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 (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA10520 for ; Fri, 30 May 1997 08:44:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (0 at judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu [141.211.83.37]) by srvr7.engin.umich.edu (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id IAA04003 for ; Fri, 30 May 1997 08:44:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.8.5/2.2) with X.500 id IAA09124; Fri, 30 May 1997 08:44:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from uu6.psi.com by judgmentday.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.8.5/2.2) with SMTP id IAA09115; Fri, 30 May 1997 08:44:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA05993 for spencer at umich.edu; Fri, 30 May 97 08:44:08 -0400 Received: (from majordom at localhost) by synchro.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA11390 for judge-digest-outgoing; Fri, 30 May 1997 08:06:55 -0400 Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 08:06:55 -0400 Message-Id: <199705301206.IAA11390 at synchro.com> From: owner-judge-digest at synchro.com To: judge-digest at synchro.com Subject: judge-digest V1 #1448 Reply-To: judge at synchro.com Errors-To: owner-judge-digest at synchro.com Precedence: bulk judge-digest Friday, 30 May 1997 Volume 01 : Number 1448 ============================================================================ 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: exam preparation Re: judge-digest V1 #1446 Re: Relevance of the exam Are we all worthless? / Retesting the tasting Re: Obtaining judging experience Experience Re: gaining experience Re: The Relevance of the Exam II ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bryan L. Gros" Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 09:44:07 -0500 (CDT) Subject: exam preparation jdecarlo at mail04.mitre.org (John A. DeCarlo) writes: > >>So, how did you get all your experience? There definitely seems to be an >>emphasis on having BJCP judges at competitions, rather than others. Sort of a >>Catch-22: how can you be a good judge (and do well on the judging part of the >>exam) without actual experience judging, yet how can you get experience without >>having passed the exam? I think the exam proctor should be obligated to hold at least one study session where the basics of beer evaluation are described (how to fill out a score sheet) and the exam format and study questions. Not everyone has net access. It is up to local clubs to help organize study sessions and beer judging sessions. Where clubs aren't available, exam takers should organize themselves. I believe there needs to be at least five people to organize an exam, so hopefully they live close enough together to get together at least once or twice. As for whether the exam tests the right things, I agree with others that it is good that not many takers can score above 80. I feel pretty confident that national and master judges are pretty good judges. On the other hand, it is fairly easy, with some work, to get over 60 on the exam. We should welcome these people and help them advance in the program. The only way for us to advance our skills is to practice--competitions are always looking for judges, so there's opportunity to practice. The only thing that would be nicer is more feedback on how the score sheets look as we judge. Not sure how this could be accomplished without a lot of work for few people. Bryan (cronks1 at mindspring.com, bcronk at nortel.ca) writes > In fact, I'd like to have the option >of paying a modest fee and re-taking just the judging part >anytime an exam was held in order to get feedback. My result >on the test was much better on the written portion, and while >I think I'm a better judge now, I could use some feedback, >maybe including a discussion with the proctors. This is a great idea. What is the partial re-take fee? - Bryan grosbl at ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu Nashville, TN ------------------------------ From: Dion Hollenbeck Date: 29 May 1997 07:49:58 -0700 Subject: Re: judge-digest V1 #1446 >> Jeremy Bergsman writes: JB> Since stewarding lacks somewhat in glamour, busy people seem to JB> find it hard to make time to drive a distance to serve beer to JB> other people. This is unfortunate since it is probably the best JB> way to get experience if you are hesitant to judge. JB> A program to make stewarding more attractive or, more generally, JB> to introduce people to the judging process would probably benefit JB> the program in the long run. When judging at the NHC first round, in all the panels I was on, we included the stewards in our discussions as well. The stewards all stated that they learned a whole lot from the experience. Don't take me wrong, I do not purport to be a know it all in judging, but by three people sharing what they perceive in a beer, all of them learn. Some of the stewards even picked up subtle flavors/aromas that the judges did not, and it caused us to go back and try again. Of course, we waited for this discussion until both judges were done with scoring. I think Jeremy has a fine point here, that if we as judges include stewards more, then stewarding becomes a way to learn evaluation skills and if there is more available to stewards than just "serving beer", then hopefully we attract more novices to the judging program. 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: Dion Hollenbeck Date: 29 May 1997 07:55:59 -0700 Subject: Re: Relevance of the exam >> George De Piro writes: GDP> I agree with Kieran that promotion in the BJCP is too easy. You GDP> may recall back in Jan. or Feb. when I ranted about a Certified GDP> judge that did a very poor evaluation of a Weizen because he GDP> didn't know the style. You should not be able to be Certified if GDP> you can't at least describe the basic, easily obtained styles! I have to disagree with this. When you are judging (not when taking the exam), you do not have to be able to describe any styles of beer. You are provided with the guidelines in printed form. What you have to be able to do is objectively evaluate whether a beer fits the style guidelines in front of you. Memorized knowledge of the parameters of the style are nice, but not necessary when you can look up what you need. If a judge did not know the style, it seems to me that either he cannot read, or his perceptions of flavors and aromas is not good due to lack of experience. Probably gonna get flamed over this one, 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: George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro) Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 11:03:22 -0700 Subject: Are we all worthless? / Retesting the tasting Hi all, Bill seems to believe that all judges are worthless. He observes that judges sometimes give improper advice on how to improve a brew. Perhaps Bill would be placated if we just disband the BJCP? I would like to point out that any one beer flaw can have a variety of causes. For example, buttery flavor can be a result of poor yeast selection, pedioccocus infection, mistreating the fermented beer, or improper lager fermentation technique. Fruitiness can be a result of poor fermentation temperature control, low aeration, underpitching of yeast, yeast strain selection...you get the point. With so many variables affecting so complex a beverage, coupled with the fact that we all have different degrees of perception, it's amazing that we can judge as well as we do! If a beer is buttery, you can either write a short novel about how to improve it, or take a guess and tell them to improve sanitation. If the brewer purposely chose a yeast that produces buttery beer, they may say, "What a dumb judge. I wanted it to be buttery," but that would be narrow-minded on the entrants part. A good brewer would understand the reason for the advice. Not knowing styles is another matter entirely, and is inexcusable. Heck, the style guidelines are right in front of us at most contests. If one can read, one should be able to at least know that a wheat beer should be cloudy, and that a Dubbel shouldn't be sour! Of course we can all improve as judges, but simply ranting about how bad we all are is not useful. I like the idea of retesting before promotion. As I've already said, I think the exam does cover technical knowledge pretty well, but it would be very useful to retake the tasting portion of the exam before promotion. Then the BJCP would really be testing JUDGING SKILLS in an overall sense. Retesting the tasting seems like a task that we can execute. I would bet that we would see tremendous improvement in scoring and comments if retesting was made policy. We might also see a decline in the number of promotions, which wouldn't necessarilly be bad! I really wish that I could get feedback about my judging. I include my E-mail address on every sheet, but have yet to get a single comment, good or bad. If the entrants aren't going to comment, than the BJCP should. Retesting would achieve this. I'll stop now, have fun! George De Piro (Nyack, NY) ------------------------------ From: Scott Bickham Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 12:20:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Obtaining judging experience jdecarlo at mail04.mitre.org (John A. DeCarlo) asked: > So, how did you get all your experience? There definitely seems to be an > emphasis on having BJCP judges at competitions, rather than others. It's natural for organizers to have a preference, but it's rare that novices are turned away. The other seven judges and I who tackled the 75 entries in the Cambridge, MD competition last summer would have certainly liked some help! Though on the other hand, the judges in the DC area tend to stay close to home, so competitions such as the Spirit of Free Beer and the Capital Ditrict Open tend to fill the judging slots rather quickly, but there are usually plenty of other judging opportunities within a three hour driving radius. Scott ------------------------------ From: korz at xnet.com Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 11:41:46 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Experience Spencer writes: >Yes, but you can almost always find an opportunity to "sit in" at a >table with experienced judges, filling out score sheets along side, >and getting feedback from them on the spot. I took the leftover beers from our club's competition home and then brought 12 or so of them to subsequent meetings with a pile of blank scoresheets. I then got a group together in the corner and we judged these beers as if it was a competition. Afterwords, we talked about the beers and they looked at my scoresheet. I did the same when I was preparing a group for taking the BJCP exam. We judged a couple of beers and I made photocopies of my scoresheets for the judges to take home along with their own scoresheets. I did this in addition to teaching them what was going to be on the exam (what *types* of questions and what *types* of answers are desired for them). I left it to them to actually read the texts for the actual answers to the questions. Every one of my students passed the exam and a few scored near 80 on their first taking. Al. ------------------------------ From: Btalk at aol.com Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 17:23:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: gaining experience John DeCarlo wonders about gaining judging experience. Entering a few contests would at least clue someone in to what goes on with a score sheet before they begin to judge. That is what actually sparked my own interest in learning about judging. The procedure for gaining experience, as I understand and preach it, is to begin by stewarding contests in order to learn from the judges at the table. Then, when your confidence is sufficiently bolstered, you sit in as an apprentice judge and progress from there. At the contests that I've been involved in organizing I always stress to the judges that this is supposd to be an educational experience for the stewards and apprentice judges. The idea is to nurture and support the newbies in order to bring them into the judging ranks. I am particularly sensitive to the stewards interests because of my friend's experience at the first sanctioned event we had ever attended. We went as stewards to learn not only about judging but also how a sanctioned event operated. One of the judges at the table my friend was stewarding for proclaimed that 'Stewards don't get to taste the beer!'. What a bunch of crap.4 years later my friend still has no interest in pursuing the BJCP program. This feeling has lingered even after I sat him with another judge who I knew would not be a jerk. Another way to gain judging experience (not points) is through non sanctioned events. We have held a number of somewhat informal contests at club and county level. This is a good way to begin using the score sheets and think about judging without feeling too much under pressure. Later, Bob Talkiewicz, Binghamton, NY ------------------------------ From: John Wilson Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 17:27:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: The Relevance of the Exam II > > From: "Kieran O'Connor" > > But one does not need to be a beer geek to be a beer judge and discuss > style and technical flaws intelligently. I would simply argue that the > depth examinees need is just a wee high, especially in the technical area. I have to totally disagree! To simply PASS the exam with a score high enough to begin judging does not require the "depth" suggested here. EVERY judge should be able to "discuss style and technical flaws intelligently," and to receive a passing score examinees are required to discuss such things--but, should individuals who do not understand the malting process or brewing techniques be GIVEN a master ranking? I think not! The exam accurately represents the technical sides of brewing, and there is no reason to alter it. On the other hand, if examinees were required to discuss the chemical processes of malting in depth I might sing another tune, but it doesn't. As such, it appears as if this discussion should be turned toward rank progression and judging. Rather than modify the exam, why not expand the judging portion in an effort to give "green" judges the required tools to become superior judges? Or require "judging seminars" (I don't know if such a thing exists--yet) to progress. It's just an idea which might help alleviate the "rank progression" issue. Basically, a system that requires attendance and participation to gain such-and-such rank can only help. Damn that sounds like a lot of work, but it could work in conjunction with an exam date/place. Like taking the tasting portion again only with immediate feedback and more depth in judging. Let it rattle around while enjoying a pint! John BTW, the "chili judge" post was HILLARIOUS! ------------------------------ End of judge-digest V1 #1448 **************************** Send subscription cancellations & changes to judge-request at synchro.com. Messages sent to the wrong address will be ignored.