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 (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA28457 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 02:24:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu [141.211.83.37]) by srvr8.engin.umich.edu (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA17086 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 02:23:31 -0500 (EST) Received: by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.4/2.2) with X.500 id CAA02898; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 02:23:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from uu6.psi.com by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.4/2.2) with SMTP id CAA02892; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 02:23:29 -0500 (EST) Received: by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA27649 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 96 01:39:41 -0500 Received: (from listadm at localhost) by synchro.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA00639 for judge-recipients at synchro.com; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 01:10:00 -0500 Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 01:10:00 -0500 Message-Id: <199603050610.BAA00639 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 #1228 (Mar 04, 1996) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ JudgeNet Digest #1228 Mon 04 Mar 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: AFCHBC Competition Results (hollen) Re: JudgeNet Digest #1226 (Mar 01, 1996) (M.P. Manning) Judging points (Scott Bickham) Talking About Comments (John DeCarlo ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Mar 96 17:40:43 PST From: hollen at vigra.com Subject: AFCHBC Competition Results Third Annual America's Finest City Homebrew Competition Results QUAFF Homebrew Club of San Diego. California is pleased to announce the results of our third annual competition. We would like to thank all brewers, judges, and stewards who participated and helped to make this a successful event. Once again, the proportion of excellent beers we received was very high. Individual score sheets and ribbons will be mailed out to the brewers within a week. The trophy for Best of Show, an engraved beer glass with the QUAFF logo, the competition information, the brewer's name and beer will take a while longer since it is being custom made. Due to some categories having insufficient entries, those categories were combined with other categories for purposes of scoring. Ribbons were awarded for the combined categories together. To prevent beers which are not "Ribbon Quality" from placing for an award solely because they happened to be the only beer entered in a category, minimum scoring requirements were placed. To be awarded a First Place Ribbon, a minimum of 35 points must be scored, for Second Place, 30 points, and for Third Place, 25 points. Barley Wine (01) English and Scottish Strong Ale (10) 10 Entries total Barlery Wine 01 First Greg & Liz Lorton (Quaff) Barlery Wine 01 Second Rich Link (Quaff) English and Scottish Strong Ale 10 Third Ray Greflein & James Selgrath (No Club Affiliation) - ------------------------------------------------------------------ Belgian and French Ale (02) Belgian-Style Lambic (03) 7 Entries Total Belgian and French Ale 02 First, Best of Show Honorable Mention Rich Link (Quaff) Belgian and French Ale 02 Second Harold Gottschalk (Quaff) Belgian-Style-Lambic 03 Third Fred Waltman & Steve LaBrie (Pacific Gravity) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mild and Brown Ale (04) 7 Entries Total Mild and Brown Ale 04 First, Best of Show Honorable Mention Fred Waltman & Steve LaBrie (Pacific Gravity) Mild and Brown Ale 04 Second Greg & Liz Lorton (Quaff) Mild and Brown Ale 04 Third Brian Jones (Barley Literates) - --------------------------------------------------------------- English-style Pale Ale (05) English Bitter (07) Scottish Ale (08) 12 Entries Total English-Style Pale Ale 05 First Rich Link (Quaff) English-Style Pale Ale 05 Second Tod Fitzsimmons (Quaff) Scottish Ale 08 Third Carol Satterblom (Pacific Gravity) - ----------------------------------------------------------- American-style Ale (06) 13 Entries total American Style Ale 06 First Rich Link (Quaff) American Style Ale 06 Second Tod Fitzsimmons (Quaff) American Style Ale 06 Third James Mackey (Barley Literates) - ---------------------------------------------------------------- Porter (09) 15 Entries Total Porter 09 First, Best of Show Tod Fitzsimmons (Quaff) Porter 09 Second Uwe Boer (Foam on the Brain) Porter 09 Third Tiffany Nyrkkanen (Pacific Gravity) - --------------------------------------------------------- Stout (11) 9 Entries total Stout 11 First, Best of Show First Runnerup Fred Waltman & Steve LaBrie (Pacific Gravity) Stout 11 Second Uwe Boer (Foam on the Brain) Stout 11 Third Rich Link (Quaff) - ---------------------------------------------------- Bock (12) 7 Entries total Bock 12 First, Best of Show Honorable Mention Frank Leers & Bobby Sparks (Quaff) Bock 12 Second Brian Jones (Barley Literates) Bock 12 Third Dan Sherman (Quaff) - ------------------------------------------------------------------- German Dark Lager (13) German Light Lager (14) Classic Pilsner (15) American Lager (16) Vienna/Marzen/Oktoberfest (17) 9 Entries Total No First Place Awarded German Dark Lager 13 Second Erol Kilki (Quaff) American Lager 16 Third Patrick Mckee (Temecula Valley Homebrewer's Assoc.) - ------------------------------------------------------------- German-style Wheat Beer (19) 9 Entries total German-style Wheat Beer 19 First Jeff Lannon (No Club Affiliation) German-style Wheat Beer 19 Second Dirk Niemeyer, Brad Ebright & Mike McAllister (No Club Affiliation) German-style Wheat Beer 19 Third Greg & Liz Lorton (Quaff) - ------------------------------------------------------- Smoked Beer (20) Specialty Beer (23) Fruit and Vegetable Mead (26) 7 Entries Total Smoked Beer 20 First Fred Waltman & Steve LaBrie (Pacific Gravity) Specialty Beer 23 Second Fred Waltman & Steve LaBrie (Pacific Gravity) Specialty Beer 23 Third Antoinette Hodges & Cher Cunningham (No Club Affiliation) - -------------------------------------------------------------- Fruit and Vegetable Beer (21) Herb and Spice Beer (22) 10 entries total Herb and Spice Beer 22 First, Best of Show Second Runnerup Tod Fitzsimmons (Quaff) Herb and Spice Beer 22 Second Jim Weiner (No Club Affiliation) Fruit and Vegetable Beer 21 Third Fred Waltman & Steve LaBrie (Pacific Gravity) - ------------------------------------------------------------------- German-style Ale (18) California Common Beer (24) 7 Entries total California Common Beer 24 First, Best of Show Honorable Mention Steve Rittenhouse (Pacific Gravity) California Common Beer 24 Second Patrick, Mckee (Temecula Valley Homebrewer's Assoc.) California Common Beer 24 Third Tod Fitzsimmons (Quaff) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Mar 1996 21:56:18 -0500 From: mannin29 at eos.eos.net (M.P. Manning) Subject: Re: JudgeNet Digest #1226 (Mar 01, 1996) Bill Giffin Wrote: >Athough the points per beer is an interesting idea; It provide no more >information about the qualifications of a judge then the present system. >Why add complexity for no gain. The point was not to provide more information, but to more closely tie a judge's point total and rank to his or her actual experience judging beer in competitions. I see this as an improvement over the current system. Martin Manning Cincinnati, Ohio, USA ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:27:27 -0500 (EST) From: Scott Bickham Subject: Judging points Martin's proposal about a different system for awarding points has generated an interesting discussion, and those issues are exactly the ones we should be discussing on JudgeNet. Personal attacks and poor efforts at creative writing should be left at home. The best argument against Martin's proposal is the issue of alcoholic strength. A typical flight of beers should have 12 or fewer beers, but this number should be smaller for strong beers and meads where it takes fewer entries to saturate one's palate. The solution is to prorate the judging points by the average O.G. of the beers in the flight, but that's making things a bit too complicated. Another argument which was touched upon is competetion to judge the flights with higher number of entries. This would put pressure upon the organizer, just as there is when divying up the Best of Show slots, to try to satisfy as many judges as possible. Organizers could also have the same beers judged in the week preceding the competition to make more points available to local judges. I find it much simpler to give equal points, either by judging flight or by the size of the competition, than to make the system more complicated. Martin asked about points for Best of Show judges. Except at the AHA Nationals, Best of Show judges usually receive one more point than the other judges, and I think this is reasonable. It usually is rewarding to taste the beers that make it to the Best of Show round, but it's still work and a learning experience. This brings up the question of what the BJCP will do with the AHA Nationals this year. Though I haven't been involved in the discussion, it looks like the BJCP will consider each first round and the finals as a separate competition. One problem is that with seven first round sites, there may be fewer than 500 entries at some of the sites. In this case, judges will only earn one point regardless of the number of flights judged, while those at sites with more than 500 entries will earn 0.5 point per flight with a limit of 2 points for the event. It would really suck to have 498 entries at your regional site! On the other hand, (7)(24)(3)=504 beers will advance to the second round, qualifying it as a large competition. I would personally like to see 2 points awarded to anyone who judges all three flights at the first round sites, and 2 points to those who judge at the AHA Conference. Regardless of your opinion of the AHA, judging at these events is always a learning experience and the more incentive we can give judges to participate, the better the program will become. Cheers, Scott Bickham ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Mar 96 12:55:52 EST From: John DeCarlo Subject: Talking About Comments Of all the methods I have been involved with, my favorite is to have each judge write down all the comments first and numbers as well. Then discuss the comments and see what happens. I will use my eraser from time to time as well as add other comments based on talking with fellow judges. OTOH, I try not to simply copy something I didn't taste. If I suddenly realize after talking to another judge that a harsh taste I wasn't identifying is metallic, I will add the word metallic after my harsh flavor comment. OYAH, if I don't taste the DMS, I won't add it to my comments even if everyone else does. And, I have no compunction about peeking at a fellow judge's scoresheet. I have yet to recommend someone write more, but I now feel *empowered*. John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org ------------------------------ End of JudgeNet Digest ************************ -------