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 KAA09396 for ; Sat, 19 Apr 1997 10:30:54 -0400 (EDT) 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 KAA23900 for ; Sat, 19 Apr 1997 10:30:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.5/2.2) with X.500 id KAA17798; Sat, 19 Apr 1997 10:30:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from uu6.psi.com by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.5/2.2) with SMTP id KAA17773; Sat, 19 Apr 1997 10:30:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA20320 for spencer at umich.edu; Sat, 19 Apr 97 10:30:34 -0400 Received: (from majordom at localhost) by synchro.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA28413 for judge-digest-outgoing; Sat, 19 Apr 1997 10:08:54 -0400 Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 10:08:54 -0400 Message-Id: <199704191408.KAA28413 at synchro.com> From: owner-judge-digest at synchro.com To: judge-digest at synchro.com Subject: judge-digest V1 #1425 Reply-To: judge at synchro.com Errors-To: owner-judge-digest at synchro.com Precedence: bulk Status: O X-Status: judge-digest Saturday, 19 April 1997 Volume 01 : Number 1425 ============================================================================ 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: Re: Judging points Secret recipe judging "styles" American Wheat Re: Can You Read Recipes... Re: judge-digest V1 #1424 Recipe? Re: Style vs. Style Guidelinews ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bickham Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 09:40:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Judging points George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro) wrote > I would like to throw in my .02 about the relatively new system for > awarding experience points to judges. In my opinion, it is neither > fair nor equitable. > > In the old system, one earned more points for judging at larger > events. While I agree that a judge should get at least 1 point > regardless of contest size (the effort of showing up is worth a lot to > me), I believe that it is only right to award more points to people > that are evaluating more beers. > > For example, at a recent contest, I judged 9 beers. I got 1 point. > At a larger contest back in Nov., I judged 18 beers. I got 1 point. The statement that one earned more points for judging in larger events in the old system is wrong. Those additional points only applied at very large competitions such as the AHA first round and the Dixie Cup. If you judged one session at a competition with 76 entries, you would get one point, as you would if you judged four sessions at a competition with 499 entries. The basics of the new system are: 1. Minimum of one point earned per competition. I have several half points on my record from competitions with less than 75 entries, so this is a welcome change. 2. Maximum on one point per competition day, not including BOS. 3. Flat 0.5 point for BOS judges, regardless of size. 4. Maximum points allowed scale with competition size. Dion mentioned a few days ago about judging at a competition with 200 entries. According to the guidelines, judges receive a minimum of one point and a maximum of 1.5 points of they judge in three sessions over two calender days. The solution is obvious - have one or two prejudging sessions so that local judges can pick up the extra 0.5 point, and this makes it easier to hand out the 0.5 BOS point to qualified out of towners the next day. With very little fancy stepping, nearly everyone can get 1.5 points for judging. Although I do have a degree in rocket science (well, sort of), it wasn't necessary to figure this out. JCalen at aol.com wrote: I know a little bit about the story that John alluded to, but here is my interpretation of the recipe. Partial mash aside, a recipe with 8 oz. chocolate malt, 7 oz. of black patent, 1 oz. of roast barley, molasses and aroma hops screams out robust porter. The OG of 1.059 and IBUs of 50+ are also appropriate, but I would consider calling a high gravity version of this recipe an imperial stout. Flip flop the black malt and roast barley and you might have something similar to bottled Guinness. Good brewing, Scott ------------------------------ From: Btalk at aol.com Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 11:02:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Secret recipe John Calen asks what style the recipe would produce. I'll stick my neck out and say Robust Porter. The molasses and brown sugar flavors may act to balance some of that black patent... The Laaglander extracts tend to leave a lot of unfermentables, helping to boost the body. later, Bob Talkiewicz, Binghamton, NY ------------------------------ From: DAVE_SAPSIS at fire.ca.gov (DAVE SAPSIS) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 08:12:07 -0700 Subject: judging "styles" The thread about how a judge should meld his understanding of a style with the style guidelines presented in a given competition raises the age old issue (in my mind intractable) of universal agreement about something that is both subjective and dynamic. Here is what we did for our comp, where the style guidelines were kluged together from Steve Stroud's, Tim Dawson's, and my own interpretations: Right at the header of the style guidelines I put: "Please note: these are meant only as guidelines". I had also included after the above: "subject to both brewer and judge interpretation" but that got formatted out because it was the text that pushed the guidelines over two pages. Next year I will make sure it fits. cheers, --dave dave_sapsis at fire.ca.gov ------------------------------ From: Jeremy Bergsman Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 08:48:22 -0700 Subject: American Wheat What is the appropriate body for an American Wheat? I would say low body is appropriate--I think of this as a summer refresher. The BJCP guidelines agree. But I have had two commercial examples recently with pretty full body. One of these is well-known: Red Hook's "Hefe Weizen". Is the use of a large portion of wheat going ensure a big body, or is this under the brewer's control with protein rests etc.? Comments? - -- Jeremy Bergsman jeremybb at stanford.edu http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~jeremybb ------------------------------ From: hall at galt.c3.lanl.gov (Michael L. Hall) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 10:15:50 -0600 Subject: Re: Can You Read Recipes... John Calen asks if we can name the style of this recipe: > 4 lbs Laaglander Light Dry Malt > 1 lb Munton & Fison Wheat Dry Malt > 2 lbs English Pale Ale Malt > 0.5 lb Dark Crystal Malt > 0.5 lb Mild Ale Malt > 0.5 lb Chocolate Malt > 7 oz Black Patent Malt > 1 oz Roasted Barley > 0.33 cup Molasses > 0.33 cup Brown Sugar > 4 gm Brew Salts > 1 tspn Gypsum > 1 tspn Irish Moss > 1 oz Eroica Pellets-13 A for boil 60 minutes > 1 oz Fuggles Pellets aroma 2 minutes > single step infusion mash at 158 degrees > OG 1.059 FG 1.015 > Wyeast 1056 > Primary 7 days at 70 degrees > Secondary 12 days at 65 degrees I notice first that it uses dark malts and English finishing hops, along with the Chico Ale yeast. This directs me toward porters and stouts. The brew salts and gypsum also indicate an English ale. The OG seems high at 1.059, but calculating the IBUs from the Eroica hops (which are obviously used for their high AA%) gives about 42, which means that it won't be overwhelmingly sweet. Taking a look at the OGs and IBUs from Tim Dawson's style guide (located at http://alpha.rollanet.org/library/StylesTD.html): Style OG IBUs Robust Porter 1.040-1.058 25-40 Brown Porter 1.040-1.050 20-30 Dry Stout 1.036-1.055 25-40 Foreign Stout 1.050-1.070 25-60 Imperial Stout 1.075-1.095 50-90+ Sweet Stout 1.038-1.056 15-25 Oatmeal Stout 1.038-1.056 15-25 shows that this beer is most centered in the Foreign Stout range. HOWEVER, I also noticed that this beer has only 1 oz. of roasted barley. Most of the color and flavor of dark malts will come from the 8 oz. of Chocolate and 7 oz. of black patent. I'm of the opinion (I know this can be a religious issue) that stouts must contain roasted barley, and more than just an ounce, so I would have to say that this is a Robust Porter, on the high end of the range. - -Mike +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Michael L. Hall, Ph.D. | | President, Los Alamos Atom Mashers | | Member, AHA Board of Advisors | +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ From: Tom Fitzpatrick Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 11:37:58 -0500 Subject: Re: judge-digest V1 #1424 > From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro) > Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 11:16:23 -0700 > Subject: RE: Fairness of awarding judging points > > Hi all, > > I would like to throw in my .02 about the relatively new system for > awarding experience points to judges. In my opinion, it is neither > fair nor equitable. > > In the old system, one earned more points for judging at larger > events. While I agree that a judge should get at least 1 point > regardless of contest size (the effort of showing up is worth a lot to > me), I believe that it is only right to award more points to people > that are evaluating more beers. > > For example, at a recent contest, I judged 9 beers. I got 1 point. > At a larger contest back in Nov., I judged 18 beers. I got 1 point. > > What is fair and equitable about that? It is most illogical to > conclude that a judge gained the same experience judging 9 beers as > they did when judging 18. What is the point of this new system? To > ensure that it would take longer to earn promotions? > > That's just my opinion. If somebody can offer a logical reason for > this new system to exist, I'd be glad to hear it. Perhaps the BJCP > DOES want it to take longer to earn promotions, reasoning that a judge > gains more experience from attending many contests, regardless of > size, as opposed to attending fewer, larger contests. If that is the > case, it should be stated as such. > > Have fun! > > George De Piro (Nyack, NY) > George, I think anyone who has judged in more than 15 or 20 competitions will tell you that there is absolutely no relationship between the size of the competition and the number of beers you end up judging. Your misconception is that there is some linear relationship between competition size and number of beers judged. I've judged at small to medium comps that had a severe shortage of judges; in one extreme case I judged 42 beers over two sessions in one day! Under the old and new system I get one point. I've also judged at the AHA 1st round nationals in Chicago where there are plenty of judges. I judged about half as many beers as in my first example and under the old system got 3 points! If you want to take the fairness and equitable point distribution to an extreme, you would set up a system that awarded points for each beer judged. Of course administering such a system would be an absolute nightmare. I think the current award system is an improvement over the old system, but there will always be examples where it seems inequitable. Sometimes you get amply rewarded for your efforts, sometimes not. I think it tends to even out over time. - -Tom ------------------------------ From: kit.anderson at acornbbs.com Date: Fri, 18 Apr 97 15:08:40 -0500 Subject: Recipe? >It is a dark ale. If you were going to brew a partial mash dark ale >this weekend you might consider giving this recipe a try. I felt the >beer was excellent -- but in what style? 4 lbs Laaglander Light Dry Malt 1 lb Munton & Fison Wheat Dry Malt 2 lbs English Pale Ale Malt 0.5 lb Dark Crystal Malt 0.5 lb Mild Ale Malt 0.5 lb Chocolate Malt 7 oz Black Patent Malt 1 oz Roasted Barley 0.33 cup Molasses 0.33 cup Brown Sugar 4 gm Brew Salts 1 tspn Gypsum 1 tspn Irish Moss 1 oz Eroica Pellets-13 A for boil 60 minutes 1 oz Fuggles Pellets aroma 2 minutes single step infusion mash at 158 degrees OG 1.059 FG 1.015 Wyeast 1056 Primary 7 days at 70 degrees Secondary 12 days at 65 degrees I'd say an American Sweet Stout. ------------------------------ From: Lowell Hart Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 16:23:33 Subject: Re: Style vs. Style Guidelinews Howdy, I thought I'd throw a spanner into the works here and point out that some judges' notions of beer styles (their experience) can be quite different from more commonly held notions (traditional styles) which, as already discussed, are often different from AHA and individual style guidelines (the contest rules). The new judges' notion is one I've heard referred to as "current commercial practice" and often has little to do with traditional concepts. My example (and rant) is of an IPA I entered in a well-known California competition, which was judged by a very well-known judge. My IPA was orange, a color well within the color guidelines provided by the organizers, well within the range of golden "...to copper". My judge sheets came back with the comment "IPAs are much lighter these days" and points down for the wrong color. Between this and the fact that my beer wasn't bitter enough to remove the skin from the top of your mouth (sorry, only 45 IBU, but again well within the range) I was given a pretty crummy score that didn't seem based on the contest's style guidelines (usual disclaimer about the beer, it wasn't perfect, etc. but it wasn't as far off as the sheet claimed.) Yes, I can name a couple dozen yellow beers with 75+ IBUs produced commercially and well regarded, but the contest didn't say 'Brew a West Coast IPA', it had the usual requirements covering everything from a trad. english style to hophead nectar. (Splitting the styles goes to another discussion) A most extreme case of current commercial practice ocurred at the Calif. State Club Competion. The Steam Beer category (they have Anchor's permission to use that) judges went to the bar of the clubhouse we were in, got a bottle of Anchor Steam Beer (delivered that day, bottled the day before according to the code on the back) and used it as a calibration beer. They then went on to trash any beer that didn't taste just like the Anchor, which of course was all of them.This was intentional, not coincidence, as that was why they went and got the bottle in the first place. The contest style guidelines didn't say 'Make Anchor Steam Beer and enter it', they had the more usual description. Day-old Anchor Steam has a delightful hop aroma and flavor that I'd never tasted even in fresh kegs in the San Francisco area (I made great effort to research this flavor at the party after the contest...). Many folks pick up the distinctive phenolic produced by the Anchor yeast (also present in the Porter) but I've never seen this in the AHA California Common guidelines nor in any of several unique-to-the-contest guidelines. I was under the impression that you were brewing to the guidelines, not making a clone. And, yes, I am aware that folks have been judging Cal. Common as if it were Anchor for years, as in, if it ain't full of No. Brewers, it's no good. I didn't say I had an answer, but I thought I'd add this third factor to the discussion. After all, what do you say to a fellow judge who starts with 'Well, the last 19 times I as in Brussels...' or 'At the bar of the White Harte in the Strand...' and has a different idea of what things should taste like than you do? Lowell Hart President, San Joaquin WortHogs Organizer, AHA 1997 NHC Western Regional First Round Fresno, California ------------------------------ End of judge-digest V1 #1425 **************************** Send subscription cancellations & changes to judge-request at synchro.com. Messages sent to the wrong address will be ignored.