From synchro!judge-owner at uu6.psi.com Mon Apr 17 03:35:23 1995 Status: O X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil t nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["19570" "" "17" "April" "1995" "02:18:08" "EST" "JudgeNet Administrator" "judge-owner at synchro.com" nil "440" "JudgeNet Digest #1022 (Apr 17, 1995)" "^From:" nil nil "4" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.12/2.2) with X.500 id DAA10363; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 03:35:20 -0400 Received: from goodman.itn.med.umich.edu by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.12/2.2) with SMTP id DAA10358; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 03:35:19 -0400 Received: from uu6.psi.com by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA01824 (5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at umich.edu); Mon, 17 Apr 95 03:35:17 -0400 Received: from synchro.UUCP by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA04863 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 95 03:24:59 -0400 Received: by synchro.com (smail2.5) id AA13468; 17 Apr 95 02:18:08 EST (Mon) Reply-To: judge at synchro.com (JudgeNet) Errors-To: judge-error at synchro.com Precedence: bulk Message-Id: <9504170218.AA13468 at synchro.com> From: judge-owner at synchro.com (JudgeNet Administrator) To: judge-recipients at synchro.com (JudgeNet Recipients) Subject: JudgeNet Digest #1022 (Apr 17, 1995) Date: 17 Apr 95 02:18:08 EST (Mon) JudgeNet Digest #1022 Mon 17 Apr 1995 JudgeNet 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 Anti-Prohibitionists may also be interested in LiBeerty: The Libertarian Beer Digest Subscription info: libeerty-request at synchro.com Contents: Address Corrections (Chuck Cox) Incorporation ("Ginger Wotring, Pharm/Phys") Cold beer (Bill Giffin) Judging "their" competition , points and the future (BrewsMead) Voting for BJCC reps (bickham) Cut the jive and come judge beer and party in Chicago ("Roger Deschner ") Judging for Points (WALZENBREW) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 14 Apr 95 10:41:27 EST From: chuck at synchro.com (Chuck Cox) Subject: Address Corrections Even though the BJCC has yet to authorize me to administer the BJCP database, I'm going to go ahead and start maintaining it on a provisional basis before the backlog gets out of hand. Once the BJCC appoints a database administrator, these changes will presumably become official. I am ready to start correcting those pesky address errors. If you know of an incorrect address in the database, please send email to data at bjcp.synchro.com containing the first name, last name, old address and new address of the judge in question. At this time I am NOT prepared to respond to any other type of request, so please do not send me requests for data or other types of changes. Incomplete requests or requests sent to the wrong address WILL BE IGNORED. Once we establish our regional database administration system, you will contact your regional db admin for updates and information. - -- Chuck Cox SynchroSystems / Riverside Garage & Brewery - Cambridge, Mass. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 08:47:57 -0600 (CST) From: "Ginger Wotring, Pharm/Phys" Subject: Incorporation The St Louis Brews became a not for profit corporation over a year ago. It takes some paperwork, and some legal know-how or someone willing to carefully read all the paperwork. We hired a lawyer, so we wouldn't have to read. Tom Finan took care of most if it for us. Ask him for details (pblshr at aol.com) There are additional tax documents that must be completed each year, but the incorporation is a one-time only thing. For those of you who are wondering why we bothered, the club officers or persons physically pouring beer could be sued by someone who leaves a club event drunk and gets into trouble. The officers try to discourage overconsumption, but they didn't want to lose their homes either. Incorporation means that the corporation now serves the beer. Since it has no significant assets, there is no point to lawsuits. Our club has never had a member leave an event and wind up in trouble with the law, but the officers are more relaxed now. - -- Ginger Wotring, Pharmacology/Physiology internet: wotring at sluvca.slu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 10:46:26 -0500 From: billg at giffin.iii.net (Bill Giffin) Subject: Cold beer Top of the morning to ye all, I have judged at the National's for the past two years and the beer both time was colder than a well digger's butt in February and in Maine that is very cold. I have tryed a number of times to convince Karen at the AHA that it is extremely important to have the beer presented to the judges at the proper temperature. I have not been able to get anything more from her then she would relay my concerns to the site directors. That and $3 will get me a beer at $3 Dewey's in Portland. When a beer is served to the judges far too cold the malt charactor of the beer is lost so the beer does not seem as large as it really is. This is the primary reason for the large beers winning at the Nationals and their stupid recipes being printed in Zymurgy. If you care about beer and competitons send Karen an email to karen at aob.org and let her know that you are concerned about how the beer is presented. May the wind be always at you back, Bill Bill Giffin 61 Pleasant St. Richmond, ME 04357 (207)-737-2015 All you need is a few good friends and plenty to drink because thirst is a terrible thing! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 09:20:24 -0700 From: BrewsMead at eworld.com Subject: Judging "their" competition , points and the future As Steve so correctly said yesterday , we are doing the AHA a big favor by judging and spending our time to evaluate the entries that rack up $33,000 in entry fees coupled with the convention moolah. What is the big deal about this for ....... the true reason to have the competition..... to raise money for the coffers. Every association I belong to has their annual or semi annual convention to raise the coin of the realm to support mailings , newsletters , fun occasions etc. There is a need to get to the bottom line , so to speak , about this point concern and the interests of judges who would attend the 1st and 2nd round judging. Since it (the competition) is the basis for the whole convention and monetary gain , there seems to be a level of control that we as judges exercise over the outcome of the whole event. Now many people go to the convention every year and I'm not one of them so take it from there, but it seems that the concept is to have fun and maybe win a ribbon if you're a brewer. I've been contemplating going to Baltimore to see the city and drink some good beer and have fun at a conference. Now with all the BS flying , I'm not so sure I want to anymore. I may not even enter beers into the event since it has truly become more and more of a longshot to win anything. There are many good beers entered and I usually place somewhere with 1 of 5 or 6 entries that is close to style guidelines(that I don't try hard to hit when I brew). So I have good technique and like Charlie P., I just can't seem to make the same recipe twice . People like to drink all the high gravity stuff I make and I like to drink the low gravity stuff they make. Fair trade and possibly a great event.......... but why can't we seem to work together and be mutually beneficial at the convention? Why can't the judge program benefit by receiving that HONORARIUM I mentioned the other day? Is there no one who wants to discuss the issue or what. I thought we were talking about the future of judging and how to make it better and benefit the whole homebrewing community here???? If we are really going to work as one team with the AHA as Tom Ayres and other left wing democrats would like....... then why can't we get some financial benefit from the convention. If we are not going to get anything for it , I suggest that we do the judging this year gratis to help out our peers the organizers and brewers , but dump the workload for 1996. We should get some agreements now or move on with our own agenda and generate our own system for revenue generation thru a National Convention and Competition for 96. The lever is here to lean on and we should use it while it's available , that is if you can trust them. Contracts generally help in this area and I'm sure Russ can get some help from our brewing legal eagles??? The future of fun and brewing can be worked out together or it will be fought over in the marketplace!!!!!! I hope that some of us start thinking about the bottom line to all this discussion and look ahead to having some fun without the BS next year .....one way or the other!!! This year is really messed up and its starting to feel more like politics than a hobby? I'm trying to enjoy , relax and have a homebrew , Charlie. Can you help us out here????? Brews Stevens ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 13:38:50 -0400 (EDT) From: bickham at msc.cornell.edu Subject: Voting for BJCC reps There have been some questions from judges in my area about the mechanics of nominating and voting for delegates from the various regions. This is primarily directed at the current BJCC, but since judges from 3 different regions have asked me similar questions, this seems to be of general interest. The letter from the BJCC states that if you wish to run or nominate someone, the qualifications include having the signatures of 10 participating judges. Is the onus of collecting these signatures up to the individuals who wish to be on the BJCC, or does that mean that someone may also be on the ballot if he or she is nominated by 10 different judges? The second question is whether the at-large delegates will continue to serve on the BJCC, or will they be replaced by elected reps from their regions? Finally, how many potential BJCC members can someone nominate or provide his or her signature to as an endorsement? I am interested in becoming involved in the BJCC, but I am moving between regions in July and am therefore ineligible to run in these elections. I just thought I'd mention this in case anyone was considering nominating me ;-) Thanks, Scott Bickham - -- ======================================================================== Scott Bickham bickham at msc.cornell.edu ========================================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 15:26:56 CDT From: "Roger Deschner " Subject: Cut the jive and come judge beer and party in Chicago While we've been pissing and moaning at one another here on the net, HOMEBREWERS HAVE BEEN BUSY BREWING. (Amazing, isn't it.) We will likely exceed last year's total of 666 entries for the Chicago 1st Round of the AHA National Homebrew Competition. And so we really need judges and stewards. Plus, it will be a fun weekend. At the risk of repeating earlier posts, here's the scoop. Judging will take place at Millrose Brewery, I-90 at Barrington Road, in Suburban Chicago, from Friday evening April 29 through Saturday April 30. Judges and stewards will be provided a light supper Friday, and Saturday lunch. After judging on Friday night will probably be your best chance to sample Millrose's own ales, and their guest lagers from Capital Brewing of Madison, WI. On Saturday April 30, at 6:00pm, we will have our third annual Chicago Beer Society Invitational Brew-Off and Dinner, so you, your fellow judges, and Michael Jackson (the less-skinny one, not the singer) can actually taste, and judge the winner of, some of the wondrous things which have been rumored such as Count Chockula Porter and Fruit Loops Lambic. This brew-off dinner is NOT a sanctioned event, and judging points will not be awarded. ;) Cost $35.00 for dinner and lots of uniquely good beer; Millrose has EXCELLENT food - they have their own meat packing plant in the basement. If this event sells out its limited 100 tickets, PRE-REGISTERED judges will have preference. For more info about this event, send e-mail to Ray Daniels at <71261.705 at compuserve.com>. IF ENOUGH OF YOU SHOW UP TO JUDGE, we will not have to judge on Sunday, so we can all sleep off the fermented breakfast cereal and still be on time to the Michael Jackson Microbrewery Brunch at 12:00 at Zinfandel Restaurant, 59 W Grand Ave, in Downtown Chicago. Five-course gourmet meal with microbrewery beer and MJ's commentary. $50.00. Or if, by then, you've had it with good beer and you need a Budweiser fix, the Cubs are playing the Expos at Wrigley Field, Sunday at 1:20pm. (Tickets: Ticketmaster 312-559-1212.) Unfortunately, we do not have a Beds-4-Brewers program at this location. It's out in the middle of nowhere, with jackrabbits, cornfields, clean air, etc., and even us locals will be staying at Red Roof Inn, directly across the Interstate from Millrose. After unlimited Cheerios Cream Ale and Breakfast Of Champions Kolsch, nobody will be capable of driving anyway. Check-off list of what you need to do: 1) Send e-mail to Dennis Davison to register to judge. Provide the usual details like what categories you have entries in, which sessions (Fri-Sat) you are available for, etc. You know all these questions. 2) Mail a check for $35.00 payable to "Chicago Beer Society" for Saturday's brew-off dinner with MJ to: Ray Daniels, 2847 N. Racine, Chicago IL 60657. 3) Telephone Red Roof Inn at 708-885-7877 for a motel room reservation for the nights of Friday April 28 and Saturday April 29. If they quote you a double room rate over $49, tell them you are part of the American Homebrewer's Association group to get the better price. If they say they're full, call Budgetel, next door, at 708-882-8848. 4) Telephone Zinfandel Restaurant at 312-527-1818 to make reservations for the MJ brunch. Prepay with credit card. So, only *YOU* can help the Chicago Beer Geeks make it to brunch on time with Michael Jackson. Come help us judge homebrew, and make it happen. (Oh, and there's a thing called judging points involved in this too, but I wasn't going to mention that. Other people are taking care of arguing that as I type, but the _point_ is WE'RE going to have a good time.) =============== "Civilization was CAUSED by beer." ===================== Roger Deschner University of Illinois at Chicago rogerd at uic.edu Aliases: u52983 at uicvm.uic.edu U52983 at UICVM.BITNET R.Deschner at uic.edu /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ NHC '95 Chicago Region Entry Registrar /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Apr 1995 19:29:59 -0400 From: WALZENBREW at aol.com Subject: Judging for Points Wow! That's the last time I'm ever going to post anything before going out of town for a week. Getting to the meat of the issue: Yes, I'd be reluctant to spend $100 - $200+ and go out of my way to judge a competition if I didn't get some sort of compensation - especially if I could be brewing that weekend. Judging is WORK, ladies and gentlemen, and should be treated that way. If you're one of the unfortunate few I've seen now and then who treat it as a free all-day drinking session and social event you shouldn't be judging. Taking the attitude that judging is work means that I will do everything in my power, including taking more time than the organizer would like me to sometimes, to guarantee that the entrant gets the best evaluation that he can from me. Any less is cheating the brewer (and ultimately myself). So if it's work, there should be some compensation, right? Certainly I like the camaraderie and after-judging parties I've been to - but I can get this at a convention or by simply visiting town or, if I'm lucky, attending another club's meeting if I'm in town on the right date. You don't need a competition to socialize with your fellow brewers! I've judged many impromptu "competitions" (we have one every other month to select an entry for the AHA's "Club-Only" competitions), but the point system gives competitions an aura of professionalism that would be lacking without it. I know that a competition that gives me points will be sanctioned and will most likely be run in a professional manner, having such things as legitimate score sheets and the beers served at the correct temperature. This hasn't been always true at some of the non-sanctioned "competitions" that I've judged at. I think the people who worked out the BJCP system, with it's combination of test scores and point rankings, are the homebrew world's version of the geniuses that framed the Constitution. The system, in my opinion, works extremely well. The points, as with passing the BJCP test, tell organizers and judge directors that somebody has a certain level of experience in judging competitions, and that that individual can be (usually) trusted to properly judge. It also tells the judge director which people have the experience, which enables experienced judges to be paired up with less experienced or apprentice judges so they can share their knowledge. The points are an integral part of the program - the program would fall apart without the point system the same way it would fall apart without the test (or with a diluted one). Many's the time I've judged with a more experienced judge who turned out to know substantially less about a style than others at the table, or who couldn't pick up a certain off flavor (for example). OK - this is human nature. Someone who treats judging as WORK (that word again) will admit this and ask for help, because (s)he's a professional and not a show-off. I've also judged with a**holes who try to use their status to influence and intimidate the others at the table. This is also human nature. But this has nothing to do with the validity of judging for points. By the way, my statement about not judging at a non-point competition was framed in frustration with what's happening with the whole judging program and the AHA's attitude in particular. I'd easily judge a non-sanctioned competition if I knew the organizers or felt it was a worthwhile endeavor for all concerned. I've done it in the past and will continue to do it. I enter beers in competitions because I want to win ribbons. Similarly, I judge competitions because I want to earn points. OK, to some of you this may seem a bit backwards, but this is the way I do it and it works just fine for me, thank you. Getting points gives me a tangible feeling of accomplishment and the knowledge that I'm making some progress in learning how to judge beers properly. Sort of like having a diploma. And it has the advantage that I can, if necessary, prove it to others. My first 10 points cost an average of $100 a point. Would I have judged these competitions without points? Probably not. The points involved are a powerful motivator to spend a beautiful spring Saturday sitting inside sipping and evaluating beers that sometimes are so unpleasant that you wish you could spit them out like the wine tasters do. Bragging rights? I'm proud of my current status. We all are. We've done a lot to earn the right to say we're Certified or National or whatever. But I feel that any judge who uses his/her status to intimidate others should be kicked out of the program. This isn't what I mean when I say I judge for points. Judging is WORK. Let's not forget this. Points are the compensation, and the personal satisfaction (for me, anyway) comes from improving your skills at evaluating beer and having tangible proof that you're doing so. Prosit! Greg Walz Pittsburgh, PA WALZENBREW at aol.com ------------------------------ End of JudgeNet Digest ************************