Return-Path: listadm at synchro.com Received: from srvr8.engin.umich.edu (root at srvr8.engin.umich.edu [141.212.2.81]) by srvr5.engin.umich.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA20747 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 1996 02:03:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from twins.rs.itd.umich.edu (twins.rs.itd.umich.edu [141.211.83.39]) by srvr8.engin.umich.edu (8.6.12/8.6.4) with ESMTP id BAA23872 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 1996 01:58:38 -0500 Received: by twins.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.12/2.2) with X.500 id BAA29235; Mon, 12 Feb 1996 01:58:37 -0500 Received: from uu6.psi.com by twins.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.12/2.2) with SMTP id BAA29230; Mon, 12 Feb 1996 01:58:33 -0500 Received: from synchro.com by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA10170 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 96 01:45:38 -0500 Received: (from listadm at localhost) by synchro.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA00643 for judge-recipients at synchro.com; Mon, 12 Feb 1996 01:09:33 -0500 Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 01:09:33 -0500 Message-Id: <199602120609.BAA00643 at synchro.com> To: judge-recipients at synchro.com (JudgeNet Recipients) From: judge-owner at synchro.com (JudgeNet Administrator) Reply-To: judge at synchro.com (JudgeNet) Errors-To: judge-error at synchro.com Precedence: bulk Subject: JudgeNet Digest #1210 (Feb 12, 1996) JudgeNet Digest #1210 Mon 12 Feb 1996 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 WWW Archives: http://www.umich.edu/~spencer/beer/judge 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 For BJCP General Information contact: geninfo at bjcp.synchro.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Contents: synchro lives (Chuck Cox) (Alan Folsom) Competition Announcment (Algis R Korzonas) Little/Big (Norman Dickenson) Bo Pils & 'Cascade Wonder' IPA ("Nathaniel P. Lansing") Re: Degree of Difficulty (JCalen) contest announcement (Btalk) Categories, Categories (Fred Hardy) BJCP Exam Study Guide + Sample Questions (WALZENBREW) Meat Free Chow (BrewsMead) Re: BJCP Mission and Focus (WALZENBREW) Re: Giffin's Comments on the BJCP Board (WALZENBREW) 1996 Capitol District Open (Fred Hardy) Call of Judges (David Klein) Knickerbocker Battle of the Brews (Paul Krebs) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 23:57:40 -0500 From: Chuck Cox Subject: synchro lives As you may have surmised, the old synchro crashed, just prior to retiring from a long career. Fortunately, it left a flawless backup just hours before crashing, so I think little email was lost. If you posted something, please resend it if you don't see it by Tuesday. The new synchro has been hastily brought into service, and things will be run manually for the next few days, so please be patient. - --- Chuck Cox SynchroSystems / Riverside Garage & Brewery - Cambridge, Mass. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 21:53:47 -0500 From: Alan Folsom Subject: A couple of requests: I find I enjoy seeing the who's who list each month. As I get into judging it's fun to see who's on the list, who's moved up, and so forth. I think it would be even more useful if there were some indication on the list of geographic location. city and state, for instance. Maybe this information isn't readily available, but if it could be collected, would make a nice feature even better. There have been some inside jokes posted lately, indicated by a smiley of some sort. One referenced old hops, wheat extract, and an award of some sort, and another referenced a "certain competition". I enjoy gossip as much as anyone, and don't mind an inside joke, but perhaps a public forum is not the best place. At best you simply confuse a few hundred people, at worst you impugn character in an irresponsible way. Of course, if you want to fill us all in on the reference, I'll chuckle along. Obligatory judging comment: Regarding the "Big" beer thread. As a new judge, I find a problem with pallette fatigue after tasting a dozen beers or so, which might make the bigger beers seem to stand out. Recognizing the problem is one thing, any suggestions on how to combat it? Al F. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Feb 96 09:51:54 CST From: korz at pubs.ih.att.com (Algis R Korzonas) Subject: Competition Announcment This year's Brewers of South Suburbia Homebrew Competition will be held Saturday March 23rd at the brand-new Flossmoor Station Brewpub in Flossmoor, IL Last year, there were over $600 in prizes and I suspect there should be a similar amount (if not more) this year. This competition has been sanctioned by both the AHA and BJCP. For more information: Bob Ward 708-403-6666 or Marty Nachel 708-614-MALT. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 09:56:51 -0700 From: Norman Dickenson Subject: Little/Big Subject: Time: 8:22 AM OFFICE MEMO Little/Big Date: 2/1/96 In yesterday's digest, Ed Hitchcock sez: >Most judges, I think, are reluctant to make >unfounded assumptions about production techniques, >including guessing at the recipe. Be they reluctant or not, they volunteered to judge beers, not save face. If a judge is of the opinion, based on his/her best knowledge, experience and tasting abilities, that a beer is too big for a style, then that opinion should be stated and the beer scored accordingly. If the judge doesn't trust his/her own judging abilities, then use a hydrometer to check the beer just as thermometers and flashlight are tools of choice for some judges. Of course, mistakes will occur. That's why there is more than one judge. >grossly exceeding these criteria is dishonest. Now, I strongly disagree with this statement. People may exceed criteria because they are new at brewing and made big brewing mistakes, or they are "testing" the panel, or they may have entered the beer in two categories because they weren't sure where the beer belonged, or they may be gunning for a ribbon because they assume big beers will win over smaller beers. As far as I'm concerned, people can enter anything they want in a bottle as long as it isn't toxic or illegal and call it anything they like. It's their entry money. If they want to toss it away, then that's their business. It's the judges job to effectively evaluate the beers for what they are. Trying to REQUIRE entrants to brew to style is tantamount to organizers telling entrants what recipe and techniques to use. That's fine, if that's what the public wants and would be a great learning experience, but I doubt that the public would maintain interest in that style of competition. >they should be able to question the organizers as to >the OG and FG stated on the entry form. That procedure would compromise the principles of blind tasting. There also seems to be some notion that all competitions require that a recipe form be submitted with the entry. The only reason the AHA does it, is so that they have something to publish in their magazine. You can be sure they aren't developing a mega database to hunt for correlations. Have you ever heard of a wine competition that required the entrants to divulge their secret winemaking techniques? Many, many, many competitions (dare I say a majority?) do not require a recipe form. It is not to my knowledge a requirement or even a recommendation for BJCP registered competitions. I'm not advocating that homebrewers keep their recipes secret. It's just that aside from the AHA and a few comps whose club sponsors may publish winning recipes in newsletters, no one ever sees those entry recipes. >Once the gravity is determined it is then the >judge's responsibility to determine suitability >to style. I propose that if a judge cannot taste an out-of- style beer and must rely on seeing numbers, then there is a serious lack of competency. Tasting is a skill and an art. Attempting to impose the scientific method on tasting is doomed to fail. By this, I do not deny for a second the usefulness of scientific tools, but am adament that the bottom line lies with the judge being willing and able to do what he/she has agreed to do, stick the neck out, evaluate the beer and offer feedback. >In sum, educate the entrants....... Of course, that's the purpose of competitions, isn't it? But shouldn't the primary burden be placed on the judges to be able to competently evaluate beer. This thread on style parameters is a valuable discussion and I am sure has brought out into the open the ugly scandal that SOME judges have been unable to discern that SOME beers are out of style. BUT, it is only one of many pressing issues in the beer judging world. Personally, I thing people ought to place more emphasis on brewing and drinking beer as an enjoyable social hobby rather than emphasizing competitions, rules, cheating and enforcement. But, what would people talk about then? Hmmm. -norman- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 21:23:55 -0500 (EST) From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" Subject: Bo Pils & 'Cascade Wonder' IPA In digest 1209, Mr. Ellington remarks at the BOS choice between a Pils and an IPA, both equally flawless. The name of the IPA was Cascade Wonder, sorry but for me this would be a no brainer; any cascade note in an IPA would definately make that one more appropriately an American Pale Ale, I would have probably kicked that one out in the first pass. Just my 2 bits. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 23:24:46 -0500 From: JCalen at aol.com Subject: Re: Degree of Difficulty In the discussion so far, there are two schools of thought among the "Degree of Difficulty" camp. * More flavorful styles can hide flaws, less flavorful styles can't * Some styles have a more elaborate brewing process than other styles Jim Ellingson offers Michael Jackson's view (JudgeNet #1209): >What Michael said, in breaking the tie, was that the pils is harder to >brew, and so, all other things being equal, it deserved the prize. Al Korzonas asks (ibid.): >Surely you will agree that it is more difficult to make an outstanding >Eisbock than an outstanding Special Bitter? No, I disagree... and don't call me Shirley. (I couldn't resist.) A pilsner or eisbock produced *via traditional means* may be a big pain in the neck, but it's not more difficult. It's simply how those styles are made. If you want result A, use method 1. If method 2 only yields result B, it's not fair to quantify method 1 as easier or harder than method 2, despite which one you'd rather use. I take back my flippant remark in JudgeNet #1208 about decoction vs. single-step infusion. They are different methods, that's all. Besides, would you ever assume in BoS that all the beers were made using traditional methods? Those beers could have been extract batches. Dennis Davison writes (ibid.): >(An) Imperial Stout can hide a few flaws where the Kolsch can't. At its face, this is a very plausible argument, especially given the latitude that some styles are granted, but, I can't accept it. If I don't perceive a flaw, it's not flawed. The heart of the matter seems to be that a tie-breaker of some sort is needed to allow a deadlocked judging panel to finish their job. I don't have any good answers for this. If the top beers are equal, it isn't fair to single one out as the best. On the other hand, no organization can afford multiple BoS prizes. We also don't want to encourage lazy judges to simply advance beers to a tie-breaker. I'm rolling some ideas around, but I'd like to incubate them a bit. Can there be a satisfactory approach to this apparent dilemma? Regards, John Calen ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 16:10:18 -0500 From: Btalk at aol.com Subject: contest announcement CONTEST ANNOUNCEMENT ... CALL FOR JUDGES AND STEWARDS Here's the short story- Last year it was the Borderline Brawl. This year it is the Parlor City Brew Off! The Parlor CIty Homebrewers Coalition, comprised of the Borderline Yeast Infectors and Broome County Fermenters Association brew clubs, is sponsoring the second annual sanctioned homebrew contest in the BInghamton, NY area. The Parlor City Brew Off will be held on Saturday April 13, 1996 at the Parlor City Brewery i Binghamton, NY. Last years event drew over 150 entries, so we anticipate easily over 200 this year. All recognized styles of beer, meads and ciders can be entered. All types of bottles will be accepted! Carbonaters will be returned. Entries will be received between March 11 and March 31. Best of Show for beer is a complete kegging system. Meads and Ciders will compete for a separate Best of Show prize. Ribbons and prizes will be awarded for First, Second and Third in each judging category. Points will also be awarded towards the NY Brewer and Club of the year awards. Entry packets with all of the details will ready in a week or so. To get one, send your snail mail address to Roger Haggett , the contest organizer. Judges and stewards can contact either Roger or myself, Bob Talkiewicz . Enter early and enter often!! Later, Bob Talkiewicz, Binghamton, NY ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 16:31:50 -0500 (EST) From: Fred Hardy Subject: Categories, Categories It has been unusually cold here in DC, so the flames I received over suggesting that some beverage categories might be rethought have actually been rather nice. There was some misunderstanding that I was suggesting that we should go back to long forgotten beverage profiles. I realize that times have changed, and IPA usually isn't and American Amber does not exist. I do suggest, however, that there seems to be categories that are redundant and should be revised. Hippocras is mead (honey wine) made with grape juice and spices. Its origin is soaking medicinal herbs and spices in finished wine to create an extract. The result was usually bitter medicine, and raw honey was added to make it more palatable. That is hardly the definition of today's Hippocras, but it is similar to a commercial product called Meade. I suggest that a spiced melomel category is more descriptive of what the guidelines call Hippocras. Metheglin, OTOH, is historically correct. Pyment seems to me to be redundant, since there is already a melomel category. Grapes are usually considered fruit. Historically it had more in common with historical Hippocras than with today's definition. Braggot with noticeable hop bitterness, character and/or aroma is beer with lots of honey in it. The specialty beer category certainly allows these beverages to be entered there. If braggot is to remain a category, it should be made of malt and honey with no detectable hops. Historically it was probably spiced, so spiced braggot should not offend the modernists. Cyser under mead is also redundant. The specialty cider subcategory covers it, as does melomel. Until the 16th century most cider was made with honey, but it was still cider, not mead (or meth). All that has changed is the category. Summary: - Drop cyser (BTW, there is no perry subcategory in either mead or cider) from the mead category (enter under specialty cider or melomel or both) - Drop Hippocras as a subcategory (enter as a spiced melomel) - Drop Pyment as a subcategory (it is a melomel) - Drop hopped braggot from any category, or drop braggot altogether - Add a spiced melomel subcategory under mead - Enter hopped beer with lots of honey in it as a specialty beer. - Drop the lead statement that ciders are made with apple juices to permit perry, peach, guava, etc. ciders. They can be entered as specialty cider, or create a non-apple subcategory. A spiced peach cider made with honey could be entered as a melomel or specialty cider or both. Folks enter the same beer in more than one subcategory all the time. Why not ciders/melomels? More flames, please. It was 20 degrees this AM and heat is welcome. Cheers, Fred ============================================================================== We must invent the future, else it will | happen to us and we will not like it. | [Stafford Beer, "Platform for Change"] | email: fcmbh at access.digex.net ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 18:17:29 -0500 From: WALZENBREW at aol.com Subject: BJCP Exam Study Guide + Sample Questions For those of you who are interested, I wrote a 115 page study guide for the BJCP Exam that's now available free on the TRASH home page. I wrote this guide back in 1990 when I first took the BJCP exam, and I continue to use it as a study aid when I've held pre-test study sessions for our members who want to prepare for the Exam. I've also included a four-page list of sample BJCP exam questions. This quesiton list appeared on the Net in 1994 and also in numerous homebrew club newsletters. I've organized them by type and included them in the same file as the Study Guide. Questions are a great way of studying because you can practice handwriting answers in the same fashion as you'll be required to do at the Exam. Feel free to copy and distribute the Guide and the question list. All I ask is that the title page be included and that no money changes hands (i.e., you can give it away but you can't sell it.) The TRASH home page is at: http://members.gnn.com/rcolaizzi/trash.htm The Guide is in WordPerfect 5.1 format and has been zipped, so you'll need a PKUNZIP program or similar to decompress it. It'll take about two minutes to download at 14.4K. Please address any comments, corrections, or suggestions to me at WALZENBREW at aol.com. Cheers, Greg Walz ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 04:56:49 -0800 From: BrewsMead at eworld.com Subject: Meat Free Chow Here in Maine ,you gotta get used to the vegheads and as Ron Popeil did....sell stuff to them and make money! We will be featuring some meatless dishes at the Yankee Brewers Competition in June. I just wanted Julian and Greg to know so that they and their sprout head buddies can come here to help judge our fiesta in stead of going to the Nationals. Sorry Martin but I can't change it now. We will have a homemade beer bread breakfast with cheeses from all over the state . Screw the lactose intolerant ....they should've died at birth without breastmilk. We will have some potluck dishes for lunch along with my world famous lobster stew( almost veggie for the meat haters) and one of the finest vegematic cooks in our club will make some spectacular grub for you root chewers. This is not even the best part! For you yeastheads ,we have a treat, Greg Noonan will be over to talk to us about the care and manipulation of bugs in the brewhouse at home and for pros. Bring some chow of your own if you don;t like what you hear or go next door to Chilies and buy your own bean brained taco stuffed with the root of some sundry plant matter, but come up to judge and play golf in the Brewer's Best Ball tourney the morning after. There's also the possibility of a trout fishing excursion after the festivities . We'd take you up Bangor to do some salmon fishing but the greenheads got the damn fish put on the almost Endangered Species Act list as part of their surreptitious plan to stop all humans from consuming other sentient life forms. Now that I think of it some more........to hell with you all for wasting my time on this. See you in June in Portland ,ME . Brews ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 18:24:29 -0500 From: WALZENBREW at aol.com Subject: Re: BJCP Mission and Focus In JudgeNet 1206 Rob Bates write: >There seems to be some misconception in some circles as to what the >BJCP is all about. The charter of the BJCP is now and has always >been to test and certify judges. Period. > >As far as education goes, the ... AHA is much better equipped >for the task of education than the BJCP. > >The BJCP should, in my humble yet time worn experience, NOT try to be >all things to all people... > >The AHA should do what it does best (educate) and the BJCP should >continue to test, evaluate, rank and certify judges. >Attempts to enlarge the scope of the program may just produce another >self-righteous, bloated, bureauratic, holier-than-thou, immovable...entity Couldn't agree with you more about the BJCP's focus. Although I don't think we have any problems with this kind of "mission creep" at present, we need to be aware that it -can- happen and prevent it from happening. The most successful organizations are the ones that pick a focus and scope and stick to it regardless of temptations to expand. Yes, the BJCP's mission is certify that judges have at least a certain, defined level of knowledge and tasting skills, so as to advance the ultimate goal of improving the quality of beer judging at competitions. That's it! Everything else, such as the improvement in the average brewer's beers after he/she takes and passes the Exam, is a fringe benefit. Education is only relevant to this mission as a way to improve the quality of the beer judging that takes place at competitions. For example, defining style guidelines and taste descriptors is well within the BJCP's focus. Preparing detailed histories of the styles and descriptions of the brewing process, for example, are not, and best left to those that are publications specialists (like the AHA and others). Even preparing study guides for the Exam is something best left to others. I agree that the AHA is better equipped for education than the BJCP is or ever should be. The implication you're making, and to which I agree, is that the AHA and BJCP are complementary, not competitive, organizations that should work together. And I think that now many feel that this is the way of the future - the independent BJCP cooperating, not competing, with organizations like the AHA. Prosit! Greg Walz Mid-Atlantic Rep, BJCP Board of Directors Pittsburgh, PA ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 18:24:14 -0500 From: WALZENBREW at aol.com Subject: Re: Giffin's Comments on the BJCP Board In JudgeNet #1208 Bill Giffin writes: >From what little >information that has been provided to the judges it seems that you, the BOD >have perpetuated all the faults of the former organization and added new >problems as well. How can I have any faith in the BOD when you caa't even >set up a legal checking account, no big deal, yet you haven't managed it in >almost a year. What is the hold up? Do you even know what has to be done? > >All of you on the board have cryed about how hard you all have worked. >Sadly enough the reason why so many folks were layed off from AT&T is the >same reason for how hard you folks have worked. What you have been doing >was not productive, that how simple it is. If you weren't prepared to get >the job done in a reasonable amount of time then you should not have run for >the possition. And instead of crying how much work it is you should have >resigned if you couldn't handle the load. > Normally still another diatribe from Mr. Giffen would give me little more than amusement. But speaking as one of the seven Board members of the BJCP I find it difficult not to be offended by his offhand, insulting remarks directed towards a group of dedicated persons working hard to assure the success of the BJCP. Here, we (i.e., the present Board) inherited an organization that was previously little more than a "committee" jointly run by the AHA and HWBA. Fleshing this out into a valid stand-alone organization, especially when persons with differing opinions must be accomodated in the process, is no easy task. If we rush into incorporation we could wind up with a non-workable organization with all the flaws of the previous BJCP. The hold up has really been in defining and developing workable Bylaws to turn this organization into a functioning legal nonprofit entity. Which we're doing. In fact, we're presently voting on the Bylaws and, if they are approved, they'll be sent out to the membership for review within the next couple of weeks. Mr. Giffin does not appear to have had much experience with non-profits or he'd understand the work that's involved to do this, and, more importantly, do it RIGHT. While at the same time maintaining the Exams (and investigating possible improvements), the sanctioning program, the point records, and trying to improve communications. All the while with the active personnel scattered across the US. Now, for the first time, the BJCP has a Board that, despite some differing viewpoints, is able to work together to get things done. From my point of view, it seems that the only persons that are still perpetuating "all the faults of the former organization", such as the infighting, are persons like Mr. Giffin. Prosit! Greg Walz Mid-Atlantic Representative BJCP Board of Directors Pittsburgh, PA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Feb 1996 09:20:20 -0500 (EST) From: Fred Hardy Subject: 1996 Capitol District Open The Dulles Regional Brewing Society (DReBS) will sponsor the 1996 Capitol District Open homebrew competition on the first Saturday in November (November 2, 1996). We expect it will be held at the Hyatt Regency Washington hotel on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. We will be combining categories to compensate for small numbers of entries in some. We will use the 1996 AHA Style Guide and Guidelines for classifying entries and as the judge's guide. We will be awarding a beer best of show and a non-beer BoS (meads and ciders). Early mailings to our mailing list will go out in August. If you have entered before, judged, stewarded, in the mid-Atlantic BJCP database or requested entry material for a previous CDO, you are probably on the list. The competition is AHA Sanctioned and BJCP recognized. We expect the 1996 CDO to draw around 200 entries. Two bottles are required per entry. Start brewing and stay tuned. Cheers, Fred ============================================================================== We must invent the future, else it will | happen to us and we will not like it. | [Stafford Beer, "Platform for Change"] | email: fcmbh at access.digex.net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Feb 1996 11:06:50 -0800 (PST) From: David Klein Subject: Call of Judges SECOND ANNUAL WORLD CUP OF BEER HOMEBREW COMPETITION Homebrew Judges, In the spirit of recognizing the development of endemic styles of beer, the Bay Area Mashers are proud to present the 2nd annual World Cup of Beer Homebrew Competition. We invite you to enter and judge this event. The competition is sanctioned by the BJCP and AHA and is being sponsored by numerous west coast beer related businesses. The deadline for receiving entries is March 9, 1996; The judge registration deadline is also March 9, 1996. Final judging will be conducted on March 24, in Oakland. Like last year, we'll work to ensure a nice resturant environment, with proper beer serving temperatures, and clean glassware to ease your job. Ribbons and prizes will be awarded to 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place finishers in each category, and to Best of Show. After judging, we invite you to a party at the Barclays Pub and Restaurant to celebrate all efforts and award the winners. This will be an excellent opportunity to share homebrew and interact with the professional and amateur brewers who are reviving quality brewing in the Bay Area. For more information please check out out Web page at: http://www.hooked.net/users/regent/worldcup.htm For more judging information please mail me at klein at physics.berkeley.edu and let me know if you'ld like me to send you a judge registration packet, or if you would like to be registered by email. Sincerely, David Klein Judge Coordinator (510) 527-4508 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Feb 1996 16:45:18 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Krebs Subject: Knickerbocker Battle of the Brews The Saratoga Thoroughbrews Club, located in Saratoga Springs (NY) is hosting Upstate New York Capital Region#s first LARGE REGIONAL HOMEBREW COMPETITION on March 2. The region is home to pubs with extensive draught and bottle selections, 2 brew pubs and three in the making, a future microbrewery in Saratoga, yearly beer festivals, four or more homebrew clubs, and a large following of beer lovers. The competition is sanctioned by the American Homebrewers Association (AHA) and the Beer Judging Certification Program (BJCP), and will participate in the New York Brewer Award selection. The contest will be held at Holmes and Watson in Troy, NY on March 2. Troy is conveniently located at the intersection of Interstates 87 (NYC--Montreal) and 90 (Syracuse to the West) and Rts. 2 and 9 (Mass. and Vermont to the East). We are looking for a few good judges and stewards, but many would be better. Standard AHA categories will be offered. Mead and cider will be judged separately. If you are interested in judging or stewarding, please fill out the Call for Judges registration form in the package and mail it as soon as possible. If you can't attend the event, send your best brews and fight it out for the $250 gift certificate BEST OF SHOW PRIZE, courtesy of NORTH COUNTRY BREWERY, the future microbrewery of Saratoga Springs. The gift certificate will be redeemable at The Hoppy Troll in Saratoga Springs. All bottle types and carbonators (which will be returned) will be accepted. All categories will have first and second place prizes. Score sheets returned promptly. In order to keep this to a reasonable length, I have not included the full information packet. To receive a full competition packet, contact Paul Krebs at krebspv at gw.sunysccc.edu. Let me know whether you would prefer it by e-mail as an attached text file or a regular paper copy. Hope many of you can participate in one way or another. Paul Krebs Asst. Organizer ------------------------------ End of JudgeNet Digest ************************ -------