Return-Path: owner-judge at synchro.com Received: from srvr20.engin.umich.edu (root at srvr20.engin.umich.edu [141.212.2.26]) by srvr5.engin.umich.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA23591 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 11:46:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (0 at judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu [141.211.83.37]) by srvr20.engin.umich.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA28940 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 09:05:28 -0500 (EST) Received: by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.5/2.2) with X.500 id JAA01699; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 09:05:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from uu6.psi.com by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.5/2.2) with SMTP id JAA01694; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 09:05:24 -0500 (EST) Received: by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA29756 for spencer at umich.edu; Thu, 27 Mar 97 09:05:20 -0500 Received: (from majordom at localhost) by synchro.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA09078 for judge-digest-outgoing; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 08:33:11 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 08:33:11 -0500 Message-Id: <199703271333.IAA09078 at synchro.com> From: owner-judge-digest at synchro.com To: judge-digest at synchro.com Subject: judge-digest V1 #1413 Reply-To: judge at synchro.com Errors-To: owner-judge-digest at synchro.com Precedence: bulk judge-digest Thursday, 27 March 1997 Volume 01 : Number 1413 ============================================================================ 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 Subscriptions: judge-request at synchro.com Archive: http://realbeer.com/spencer/judge BJCP info: geninfo at bjcp.synchro.com ============================================================================ contents: PC during Competition.. Lots of Judges / Compact Guidelines Re: judge-digest V1 #1407 Re: style guidelines ... Blind judging Missing the point ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bill Giffin Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 11:03:45 -0600 Subject: PC during Competition.. Top of the morning to ye all, Barry DeLapp said: >There has been some discussion about using a computer and leaving it at >home for the actual event. IMHO that's like ordering Surf & Turf and >just eating the salad. > Hogwash! The computer at most of the competitions I have organized and judged only caused a bottle neck in the competititons. A COMPUTER IS NOT NEEDED. Pardon me for shouting. As I have said before and will again you don't need a computer to run a competition and it impedes the competition. No matter how good the computer program is you have to have data input. With each bit of data input there is alway a chance for error. If you avoid computer data input then the possiblity for error goes down. How many of you have had your beer judged in the wrong category due to a computer mistake? I have. Not only leave the computer at home don't even turn the foolish thing on. Bill ------------------------------ From: "Houseman, David L" Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 11:28:06 -0500 Subject: Lots of Judges / Compact Guidelines For Dion to get 40 judges for a competition of 200-250 is great. I wish we could have had 40 judges for our last competition of 332. We were able to judge 332 beers/ciders/meads from 10am to about 4:30pm with 30 judges. We only required two bottles per entry as well. I was a long judging day and judges judged two flights (or one long flight, morning and afternoon) for a total of about 25 beers each. They were great to put up with the quantity of beers to judge, but then that's what we were there for. This year we expect to have more entries, and hopefully more judges. If not we will be forced into judging some of the categories the day before with what judges we can find; many large competitions break up the competition over more than one day. So I'd see NO reason to limit a competition just because you could only get 40 judges!! On the question of a compact set of guidelines, I think that is needed primarily for competition mailings to keep the copying and postage costs down. The AHA and BJCP should, IMHO, have the SAME guidelines so that those that want to enter can reference what is printed in Zymurgy, what's available on the AHA or BJCP web sites, or what the club may send out. It makes it a whole lot easier on all involved if everyone is singing from the same hymnal, those that enter and those that judge. But to help the competition organizers, a compact summary from the BJCP would be helpful -- especially if the content were the same as the AHA - -- then they can simply reference people to the appropriate point for more details. Dave Houseman ------------------------------ From: Dion Hollenbeck Date: 26 Mar 1997 08:43:53 -0800 Subject: Re: judge-digest V1 #1407 >> C JOHN MARE writes: CJM> Dion, I can attest to the fact that you worked very hard to get CJM> judges, even from as far afield as Tucson! Recognizing that it CJM> would be hard to find more than 40 judges, could you not limit CJM> the competition to a given number of entries (say 200), or CJM> perhaps limit the number of entries per category. I'll try to CJM> make it to your fine competion again next year. Limiting entries in a category sounds like an intriguing idea, but how would one go about it? Given that we have no idea how many entries we have until the night we open and process them all, we would then have many entries that would have to be returned along with partial payment when a brewer has some entries accepted and some rejected. Sounds like more of a hassle than a help, unless someone has a method for doing it which has successfully worked. I would truly *love* to have some sort of limits on both a single category and the total amount of entries in the competition, but see no practical way to do this. Hoping you have the magic answer. B-} thanks, dion - -- 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: Dion Hollenbeck Date: 26 Mar 1997 09:06:39 -0800 Subject: Re: style guidelines ... >> Tom Fitzpatrick writes: TF> As a clarification, the BJCP Guidelines fit on FOUR double-sided, TF> 8 1/2 x 11 sheets. The AHA guidelines fit on three double-sided TF> sheets. A few people have contacted me about the size of the BJCP TF> guidelines. Would there be interest in a miniaturized version of TF> the guidelines that DOES fit on two sheets? The scaled down TF> version would probably have to do without the commercial examples TF> to fit on two sheets. Yes, anything which will save paper and hence postage would be welcome. However, since the AHA Style Guidelines are published in the Winter issue of Zymurgy, I can save even more postage by referring people to them, so until the BJCP Style Guidelines are published somewhere, we will probably choose to use the AHS Guidelines because it will save our competition a considerable amount of money in postage and printing. dion 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: kit.anderson at acornbbs.com Date: Wed, 26 Mar 97 16:41:27 -0500 Subject: Blind judging I recently started learning to judge BBQ for the Kansas City BBQ Society. The method in competitions is far different than beer judging. The scoring is done individually with no corroboration between judges. No form of communication, including smirks, grimaces, or "yumms!" are allowed. After the scores are turned in, discussion can ensue. All the scores from the judges (5 at the last competition I attended) are added together to get the final score. No revision is allowed. When the scores are posted, they are broken out by judge number, but no names are given. As a matter of courtesy, judges are expected to visit the sites of the contestants and discuss the scoring while offering helpful advice. As you might expect, there were some wild differences in scores, but everyone seems happy with the system. This seems to eliminate the possibility of stronger willed judges, whether they are right or not, influencing the final score. ------------------------------ From: "Rad Equipment" Date: 26 Mar 1997 14:07:12 U Subject: Missing the point Subject: Missing the point Time:7:39 AM Date:3/26/97 Chiming in on the Style Guidelines debate... Style Guidelines are NOT entry categories. Granted some organizers may choose to use them as such but generally they will not be used for this purpose. Every competition has the freedom to define its own entry categories. With any luck these categories will be built on styles which are described in the Style Guidelines but they need not follow the format of the guidelines when establishing entry categories. I may hold an event with a Pale Ale category which includes styles American Pale Ale, British Bitter, and IPA whose descriptions can be taken from the BJCP Style Guidelines. I am not required to group my entry categories to match the Style Guidelines nor must I include each and every style described by the Style Guidelines. >What if a brewer or meadmaker creates a beverage that contains both >fruits *and* herbs or fruits *and* spices or spices *and* herbs? Such a concoction would not fit into an acknowledged "style" and so would/should not be included in any Style Guidelines. That does not mean that you couldn't include a category for such things in your competition. Simply offer a "non-specific", "specialty", or "free-style" mead category where the entrant identifies the unique ingredients so the judges know what's in the entry. Defining styles of beer which are either currently commercially available or can be historically documented is not the same thing as setting parameters for homebrew competition entries. Competition categories should be determined based upon the size and resources of the specific competition as well as the targeted entrants. This is just my position, not necessarily that of the BJCP. RW... Russ Wigglesworth (INTERNET: Rad_Equipment at radmac1.ucsf.edu - RussWig at aol.com) UCSF Dept. of Radiology, San Francisco, CA (415) 476-3668 / Home (707) 769-0425 ------------------------------ End of judge-digest V1 #1413 **************************** Send subscription cancellations & changes to judge-request at synchro.com. Messages sent to the wrong address will be ignored.