Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 00:01:05 -0400
Message-Id: <199807140401.AAA28504 at brew.oeonline.com>
To: judge at hbd.org
From: judge-request at hbd.org (Request Address Only - No Articles)
Reply-to: judge at hbd.org (Posting Address Only - No Requests)
Errors-to: judge-request at hbd.org
Precedence: bulk
Subject: Beer Judge Digest #19 (July 14, 1998)


Beer Judge Digest #19		             Tue 14 July 1998


	FORUM ON BEER JUDGING AND RELATED ISSUES
		Digest Custodian: custodian at hbd.org
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Beer Judge Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com


Contents:
  To style or taste? (Charles Hudak)
  Styles vs. Categories clarified (Russ Wigglesworth)
  Re: Style vs Category (Bob Devine)
  Re: BOS beers (John DeCarlo)
  reported OG or IBUs (STEPHEN G STROUD)
  BOS beers (Al Korzonas)
  BJCP Points/ Check Boxes ("RANDY ERICKSON")
  BJCP Exam (pgarofalo)
  Judgenet #18 (Lyle C. Brown)


     Have you organized a competition lately?
Send articles for __publication_only__ to judge at hbd.org
  (Articles are published in the order they are received.) 

If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
  "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to judge-request at hbd.org. 
**SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL
**ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!! 
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and
  the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail!

YOU MUST BE A BEER JUDGE OR BE REFERRED BY ONE TO SUBSCRIBE!!! 
You MUST be a subscriber in order to post articles!!! 

Requests for back issues will be ignored. 

CUSTODIANS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (custodian at hbd.org)

              "Not a publication of the BJCP"


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


Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1998 23:41:27 -0700
From: Charles Hudak <cwhudak at home.com>
Subject: To style or taste?

Steve writes:

>Please feel free to correct me if I am way off base here, but I have been
>under the impression that the BOS round is to have a panel of judges and/or
>other valued persons take a sample of each of the beers that have won their
>respective flights/categories/styles and decide which one beer is the best
>*tasting* beer on the table, not necessarily which one is the closest fit to
>its named style according to the guidelines published for that competitions.

Peoples opinions of what "tastes" good have no place in a competition. In
every BOS that I've judged, the purpose was to pick the beer that "best
exemplefied the style." I've been disappointed that in the past, panels
that I've judged on have had judges take just this kind of hedonistic
approach that Steve mentions. I've had to bite my tongue to keep from
dragging the BOS judging out when I disagreed with my associates but was
outvoted; I knew that a certain beer/mead was a better example of the style
but the one they picked, they obviously "liked better."


>If it were the case that BOS judges/evaluators were picking the best fit to
>a style guideline, it seems to me that more BOS rounds would have that panel
>actually use the score sheets one more time and pick the winning beer based
>on the highest scoring beer.

Not true. Different judges score differently. While judges on the same
panel try and are required usually to have a difference of no more than
five points, their average scores may be lower than another panel. You
can't evaluate these apples and oranges side  by side.

>Anyway, my sense on this was that these judges/tasters/celebrities/brewers
>(some of the BOS panels had a brewer representing the brewpub where the
>winning BOS brewer would get to brew the BOS recipe or something similar at
>the brewpub and have it served to the public) weren't necessarily using the
>style guidelines as their yardstick to pick the best one.  I saw more at
those
>tables along the lines of "which of these beers tastes the best today".


This is "unacceptable" if it is true. CP (mentioned in the quote I snipped)
has gone on record as saying he hates Bavarian Weizens. How can that
category get a fair evaluation if he is judging on "what he likes?"


Charles Hudak
Charles Hudak
cwhudak at home.com
Living large on the left coast.......


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

Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 08:02:21 -0700
From: Russ Wigglesworth <russ.wigglesworth at radiology.ucsf.edu>
Subject: Styles vs. Categories clarified

I accept the logic for viewing the Style Guidelines as Entry Categories and
I don't have a problem with us (BJCP/AHA) creating a standard format for
structuring entry categories including a collapsing formula which is built
around the Style Guidelines to ease the workload of the organizer. My
primary concern is that we not stifle the overall creativity of the
sponsors and organizers by leading them to believe that they must follow
our structure in order to comply as a "BJCP Registered Competition". Or
even that there is some "standard" which is "expected" by the judges or
entrants. To that end I would prefer that we treat the Style Guidelines as
definitions of beer styles in and of themselves rather than as groupings
for competition purposes. We need to include a section in the Competition
Guide which outlines the competition category structure and makes it clear
that organizers are not restricted to follow our "suggested" format.
Rather, that we encourage variations and like to see unique competitions
emerge.

It costs us nothing to set up a category format which follows the Style
Guidelines and includes a means for including oddball beers AND to also
allow the organizers to re-format what we suggest for their own purposes,
or for that matter establish their own unique sets of categories, as long
as they understand that the definitions of the styles as peresented in the
Style Guidelines should not be altered from comp to comp.

As far as I am concerned the more choices people have the better. But more
to the point I want to encourage creativity and uniqueness. I don't want to
send the message that our beer "styles" are the only guide to what beers
people should be brewing nor that there is only one way to organize a
competition.

RW...

Russ Wigglesworth - Program Administrator
Beer Judge Certification Program
PO Box 751271 - Petaluma CA 94975
707-769-0425 (h) 415-502-1070 (w)


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

Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 10:46:45 -0600
From: Bob Devine <bdevine at 10fold.com>
Subject: Re: Style vs Category

David Houseman wrote:
> Additionally, I'll go out on a limb and advocate that the
> categories (name and numbering) for the BJCP and the AHA be one
> and the same.

Dion Hollenbeck agrees and extends by writing:
> I especially want to see this done to simplify oranizer's jobs.

>From the perspective of judging, not organizing, I agree.
I appreciate a competition that does reinvent categories
because it makes judging across events more consistent.

The issue seems to be how to use the BJCP style guidelines
to form a competition's categories. Has anyone developed a
flexible way of grouping styles into categories so that
they can grow/shrink according to the number of entries?
Russ Wigglesworth's point of letting the event organizers
choose the categories makes sense but there should be
some consistency.

Bob Devine


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

Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 14:04:15 -0400
From: John DeCarlo <jdecarlo at mitre.org>
Subject: Re: BOS beers

Steve <JOHNSONS at uansv5.Vanderbilt.Edu> wrote:
[...]
>Please feel free to correct me if I am way off base here, but I have been
>under the impression that the BOS round is to have a panel of judges and/or
>other valued persons take a sample of each of the beers that have won their
>respective flights/categories/styles and decide which one beer is the best
>*tasting* beer on the table, not necessarily which one is the closest fit to
>its named style according to the guidelines published for that competitions.
>If it were the case that BOS judges/evaluators were picking the best fit to
>a style guideline, it seems to me that more BOS rounds would have that panel
>actually use the score sheets one more time and pick the winning beer based
>on the highest scoring beer.
[...]

I don't know that I can *correct* you, but all the BOS (also including
mini-BOS) that I have participated in or watched closely have been about
judging to style.  This is, in fact, what all judging is about.  Why should
BOS be different?

I would be *very* surprised to find very many arguing that a BOS should
pick the best tasting beer of the bunch.  

As an aside, this reminds me of the thread on "harder to brew" styles and
whether they should get extra credit.  <grin>

John DeCarlo, jdecarlo at burp.org, My Views Are My Own


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

Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 14:05:01 -0400
From: STROUDS at POLAROID.COM (STEPHEN G STROUD)
Subject: reported OG or IBUs

IN BDJ #18, beerking1 at juno.com (Lyle C. Brown) posted:

>  I think Steve missed the point. Bill did not seem to me to be 
>  refering to the entrants reported OG or IBUs, I think Billl was 
>  refering to the EXPECTED OG or IBUs based on the listed 
>  ingredients.


I am very doubtful that this is what Bill meant since there is nothing in the
Style _Guidelines_ that discusses the efficiency of brewing procedures.  It
would be impossible (and stupid) to try to police this anyhow.  

Rather than debate the point further let's wait until BillG shows up again at
which point he can explain the meaning of his statement .

Cheers,
Steve

**********
work: strouds at polaroid.com
home: strouds at gis.net
**********


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

Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 15:18:25 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: BOS beers

Steve writes:
>Please feel free to correct me if I am way off base here, but I have been
>under the impression that the BOS round is to have a panel of judges and/or
>other valued persons take a sample of each of the beers that have won their
>respective flights/categories/styles and decide which one beer is the best
>*tasting* beer on the table, not necessarily which one is the closest fit to
>its named style according to the guidelines published for that competitions.

On the contrary... it should be just the opposite of what you had expected.
Yes, sometimes you have circumstances such that popularity would be the
main factor (e.g. when the beer is to be brewed by a brewpub... can't
have a *real* Lambic win Jim Koch's Longshot contest, can we?), but the
standard operating procedures for judging in BOS is to pick the beer that
is closest to its style.  If an out-of-style beer wins BOS, something is
amiss (but without specifics I'm not willing to say Bill Giffin is right,
yet ;^).

>If it were the case that BOS judges/evaluators were picking the best fit to
>a style guideline, it seems to me that more BOS rounds would have that panel
>actually use the score sheets one more time and pick the winning beer based
>on the highest scoring beer.

Ahh... but there is no time nor can our palates hold up so long.  A big
flight is 15 beers.  12 Barleywines is a big flight!  28 beers of varying
style is HUGE!  The way to judge BOS is to have the beers served up 15
seconds apart by the very best steward available (which is probably Luann
Fitzpatrick if you're lucky enough to have her in your time zone on the
day of the competition).  The judges simply sniff, taste and scribble three
or four words.  It is very different from normal judging and can even
appear to be a popularity contest even if the judges are judging as expected.
They really should be saying things like "no... I think this Bohemian
Pils is a little too fruity... I say we kick it out" or "can we toss the
IPA? -- it has no hop aroma."  It's typically done by the process of
elimination.

Al.

Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz at xnet.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/


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

Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 15:53:24 -0700
From: "RANDY ERICKSON" <RANDYE at mid.org>
Subject: BJCP Points/ Check Boxes

Greetings all:

I'm wonder if the following sentences from the BJCP Exam
Program Guide are in conflict with each other:

"For any one competition, only one point category will be allowed
for an individual steward, judge, or organizer."

and then:

"Any other [referring to the Organizer] program participant is eligible
to receive any combination of Judge, Best of Show Judge, or Staff
points in a single competition (except as noted)."

Does the first sentence preclude a judge from also earning Staff
points?  The second sentence kind of seems like this is permitted.
Ideas?
**********************************************************************

Can someone who has both the AHA scoresheets and the BJCP
sheets in front of them confirm something for me?  I've been
judging in a number of comps lately that all used the AHA sheet.
I could swear that the check boxes on that form are arranged
with the most favorable comments (Classic, Flawless, Wonderful)
on the right side.

I was looking at some sheets I just got back that were done on
the BJCP scoresheet, and in this case the poor comments (Not to
Style, Significant Flaws, Lifeless) are on the right side.

I know that the BJCP and the AHA have good reasons for doing
things bass-ackwards (relative to each other), but can anyone think
of a good reason for this one?  Or have I been doing it wrong?


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

Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 21:04:59 -0400
From: pgarofalo at juno.com
Subject: BJCP Exam

In BJD #18, Lyle Brown writes:

>Perhaps the
>exam needs upgrading. This would be a huge undertaking, requiring a
>committee for final decisions. If the exam is made too difficult, we run
>the risk of discouraging new judges with a high potential. What if the
>next batch of potential Master Judges never takes the exam because it is
>too hard to pass the exam the first time?

Actually, the exam has been reviewed several times (to my knowledge), the
most recent of which was less than a year ago. In fact, there is a
standing (?) exam committee. We grappled with some of the questions that
Lyle raises, and chose to re-word several questions, leave some others
alone, and toss out some others.

This is (and should be) an ongoing process, and we must walk the fine
line between qualifying judges and discouraging potential judges. This is
not as simple as it may seem to one who hasn't done any more than bitch
about the process, but aren't most things that way?

Cheers,

Peter Garofalo
Syracuse, NY

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]


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

Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 21:18:41 -0400
From: beerking1 at juno.com (Lyle C. Brown)
Subject: Judgenet #18

In Judgenet #18, Steve Johnson writes:

"I have been under the impression that the BOS round is to have a panel
of judges and/or other valued persons take a sample of each of the beers
that have won their
respective flights/categories/styles and decide which one beer is the
best
*tasting* beer on the table, not necessarily which one is the closest fit
to
its named style according to the guidelines published for that
competitions."

Having judged 5 or 6 BOS rounds, I have always had exactly the opposite
experience. It seems to me, the best way to ensure the beers aren't
judged solely on what style the judge prefers is to go by style.
Otherwise, how would the outstanding 50pt American Light Lager ever stand
a chance?? If a judge can discount a really good beer for BOS, just
because it is his least favorite style, then what is the point of the BOS
round? Have we degenerated to a "popularity contest?" Admitedly, it is
tough for a judge to hold of personal prejudices and judge a beer soley
on quality, but that is what makes judging so difficult. If the only
question in a BOS round is "which of these beers tastes the best today?"
Then we might as well bring in anybody off the street for the BOS round,
not use some of the most qualified judges available. 

(Change gears)

Although I may not be quite as vocal about it, I completely agree with
Bruce's comments  about AHA bashing. We have all made mistakes, and I
doubt many of us would like ALL of our mistakes to be as public as the
AHA's have been over the years. As Bruce put it, let's not forget who got
all this started to begin with? If not for the AHA, with all it's
mistakes over the years, NONE of us would even be on this net to begin
with!

Finally, regarding styles and categories, I too feel the style guidelines
between BJCP and AHA should be standardized. Probably the AHA guidelines
over the BJCP, if for no other reason than the AHA is the only
organization of the 2 that actually runs its own competition. No set of
style categories requires that organizers use all of the categories. Last
year's competition "The Taming of the Brews" was ONLY ALES! No problem
there, but everybody knew which styles to follow in meeting the
categories featured in the competition.

Lyle C. Brown

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]


------------------------------
End of Beer Judge Digest #19, 07/14/98
*************************************
-------