Received: from srvr22.engin.umich.edu (root at srvr22.engin.umich.edu [141.213.75.21]) by srvr5.engin.umich.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA08849 for ; Sat, 28 Aug 1999 01:05:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from synchro.com (cccox.ne.mediaone.net [24.218.136.73]) by srvr22.engin.umich.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA21234 for ; Sat, 28 Aug 1999 01:04:53 -0400 (EDT) From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: "Digest Recipients" Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Subject: Digest for the period 08/27/99 - 08/28/99 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1999 01:02:37 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC3601C1C8D" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 1 Status: RO --Next_Part_SYNC3601C1C8D Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Table of contents ------------------------------------------------------ proctor needed (Dave Sapsis) Soliciting Opinions (Gary Gutowski) --Next_Part_SYNC3601C1C8D Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from caforestry-bh.fire.ca.gov ([12.7.198.66]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1073) id SYNC3571C1052 for judge at synchro.com; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 19:07:01 -0400 Received: from exchsac1.fire.ca.gov by caforestry-bh.fire.ca.gov via smtpd (for cccox.ne.mediaone.net [24.218.136.73]) with SMTP; 26 Aug 1999 23:06:59 UT Received: by exchsac1.fire.ca.gov with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id ; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 16:08:15 -0700 Message-ID: <057AC0D8F569D211A0E20008C7B11873A7C677 at exchsac2.fire.ca.gov> From: Dave Sapsis Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: proctor needed Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 16:06:55 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01BEF017.E031ADBE" X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01BEF017.E031ADBE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" We are looking for an exam proctor to assist in giving an exam in Jan/Feb 2000 in the Rock Island IL/Davenport Iowa area. The exam group is willing to make some level of travel support to an exprienced judge or judges to help them out. If interested, let me know. --dave sapsis BJCP west exam director ------_=_NextPart_001_01BEF017.E031ADBE Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable proctor needed

We are looking for an exam proctor to assist in = giving an exam in Jan/Feb 2000 in the Rock Island IL/Davenport Iowa = area.  The exam group is willing to make some level of travel = support to an exprienced judge or judges to help them out.  If = interested, let me know.

--dave sapsis
BJCP west exam director

------_=_NextPart_001_01BEF017.E031ADBE-- --Next_Part_SYNC3601C1C8D Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from quasar.dimensional.com ([206.124.0.15]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1073) id SYNC3573C1190 for judge at synchro.com; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 21:26:15 -0400 Received: from garyguto (p18.2-1.pm.dimcom.net [206.124.4.50]) by quasar.dimensional.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA18492 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 19:25:59 -0600 (MDT) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 19:38:13 -0600 Message-ID: <01BEEFFA.8930ECE0.lotsahop at dimensional.com> From: Gary Gutowski Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: Soliciting Opinions Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 19:33:48 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Encoding: 94 TEXT X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message I wanted to throw this out to the group to gather some other points of view. The names and competition name will remain nameless to protect the inocent. I reciently helped judge the BOS at a competition and went away with the impression that one of my fellow judges, who was also one of the organizers, knew a bit about some of the entries, their brewers, and the techniques involved in the brewing process. This botheres me. I have organized or been involved in the organization of several homebrew competitions including 4 first round sites for the National Homebrew Competition. I belive that the integrity of the anonimity of the brewers is paramont to the success of any competition. At this competition there were two BOS judges, one with a National BJCP ranking. The addition of an additional judge did not enable us to cut the flight of potential winners in half. Side Bar: In addition to picking the BOS winner, we were also asked to judge three beers from each of 10 catagories and rank them 1st, 2nd and 3rd place. Not to muck to ask since it was a new day of judging and there were no score sheets involved. I brought this up to the judge in question (via personal email) and received the following responce (edited in an attempt to preserve anonimity): Dear Gary, I would like to address a couple of points that you make. The BJCP and AHA guidelines call for being professional and fair. Well I've found my experience with BJCP certified judges is a thorough lack of professionalism. People commit to doing an event and then cancel at the last minute. Then to have one of the two certified judges that did show up, make a mockery of the process and insult the homebrewers in the audience. It sure makes me want to be associated with these groups! It appeared that >you had some knowledge of the beer, i.e. what special ingredients were in >them and, most shockingly, who the brewers were. If this was the case, I'm >shocked that you judged any of the beers. That is very unethical and not >fair. The BJCP and AHA guidelines are very clear in the need for brewer >anonymity. > >If this was not the case, then please accept my apology. > You are correct in the fact that I know what a Chambord liqueur is and in fact I know almost all the brewers!!! Did I know what beers each one entered? Absolutely not. The fact of the matter is my family had a Liquor Store for 17 years and there is not many things in the liquor store I am not very familiar with. I am a little surprised that you didn't know what it was, being the expert and all. I've traveled extensively to 46 different countries. Who do you think encouraged 80 percent of the people to enter the competition in the first place? Let me break it down for you. (city name A) has one drop off location- number of entries -(ZERO) , (city name B) number of entries (ZERO) (city name C)- number of entries (4) (city name D) -number of entries (6) (city name E)- number of entries-(38) (city name F)-number of entries-(12) In fact I spent my free time picking up all the entries at my own cost. I own a successful homebrew shop/Brew on premise and my father owns a hop wholesale company (43 varieties). I brew probably 3-4 times a week. I bag 3-4 hop orders a day! Did I plan on judging? No. Two judges would not have been fair. I planned on helping as a steward and be there to help facilitate the process. I believe that I was dispassionate, equal, equitable, just, nondiscriminatory, objective, unbiased, uncolored, and unprejudiced, not to mention fair. I hope I've made myself clear. If you are offended by this email, then you probably need to be offended. If not take it with a pinch of salt. Me again: Am I off base with my concern? His addition as a judge did not make it any "fairer" to the two of us. Puzzled Somewhere In the USA Gary Gutowski p.s. I am not posting this to flame anyone involved. I am willing to "take it with a pinch of salt" and move on. But, I would like some help in understanding how important the "integrity" of any competition really is. --Next_Part_SYNC3601C1C8D-- Received: from srvr22.engin.umich.edu (root at srvr22.engin.umich.edu [141.213.75.21]) by srvr5.engin.umich.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA08849 for ; Sat, 28 Aug 1999 01:05:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from synchro.com (cccox.ne.mediaone.net [24.218.136.73]) by srvr22.engin.umich.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA21234 for ; Sat, 28 Aug 1999 01:04:53 -0400 (EDT) From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: "Digest Recipients" Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Subject: Digest for the period 08/27/99 - 08/28/99 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1999 01:02:37 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC3601C1C8D" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 1 Status: RO --Next_Part_SYNC3601C1C8D Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Table of contents ------------------------------------------------------ proctor needed (Dave Sapsis) Soliciting Opinions (Gary Gutowski) --Next_Part_SYNC3601C1C8D Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from caforestry-bh.fire.ca.gov ([12.7.198.66]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1073) id SYNC3571C1052 for judge at synchro.com; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 19:07:01 -0400 Received: from exchsac1.fire.ca.gov by caforestry-bh.fire.ca.gov via smtpd (for cccox.ne.mediaone.net [24.218.136.73]) with SMTP; 26 Aug 1999 23:06:59 UT Received: by exchsac1.fire.ca.gov with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id ; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 16:08:15 -0700 Message-ID: <057AC0D8F569D211A0E20008C7B11873A7C677 at exchsac2.fire.ca.gov> From: Dave Sapsis Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: proctor needed Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 16:06:55 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01BEF017.E031ADBE" X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01BEF017.E031ADBE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" We are looking for an exam proctor to assist in giving an exam in Jan/Feb 2000 in the Rock Island IL/Davenport Iowa area. The exam group is willing to make some level of travel support to an exprienced judge or judges to help them out. If interested, let me know. --dave sapsis BJCP west exam director ------_=_NextPart_001_01BEF017.E031ADBE Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable proctor needed

We are looking for an exam proctor to assist in = giving an exam in Jan/Feb 2000 in the Rock Island IL/Davenport Iowa = area.  The exam group is willing to make some level of travel = support to an exprienced judge or judges to help them out.  If = interested, let me know.

--dave sapsis
BJCP west exam director

------_=_NextPart_001_01BEF017.E031ADBE-- --Next_Part_SYNC3601C1C8D Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from quasar.dimensional.com ([206.124.0.15]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1073) id SYNC3573C1190 for judge at synchro.com; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 21:26:15 -0400 Received: from garyguto (p18.2-1.pm.dimcom.net [206.124.4.50]) by quasar.dimensional.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA18492 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 19:25:59 -0600 (MDT) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 19:38:13 -0600 Message-ID: <01BEEFFA.8930ECE0.lotsahop at dimensional.com> From: Gary Gutowski Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: Soliciting Opinions Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 19:33:48 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Encoding: 94 TEXT X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message I wanted to throw this out to the group to gather some other points of view. The names and competition name will remain nameless to protect the inocent. I reciently helped judge the BOS at a competition and went away with the impression that one of my fellow judges, who was also one of the organizers, knew a bit about some of the entries, their brewers, and the techniques involved in the brewing process. This botheres me. I have organized or been involved in the organization of several homebrew competitions including 4 first round sites for the National Homebrew Competition. I belive that the integrity of the anonimity of the brewers is paramont to the success of any competition. At this competition there were two BOS judges, one with a National BJCP ranking. The addition of an additional judge did not enable us to cut the flight of potential winners in half. Side Bar: In addition to picking the BOS winner, we were also asked to judge three beers from each of 10 catagories and rank them 1st, 2nd and 3rd place. Not to muck to ask since it was a new day of judging and there were no score sheets involved. I brought this up to the judge in question (via personal email) and received the following responce (edited in an attempt to preserve anonimity): Dear Gary, I would like to address a couple of points that you make. The BJCP and AHA guidelines call for being professional and fair. Well I've found my experience with BJCP certified judges is a thorough lack of professionalism. People commit to doing an event and then cancel at the last minute. Then to have one of the two certified judges that did show up, make a mockery of the process and insult the homebrewers in the audience. It sure makes me want to be associated with these groups! It appeared that >you had some knowledge of the beer, i.e. what special ingredients were in >them and, most shockingly, who the brewers were. If this was the case, I'm >shocked that you judged any of the beers. That is very unethical and not >fair. The BJCP and AHA guidelines are very clear in the need for brewer >anonymity. > >If this was not the case, then please accept my apology. > You are correct in the fact that I know what a Chambord liqueur is and in fact I know almost all the brewers!!! Did I know what beers each one entered? Absolutely not. The fact of the matter is my family had a Liquor Store for 17 years and there is not many things in the liquor store I am not very familiar with. I am a little surprised that you didn't know what it was, being the expert and all. I've traveled extensively to 46 different countries. Who do you think encouraged 80 percent of the people to enter the competition in the first place? Let me break it down for you. (city name A) has one drop off location- number of entries -(ZERO) , (city name B) number of entries (ZERO) (city name C)- number of entries (4) (city name D) -number of entries (6) (city name E)- number of entries-(38) (city name F)-number of entries-(12) In fact I spent my free time picking up all the entries at my own cost. I own a successful homebrew shop/Brew on premise and my father owns a hop wholesale company (43 varieties). I brew probably 3-4 times a week. I bag 3-4 hop orders a day! Did I plan on judging? No. Two judges would not have been fair. I planned on helping as a steward and be there to help facilitate the process. I believe that I was dispassionate, equal, equitable, just, nondiscriminatory, objective, unbiased, uncolored, and unprejudiced, not to mention fair. I hope I've made myself clear. If you are offended by this email, then you probably need to be offended. If not take it with a pinch of salt. Me again: Am I off base with my concern? His addition as a judge did not make it any "fairer" to the two of us. Puzzled Somewhere In the USA Gary Gutowski p.s. I am not posting this to flame anyone involved. I am willing to "take it with a pinch of salt" and move on. But, I would like some help in understanding how important the "integrity" of any competition really is. --Next_Part_SYNC3601C1C8D--