Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 01:10:01 -0500
Message-Id: <199603150610.BAA00563 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 #1235 (Mar 14, 1996)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

JudgeNet Digest #1235                              Thu 14 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 <chuck at synchro.com>
             Archivist: Spencer Thomas <spencer at umich.edu>

      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:

  Re: Calibration beers                    (John A. DeCarlo)
  huh?                                     (Alan Folsom)
  Calibration Beer                         (Fred Hardy)
  A thought                                ("Kieran O'Connor")

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 96 07:42:38 -0500
From: jdecarlo at mail04.mitre.org (John A. DeCarlo)
Subject: Re: Calibration beers

Russ and Al make some very good points.

I find it somewhat instructive that when a competition gives every judge the
same calibration beer that the low is always 19 and the high always 45
<grin>.  Especially when the judges aren't told what category the beer is in
(expert judges should "know").

OTOH, a calibration beer in the style being judged should be used as a
discussion point.  If you are judging Belgian Wits and are given Wit! (or
even Amber Wit!), it should be clear to all the judges that this is not a
very good example of the style.  If it isn't clear at first, it should lead
to lots of discussion on the subject.  

So, as Russ suggests, talk about the calibration beer--don't just judge it. 
You may be given a very good but dark and syrupy barleywine--this may well
be the perfect opportunity to say something like "this is good, but I also
really like the blonde, highly hoppy barleywines, so we shouldn't be
necessarily looking for something exactly like this".

And if you are given De Troch Gueuze as calibration for Lambics, you can all
slam it or get into a spirited discussion about the legitimacy of the
"best-selling" part of the market as being to style. <big grin>.  Please, no
pushing or shoving!
 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 1996 05:34:37 -0800
From: folsom at ix.netcom.com (Alan Folsom)
Subject: huh?

Dennis Davison posted:

>The BJCP and the AHA are currently working toward an agreement. Since 
>the Board must decide, the letters from the BJCP are slightly slower 
>in going out to the AHA. We do have the best interest of the BJCP at 
>heart in this matter. I am hoping to have everything settled by July 
>1st.

Could someone elaborate on what this means?  I'm not looking for 
elaborate details, just, in general, what kind of "agreement" we are 
talking about?  I believe the AHA and BJCP need each other (although I 
also believe the AHA needs to move away from it's "Charlie & his Angels 
mode of autocracy), so I hope this implies something positive in that 
vein, but I don't understand the context of this statement.

Al Folsom


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 1996 15:46:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Fred Hardy <fcmbh at access.digex.net>
Subject: Calibration Beer


Hi, Folks. Here's another organizer taking up cyberspace. Al commented on 
the possibility that an old English ale was used as a calibration beer 
for the old English ale flight, and may have influenced the judges. The 
beer he named certainly would influence the judges if they were 
inexperienced enough to consider it a "benchmark" beer. It is usually 
classed as an old English ale, but it's profile falls outside of the AHA 
guidelines for the style. You don't have to like the guidelines, but you 
should follow them.

I agree with Russ' take on calibration beers. At the Capitol District 
Open it is used as an icebreaker, or "throw away" first brew. It gets 
judges talking and is a non-threatening way to get into the swing of 
things. The beer we select may or may not be commercial, with or without 
faults. As long as it is somewhat neutral in profile it will do nicely.

If we use a commercial beer we do not disclose the brewer until after 
the score sheets are collected. We may not even be truthful on the style, 
as long as it is similar to the icebreaker. A cream ale judged as a 
Bohemian Pilsner can give judges something to talk about. Last year we 
used a test brew from a commercial establishment to provide the brewer 
with feedback. This year, who knows?

I echo Russ' observation that getting good benchmark beers for each style 
is not practical, and may not be possible. It's just beer, so use the 
icebreaker to set the tone for what should be a fun day for the judges.

A final word for judges who score early beers low to make room for a 
better beer later in the flight: Don't do that. This is not ice skating. 
Beers should be judged by guidelines and what is in the glass. If your 
flight ends up with 4 brews which scored 43, you enjoyed some great beer. 
All you have to do is rank order the great beers. Tough job, but someone 
has to do it.

Cheers, Fred

==============================================================================
We must invent the future, else it will  |          <Fred Hardy>
happen to us and we will not like it.    |
[Stafford Beer, "Platform for Change"]   |    email: fcmbh at access.digex.net


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 1996 20:59:04 -0500 (EST)
From: "Kieran O'Connor" <koconnor at syr.edu>
Subject: A thought

I've been thinking about the score sheets a bit. I wonder if we might be 
able to consolidate the body section into the flavor section. That would 
mean that flavor would be 24 points, instead of 19. That is what is 
currently on mead sheets.

Personally I have a hard time with the body section since if the body is 
good--I don't want to give a 4 because I need to keep the beer at a 29. 
With the body section collapsed into the flavor section--it might be easier.

Your thoughts?


Kieran

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Kieran O'Connor

koconnor at syr.edu
Syracuse, N.Y. USA

                  In vino veritas; in cervesio felicitas.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


------------------------------

End of JudgeNet Digest
************************
-------