Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 00:01:05 -0400
Message-Id: <199807150401.AAA15348 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 #20 (July 15, 1998)


Beer Judge Digest #20		             Wed 15 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:
  stuff / MCAB BoS (Louis Bonham)
  BOS judging (Steve)
  BOS: to Style or otherwise (DENNIS WALTMAN)
  AHA "bashing"/AHA vs. BJCP styles ("Henckler, Andrew")
  groupings/points/checkboxes (Al Korzonas)
  Points Conflict (Russ Wigglesworth)
  Re: BOS beers (Dion Hollenbeck)


     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: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 04:56:00 -0500
From: Louis Bonham <lkbonham at phoenix.net>
Subject: stuff / MCAB BoS

Lyle Brown notes:

> 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.

OTOH, the MCAB uses the BJCP Style Guidelines exclusively.  And, by the way, the
BJCP was invited to participate as a co-sponsor of the MCAB with BT, HBD, HWBTA,
etc., but the BJCP decided that it was better for it to just concentrate on
judging -- not a bad thought.

While I support any effort to merge/harmonize the AHA and BJCP style guides
(indeed, Dave Houseman, Jim Parker, and I were discussing this concept some time
ago), one issue we should not lose sight of who gets to decide changes /
additions to the "unified" Style Guide?  The BJCP *has* a mechanism for this --
granted, it's slow, but it does allow for serious participation in the decision
making process.  Does the AHA have a similar mechanism?  From what I understand,
changes to the AHA style guide are still decided by one person --  and said
person's judging abilities and style knowledge are, shall we say, not
universally or even particularly well respected.  If any "unified" style guide
is to be successful, you know who is gonna have to be willing to give up his
ultimate
control over it -- something that he historically has been quite unwilling to
do,
although perhaps this is changing.

=======

Another issue for discussion.  At the MCAB, we're gonna have 18 categories, each
of which will have a maximum of 11 entries.  Needless to say we expect the
winners in each category to be *extremely* good.  How should we judge BoS?
Conventional wisdom is to just assemble a 3-5 judge panel and turn 'em loose on
this large flight of 18 exceptional beers.  OTOH, we're considering going to a
two round BoS, whereby the eighteen categories are divided into three flights of
six (the six "heaviest" styes in one, the six "lightest" styles in another, and
the remaining six in a third).  Each flight of six would be judged by a
different three judge panel, which would push two beers to the "Final" BoS
panel, which would be judged by a fresh panel of 3 judges.

Comments on this concept?  As we anticipate having many more than 12 Master
judges (and functional equivalents) at the MCAB, there would be no shortage of
superior judges to staff the BoS rounds; indeed, a side benefit of this is that
the "top" 12 judges could be selected for BoS, and their assignment to one of
the four panels then chosen by lot  -- thus minimizing some of the hurt feelings
that would inevitably occur if we simply picked 3-5 BoS judges from the large
number of stellar judges that will be present.

Whaddya think?  The goal is, of course, to have a system that provides to best
possible conditions.

Louis K. Bonham


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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 06:00:26 -0500 (CDT)
From: Steve <JOHNSONS at uansv5.Vanderbilt.Edu>
Subject: BOS judging

Thanks to several who posted on Judgenet with some clarifications for me and
others who may have wondered about the whole process of determining a BOS
beer.  After I posted, I had some discussion about this with some of our
club members who are also BJCP judges, and their comments also were helpful
in clarifying some issues about BOS judging.  I think Al Korzonas provided
me with some valuable information in particular.  That being:  my perceptions
of what was going on at the BOS table may have given me the impression that
it was more of a "popularity" contest; certain "political" and "commercial"
ramifications can and do come into the equation when it comes to having a
mix of BOS judges who may have different reasons for being there; and, palate
fatigue, order of presentation, and having an extremely competent steward can
really make a difference.  Thanks for the enlightenment!  It will help me in
planning our next competition in October.

Steve Johnson, President
Music City Brewers
Nashville, TN


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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 10:19:53 -0400
From: DENNIS WALTMAN <PDWALTMAN at sablaw.com>
Subject: BOS: to Style or otherwise

I will admit I have only been a participant of one BOS (several
mini-BOS but those are different), and the questions of the finals
were all topics of style.  Likewise when I've been allowed to watch
the BOS round as a spectator.  I'm working off the AHA style
guidelines as I've never seen a competition using the BJCP guidelines.

On the other hand, there are some styles that have very broad ranges
of attributes, or in some extreme cases, no requirements altogether
[non-Bamburg/Classic Style smoke beers for example; non-classic style
fruit & vegetable; non-classic style herb & spice], and if the judges
just went by which was closest to style, then you would see these
three styles in the finalists more often, and perhaps in the 1st, 2nd,
and 3rd Best of Show awards.  However, you don't; at least I haven't
in the lists I've seen posted.

So the personal prejudices of the judges about what they like pop up
all the time.  How they like the beer is a part of what ones advance. 
Below are two examples of the style guidelines.  For the smoked beer
there are no requirements except smoke and then not any quantity or
balance requirements.  For the Fruit/Vegetable beer, there is a
obvious and harmonious requirement, and a hop requirement not to
overpower fruit.   The other ranges are wider. 

20-c) Other Smoked Beer 
Any beer to which smoke flavors have been added. Vary widely.

21-a) Fruit and Vegetable Beer 
Any beer using fruits or vegetables as an adjunct in either primary or
secondary fermentation, providing obvious, yet harmonious, fruit and
vegetable qualities. Fruit and vegetable qualities should not be
overpowered by hop character. 
Original Gravity (*Plato)  1.030-110
Final Gravity (*Plato)     1.006-30
% Alc./Wt. (Alc./V.)       2.0-9.5%
IBUs              5-70
SRM               5-50

That must be quite a fruity beer which is IBU 70, and hop character
doesn't overpower the fruit.

Dennis Waltman


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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 10:38:57 -0400
From: "Henckler, Andrew" <ahenckler at findsvp.com>
Subject: AHA "bashing"/AHA vs. BJCP styles

Hi All:

I certainly agree with Lyle and Bruce that we would be wasting valuable
time and digest space in hashing over the AHA's problems again.
However, I take exception to the idea that we should allow this
organization to rest on its laurels.  In the interest of keeping this
off this forum, I will stop now...

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

All this talk of combining AHA and BJCP styles is more than likely moot,
given the high-handedness of the BJCP about its "property" (like the old
judge digest) and the relative disorganization of the AHA.  I, for one,
would be dismayed to see this happen.  I shudder to imagine the
organizational fracas that would be involved in creating a new style or
changing an existing one.  Yes, it is somewhat inconvenient to have two
slightly different sets of guidelines.  However, if the organizer
specifies one standard or the other, everyone who bothers to read the
entry or judge directions is well aware of what standard is being used.

Andrew


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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 11:51:31 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: groupings/points/checkboxes

Bob writes:
>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.

We in the Beer Style Committee have that issue on our list of things
to do.  We had planned to see if we could come up with a way for
competitions to collapse groups of styles.  This can be done before
sending out the rules and registration info or after all the entries
are in but before judging begins.

***
RANDY writes:

>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?

It sure sounds contradictory to me.  I also question if it is right
to restrict someone to only one or another role.  Suppose I enter
a bunch of beers into a competition then I come to judge it.  Suppose
all my beers happen to be being judged on Saturday and none on Sunday.
So, I help do computer entry on Saturday and then judge on Sunday.
Should I not get points for both?

>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?

Yes, the AHA had a reason for doing this backwards from the BJCP...
they had a printing deadline and had to use a partially-completed
version of the BJCP scoresheet this year.  Next year I expect
the AHA and BJCP scoresheets to be identical.

Al.

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


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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 10:03:21 -0700
From: Russ Wigglesworth <russ.wigglesworth at radiology.ucsf.edu>
Subject: Points Conflict

Randy Erickson asks:

>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)."

Well, yes. However the first sentence was removed from the registration
form soon after the split. I'm not sure where these were taken from but
they are not current. Perhaps they came from the Competition Guide which is
still being revised and may contain conflicting statements.

The currrent rule is that an Organizer can only get Organizer points.
Anyone else can get any compination of points up to a maximum total equal
to what has been allocated to the Organizer based on the size of the event.
Except that, Judging points may not be combined with Stewarding points in
the same event.

Apparently the doc on the web page that outlines this is in need of
revision. I allerted the our web-masters to this.

RW...

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


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

Date: 14 Jul 1998 18:15:24 -0700
From: Dion Hollenbeck <hollen at woodsprite.com>
Subject: Re: BOS beers

>> Steve  writes:

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

Well, either I am going to be terribly wrong (and apologize in
advance) or I am going to be one to correct you.  IHMO, you have it
completely backwards, or at least this is according to the 4 BOS
panels *I* have been on.  The sole purpose of a BOS panel is to
determine which beer at the table is the *best* example of its style.
Nothing more, nothing less.   In all the BOS panels I have been on we
went to *great* lengths to make this our goal and discussed at length
why the Kolsch was a better Kolsch than the Imperial Stout was a
stout, etc.  

And someone correct *me* if Steve is right and I am wrong (not trying
to be the one to be right, just clear up the point).

dion

Two time Organizer AFCHBC, once Asst. Organizer
Certified BJCP judge

- -- 
Dion Hollenbeck                  Email: hollen at woodsprite.com
Home Page:  http://woodsprite.com/hollen.html
Brewing Page:  http://hdb.org/hollen


------------------------------
End of Beer Judge Digest #20, 07/15/98
*************************************
-------