Return-Path: owner-judge at synchro.com Received: from srvr7.engin.umich.edu (root at srvr7.engin.umich.edu [141.212.2.69]) by srvr5.engin.umich.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA04729 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 08:47:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from redheat.rs.itd.umich.edu (0 at redheat.rs.itd.umich.edu [141.211.83.36]) by srvr7.engin.umich.edu (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id IAA15865 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 08:47:16 -0500 (EST) Received: by redheat.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.5/2.2) with X.500 id IAA14360; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 08:47:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from relay2.smtp.psi.net by redheat.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.5/2.2) with ESMTP id IAA14343; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 08:47:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from uu6.psi.com by relay2.smtp.psi.net (8.8.3/SMI-5.4-PSI) id IAA01113; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 08:46:56 -0500 (EST) Received: by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA08900 for juknalis at ARSERRC.Gov; Fri, 7 Feb 97 08:46:44 -0500 Received: (from majordom at localhost) by synchro.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA02184 for judge-digest-outgoing; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 08:13:06 -0500 Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 08:13:06 -0500 Message-Id: <199702071313.IAA02184 at synchro.com> From: owner-judge-digest at synchro.com To: judge-digest at synchro.com Subject: judge-digest V1 #1378 Reply-To: judge at synchro.com Errors-To: owner-judge-digest at synchro.com Precedence: bulk judge-digest Friday, 7 February 1997 Volume 01 : Number 1378 ============================================================================ J u d g e N e t - t h e b e e r j u d g e d i g e s t ============================================================================ Moderator: Chuck Cox Archivist: Spencer Thomas Publisher: SynchroSystems Submissions: judge at synchro.com Administration: judge-request at synchro.com Archive: http://realbeer.com/spencer/judge BJCP info: geninfo at bjcp.synchro.com ============================================================================ contents: 8th Annual Dredhop HomeBrew Competition Immediate feedback on judging more judges? Re: Judge training / Score sheets Poor Judging, etc ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jac at access.usa.net (John A. Carlson, Jr.) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 10:25:11 -0700 (MST) Subject: 8th Annual Dredhop HomeBrew Competition 8th Annual Reggale & Dredhop Homebrew Competition Hop Barley & The Alers invites you to enter the 8th Annual Reggale & Dredhop Homebrew Competition. We will accept all homebrewed beer and mead. This competition is AHA sanctioned and will have twelve categories. Medals will be awarded to 1st place entries in each Category. Ribbons will be awarded to 2nd and 3rd place in each Category. Ribbons for Best of Show in Beer and Mead will be awarded. Prizes will also be awarded. The first place winner in the Brown Ale Category will be selected to work with the Brewers at the One Keg Brew House to scale up their recipe and brew it! The beer will be sold to Old Chicago's. Check out more details about the Dredhop on the web at: http://members.aol.com/hopbarley/index.html or contact Bob Kauffman at 303-828-1237 Rules & Regulations Eligibility All entries should be handcrafted products, containing ingredients available to the general public. Categories Each beer will be judged according to the 1997 AHA national homebrew competition classification it is entered under. Beers of similar styles will be grouped together to allow for manageable judging sessions and reasonable competition. First place winners in each Category will be judged in a final round to determine the Best of Show beer and Best of Show mead. An entry shall consist of two bottles, 10 - 22 ounce, clean of all paper or printed or enameled labels, label adhesive, misc. debris, raised designs or brand names, or any other distinguishing features. Clear glass, wire swing-top (Gr=F6lsh) type, corked, and oversized (22 oz, champagne) are acceptable. Printed crown caps are acceptable but must be blacked out completely with black marker to assure anonymity. Bottles will not be returned to entrants. Paperwork Each bottle shall have an bottle ID form attached with a rubber band. Glue or tape are unacceptable. A single recipe form must accompany each entry (one recipe form per 2 bottles, one bottle ID form per bottle). Enter your beer according to the 1997 AHA national homebrew competition styles -- a chart of these classifications is attached. Please fill out the entry forms completely. Be meticulous about noting special ingredients you want brought to the judges attention when entering categories 3c, 20b, 20c, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27. Limitations Brewers are limited to one entry per AHA subcategory. Entry Fees An entry fee of $4 per entry will be collected on the first two entries (1&2). Additional entries (3 thru ?) will be $3 per entry. Attach it to the Entry and Recipe form. Make checks payable to: Hop Barley & the Alers. PLEASE INCLUDE ONE SELF ADDRESSED STAMPED BUSINESS SIZE ENVELOPE =46OR EACH ENTRY SUBMITTED. The Fine Print Disqualified beers may be judged but will not be eligible for awards. The judges may decide to not award all places in any Category. The decision of the judges is final. The Best Brown Ale winner must be available to work with the One Keg Brew House (i.e. live in Colorado). Where To Enter Entries are to arrive between Friday February 14, 1997 and 5:00 p.m. Friday =46ebruary 21, 1997. Late entries will neither be returned nor judged. To minimize the impact on the businesses accepting entries please have a check or the exact change attached to your recipe forms. What's Brewing - Boulder What's Brewing - Longmont (use this site if mailing in your entry) 1011 Main Street 2886 Bluff Street Longmont, CO 80501 Bolder, CO 80301 (303) 772-8363 (303) 444-9433 Wine & Hop Shop HomeBrew Hut Brew Ha Ha 705 E. 6th Ave. 555 Hwy. 287 Unit I 708 8th Street Denver, CO 80203 Broomfield, CO 80020 Greely, CO 80631 (303) 831-7229 (303) 460-1776 (970) 356-1566 Judging The judging will take place from 9:00 am - 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, March 1, 1997 at the Old Chicago restaurant in Boulder. The Best Brown Ale will be brewed at the One Keg Brew House Brewpub to be sold at Old Chicago's throughout the Front Range. Judging information has been sent to area BJCP judges. If you are not a registered BJCP judge, and would like to judge at the competition please contact John Carlson at jac at usa.net. Stewards and apprentice judges are always welcome. Awards Ceremony & Celebration An awards ceremony will start around 6:00 p.m. on Saturday March 1 at the Boulder Old Chicago. Please attend! Medals, Ribbons and prizes will be handed out. Food and beer will be available. ------------------------------ From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 12:21:31 -0800 Subject: Immediate feedback on judging Hi all, Larry Matthews wrote about the gratification and usefulness of judges being able to review the score sheets that they filled out with the recipe in front of them. I couldn't agree more with this. At the Salt City Contest (Syracuse, NY) last November the organizers had the score sheets available for contestants right after the contest. This enabled entrants to discuss their scores with the judges that scored them. I left there feeling good because two entrants (who were also judges) complimented my judging of their beers (even the one that I gave a mediocre score to). I can only hope that the other contestants were pleased, too. It would be very useful for judges to receive copies of their score sheets with the recipes for review. I'm sure that we would all learn a lot! Of course, that adds a lot to the organizer's burden. I'm helping to organize a contest this spring. I may try this. I include my E-mail address on every score sheet, but have yet to receive any comments, good or bad. How about the rest of you? Have fun! George De Piro (Nyack, NY) ------------------------------ From: "Bryan L. Gros" Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 11:53:17 -0600 (CST) Subject: more judges? As evidenced by yesterday's judge digest, the number of homebrew competitions continues to grow. Seems that every weekend there is more than one competition going on. Does this make it harder to get good judges? Are there enough judges to "go around"? I also agree with others that feedback and continuing education is the key to keeping judges aware of the problems we face. Most of us on this digest will tend to keep these problems in mind when judging: elevating the status of bigger beers, not providing adequate feedback when deducting points, and maybe palate fatigue. There are many judges, however, that aren't explicitly aware of these common problems. Perhaps local judges should get together to practice judging in addition to homebrew club meetings. Maybe regional judging "seminars" or practice sessions could be organized. - Bryan grosbl at ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu Nashville, TN ------------------------------ From: Dion Hollenbeck Date: 06 Feb 1997 10:18:45 -0800 Subject: Re: Judge training / Score sheets >> George De Piro writes: GDP> Yesterday I wrote describing my recent experience with poor GDP> judging, and mentioned that I didn't know what to do about it. GDP> Well, I was thinking (ouch) about this on my drive home last GDP> night and was wondering: Do we (the BJCP) have a syllabus GDP> available to people that coordinate judging classes? GDP> If we don't, shouldn't we? This would increase the chances of GDP> creating a pool of qualified judges who all score with uniform GDP> technique, regardless of geography. Well, if our results in giving a class are any indication, our use of Greg Walz's BJCP Study Guide was very useful. Out of 11 people taking the test for the first time, we had 9 pass, two with 70+ and two with 80. We used about 200 pages of "supplementary" material in addition to Gerg's guide, but it was what we used as our "outline". It is my belief that the poor judging that you refer to has more to do with laziness on the part of the judges for doing it and on the part of the organizers for accepting it. I feel that it is the organizer's duty to "police" the judges. And if we consistently bounce score sheets back to a judge to immediately correct, they will get the idea that this is not acceptable. Or so I hope. We will be doing this for the first time this year and informing the judges in their briefing that the stewards will be instructed to bring to the attention of the organizer, any sheets which appear to be "scanty". dion QUAFF President Organizer America's Finest City Homebrew Competition March 8, 1997 Quality Ale and Fermentation Fraternity, Sponsor http://www.vigra.com/~hollen/AFCHBC.html - --- Dion Hollenbeck (619)597-7080x164 Email: hollen at vigra.com http://www.vigra.com/~hollen Sr. Software Engineer - Vigra Div. of Visicom Labs San Diego, California ------------------------------ From: David E Drinkwater-Lunn (David Drinkwater) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 23:53:39 -0600 Subject: Poor Judging, etc There seems to be a good discussion going on here. I admit I tend to stockpile these emailings and not always read them, but I'll chime in... I'll apologize up front for being a bit wordy... On the issue of getting back judging feedback: it's great for a brewer to get back the feedback on judging sheet comments, yes, and that is hopefully part of our motivation in judging. But I'm a little torn on getting back feedback on my judging. That's not to say that I wouldn't like or benefit from it. But it would be a lot more work to extend that service. (For the BJCP, and for the judges, who might then be expected to keep tabs on thier performance, above and beyond their efforts to simply render a service. I jnoy judging and don't want to spoil that by turnign it into a "job" of sorts. Communication between judges, while verboten in some people's eyes, is probably the best way we have to improve judges performance. Clearly, this does require that good information be communicated, and that can be difficult to control. To wit (so to speak), there is room for some confusion with a German wheat beer. A Hefeweizen need not be cloudy in the bottle. It is the addition of the yeast to the brew (which may require and active stirring process, best learned from a southern German soul - and greatly enjoyable to observe, I might add) that will make it cloudy. It should be possible to decant the beer from the bottle and get it clear. The Hefeweizen style should not be consumed in this manner, however. If you want a clear German wheat beer, order yourself a Kristallweizen. Here, as with any style, presentation is important. If you shake up the yeast cake in any bottle, you can make the beer cloudy. >Why just pick on the Certified judges? There are Master and National >judges who fall into the same category. That's a scary thought. Judging at 20 competitions should impart some knowledge of styles. Similarly, scoring an 80 or above on the test should require some demonstration of actual knowledge of styles. Both are madatory to a National ranking. There will, of course, always be people who get lame-*ss judging point and exam scores. I seem to recall, however, that there was some complaint a year or two back that "it was just unreasonable to require or expect someone to get a 60 on teh exam to become a Rcognized judge." At Cornell, well, in Ithaca, we did a pretty good job of pre-exam preparation with weekly tastings and discussions of styles. I think know a fair bit, and I got a 71 on the test. I would like to think that it would take a fair bit more knowledge to get that 80 or 90. So much for using the exam to qualify and rank people. We cannot forget that judging points are required to advance. That's five or ten points that every test-taker should get. If the question is about breadth of knowledge, perhaps arrangements should be made for judges to judge in their particlar areas of expertise. Having lived in Germany and spent time touring for the specific purpose of getting to know the bastions of several German styles, I think I'm qualified to judge them better than most judges. Somehow I end up judging first round pale ales at competitions. *ptui* This leads me to another point about styles. If I say an Alt isn't hoppy enough (*Zum Uerige* means effectively, "earthy"), locals say, "that's not what an American expects." If it claims to be a Duesseldorfer Altbier... On appropriate OG and FG and brewing methods: if we don't have the recipe and process, as is dicussed in Larry Matthews post, it is tough to figure out where the flaws come from. I, personally, am not a masher, so I'm not a particularly knowledgeable recipe formulator. But I do see common themes like temperature controll and yeast pitching recurring often enough to suggest better chilling/cooling or higher pitching etc. It would, in a lot of ways, be an aid to us judges to recieve a recipe and processing plan for the beers we are about to judge. That way, it doesn't have to be "good luck" as Larry Matthes posted, or even "remarkable talent" that some judge knows where a beers flaw may come from. I think that in answer to George's productive question on syllabi and the like, we can surely point to enough literature by Dave Miller, Micheal Jackson, and the like, to give a beginning beer judge a fairly good start. If you want a graduat education in brewing, pick up a journal and start following the reference list. Research is research. I'd rather leave that at the office... We are all volunteers and hobbyists for the most part, so there really should be some room for tolerance in the judging and brewing community. David Drinkwater - -- David Drinkwater, drin0004 at tc.umn.edu, NetNick=Demodave, Homepage: http://umn.edu/home/drin0004 Chilling in Minneapolis at the University of Minnesota Happy to hear from you! :-) ------------------------------ End of judge-digest V1 #1378 **************************** Send subscription cancellations & changes to judge-request at synchro.com. Messages sent to the wrong address will be ignored.