beer (due in no small part to the cork, I believe), and the distinctive flavor that comes from the unique yeast strains in French Flanders. If I had to pick the style that comes closest to it, I would have to say that if Anchor Steam (TM) were bottled with a cork, it could be considered a first or second cousin to biere de garde. No, I'll cheerfully agree with Pat that there may be rampant confusion about exactly what constitutes the biere de garde style, just as there is about (for example) a Dusseldorf Alt, or even a porter, but I would definitely vote to keep the style defined pretty much as it is. Ed Westemeier ****************************** * Ed Westemeier * * Cincinnati, Ohio * * E-mail: hopfen at iac.net * * Phone: (513) 321-2023 * ****************************** ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 95 18:34:14 PST From: BrewsMead at eworld.com Subject: Dock the lazy shiftless buggers ! You all know who you are . There is a simple thing known as common courtesy and there is no way that we should even be discussing this crap. Call the judge organizer or at least the hotel or compsite ( you know where it is ) when you change your mind and decide to bag the weekend judge trip. If you told some good friends that you'd be over for cocktails and maybe dinner or a movie , would you call when you changed your mind or just bone em and leave em hanging? You'd call and if you wouldn't , then you are truly a flaming a#$ at ^&! We'd castrate you in the Guild for b.s. like this and if the BJCC will put up with it , then they aren't worth the paper they wrote the rules on . Try to reorganize your judge pairings when 8 people don't show up? There's an automatic 1 hr. delay and the whole day goes awry. This type of behaviour is for buttheads, not the people in this program. Master judges who pull it should be demoted to meatheads and be forced to wear silly hats with Kick Me signs on their backs. Better yet how about the effective Pilgrim means of stocks and leggings in the town square? Gets my attention just like the Malaysian whipping syndrome and the Saudi Arabian sabre? What's a point for screwing up your friends day........not much? Have a nice day .......................... Bruce Stevens ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 95 18:34:19 PST From: BrewsMead at eworld.com Subject: Barley Wine style limits I just read the Beer and Tavern Chronicles' BW review and have to agree wholeheartedly with their assesssment of this arena. Just as Pat calls for dropping the Biere de Garde area ,I think that we should drop the American style BW AS A STYLE. The range of malt use and hop use is all over the map and this is generally allowed within the West Coast's version of the rules for recipes. I like hops , don't get me wrong , but the Old Crustacean we got back east this year sucked . The 34.5 or so that the reviewers gave it was way too high . I did score a case or two of Bigfoot which I thought was much better balanced and closer to the true meaning of BW - British style that is? MALT and hops to balance .......not oil with bitterness and some malt to flavor ? They have quite the range themselves and should at least get the guidelines to read 9% by vol. or better. Let's be consistent with the classic styles and allow good tasting modified versions of them to be emerging styles with the use of indiginous materials. Revamp the Barley wines guidelines !!! Bruce Stevens < 60 s.g. ain't beer ------------------------------ End of JudgeNet Digest ************************