Received: from srvr20.engin.umich.edu (root at srvr20.engin.umich.edu [141.213.75.22]) by srvr5.engin.umich.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA09801 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 01:02:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from synchro.com (cccox.ne.mediaone.net [24.147.232.109]) by srvr20.engin.umich.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA00927 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 01:01:00 -0400 (EDT) From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: "Digest Recipients" Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Subject: Digest for the period 06/09/00 - 06/10/00 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 01:00:43 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC4891B3A18" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 1 Status: RO --Next_Part_SYNC4891B3A18 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Table of contents ------------------------------------------------------ Re: Digest for the period 06/07/00 - 06/08/00 (Susan Ruud) RE: Specified Info (Sherfey) Mt. Brewer Open 2000 (BruDr at aol.com) --Next_Part_SYNC4891B3A18 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from biospud.cws.ndsu.nodak.edu ([134.129.117.187]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC4521B28AE for judge at synchro.com; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 12:18:19 -0400 Received: from localhost (ruud at localhost) by biospud.cws.ndsu.nodak.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA26083 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 11:10:07 GMT Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 11:10:07 +0000 (GMT) From: Susan Ruud 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: Re: Digest for the period 06/07/00 - 06/08/00 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Hi, I would like to see more discussion on whether the beer style needs to be specified in the Fruit and Spice/herb/vegetable beer BJCP categories 21 and 22 and the Smoke-Flavored Beer Category 23. In 21 and 22 It is underlined saying "The entrant must specify the underlying beer style as well as the type of fruit(s) used (or SHV's used)." But then the next sentence says that "If the base beer is a classic style, the original style should come through in aroma and flavor." This is a little confusing - which categories are considered classic styles and which are not? I was under the impression that any subcategory from categories 1-20 would be considered classic. Then in category 23 it is underlined saying "If this beer is based on a classic style (e.g., smoked robust porter), then the specific classic style (e.g., robust porter) must be identified" by this statement I thought I was clear that for smoked beers you did not need to specify the classic style. I just want to hear what the collective opinion here is. I have judged at large competitions where it was stated that the classic style doesn't need to be specified for any of these categories and I entered a smoked beer in the National competition this year and had points severely docked because the classic style wasn't specified altho they said overall it was a very nice well blended beer but didn't fit any classic style which is precisely why I didn't enter it as a classic style. I aggree judging is hard and really want to get opinions on this so that I can direct the judges at our competition in the fall the best way to judge these categories. Thanks for your help, Susan Ruud --Next_Part_SYNC4891B3A18 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from host.warwick.net ([204.255.24.254]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC4701B354F for judge at synchro.com; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 06:30:09 -0400 Received: from rastus (w128-2-p22.warwick.net [216.6.128.77]) by host.warwick.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with SMTP id e59AU8p22016 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 06:30:08 -0400 (EDT) Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" From: "Sherfey" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: RE: Specified Info Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 06:27:39 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message My approach... Regarding bottle size, if the entry is brought to the table without the organizer instructing the judges to disqualify for size, the entry is judged on the merit of its contents only. If the organizer has made note of bottle size as a disqualifier and the entry turns out to be a contender, I will attempt to sweet-talk the organizer into bending the packaging rule. The judge should not take the responsibility to score down for packaging rules. In the case of a mead/cider that was announced as still but turned out to be sparkling, that is a style issue just like a robust porter that was actually a dry stout. However, before the entry is scored, the competition organizer needs to research the entry information to make sure something wasn't missed at check-in. If the organizer cannot make the statement (with the entrant's paperwork in hand) that the "entrant failed to include the required information," then the benefit of doubt goes to the entrant, and the entry gets judged for what it is, and if it makes it all the way to BOS, then great! If the entrant *did* fail to include the information, the entry gets judged with the numerical scoring accurate to style issues, and the comments accurate to what is in the bottle, with tag comments along the way that say something like "but this is not accurate to *style*." Opinion: Under no circumstances should an entry that is not-to-style get a ribbon. This may seem like a no-brainer, but I have judged BOS several times in the past where at least one of the entries gets a comment like "this is a....what?" and is clearly not to style. Any comments to this? David Sherfey Warwick, NY --Next_Part_SYNC4891B3A18 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from imo-r14.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.68]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC4731B3616 for judge at synchro.com; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 09:11:41 -0400 Received: from BruDr at aol.com by imo-r14.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.9.) id u.c0.4c807aa (4386) for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 09:11:20 -0400 (EDT) From: BruDr at aol.com Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 09:11:20 EDT Subject: Mt. Brewer Open 2000 To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 104 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message CALL FOR JUDGES!!! The Mt. Brewer Open 2000 will be held July 22nd in Huntington, WV. This AHA and BJCP sanctioned competition will be held in conjunction with the "Summer Sounds Festival," which is a fund raising event for The huntington Museum of Art. This is the second annual event. Last years competition drew around 90 entries and we are expecting 100+ this year. All judges receive free tickets to the festival. This years festival features live music, catered dinner, and over 20 beer and food booths from local brewpubs, beer distributors, and restaurants. The Greater Huntington Homebrewers Association sponsors the event and will also have a booth at the festival. Lunch is provided for all judges during the competition and judging takes place within the museum grounds. Anyone interested should contact Jeff Boggess (National Judge) at Brudr at aol.com or 304-757-0337. --Next_Part_SYNC4891B3A18-- Received: from srvr20.engin.umich.edu (root at srvr20.engin.umich.edu [141.213.75.22]) by srvr5.engin.umich.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA09801 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 01:02:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from synchro.com (cccox.ne.mediaone.net [24.147.232.109]) by srvr20.engin.umich.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA00927 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 01:01:00 -0400 (EDT) From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: "Digest Recipients" Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Subject: Digest for the period 06/09/00 - 06/10/00 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 01:00:43 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC4891B3A18" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 1 Status: RO --Next_Part_SYNC4891B3A18 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Table of contents ------------------------------------------------------ Re: Digest for the period 06/07/00 - 06/08/00 (Susan Ruud) RE: Specified Info (Sherfey) Mt. Brewer Open 2000 (BruDr at aol.com) --Next_Part_SYNC4891B3A18 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from biospud.cws.ndsu.nodak.edu ([134.129.117.187]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC4521B28AE for judge at synchro.com; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 12:18:19 -0400 Received: from localhost (ruud at localhost) by biospud.cws.ndsu.nodak.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA26083 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 11:10:07 GMT Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 11:10:07 +0000 (GMT) From: Susan Ruud 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: Re: Digest for the period 06/07/00 - 06/08/00 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Hi, I would like to see more discussion on whether the beer style needs to be specified in the Fruit and Spice/herb/vegetable beer BJCP categories 21 and 22 and the Smoke-Flavored Beer Category 23. In 21 and 22 It is underlined saying "The entrant must specify the underlying beer style as well as the type of fruit(s) used (or SHV's used)." But then the next sentence says that "If the base beer is a classic style, the original style should come through in aroma and flavor." This is a little confusing - which categories are considered classic styles and which are not? I was under the impression that any subcategory from categories 1-20 would be considered classic. Then in category 23 it is underlined saying "If this beer is based on a classic style (e.g., smoked robust porter), then the specific classic style (e.g., robust porter) must be identified" by this statement I thought I was clear that for smoked beers you did not need to specify the classic style. I just want to hear what the collective opinion here is. I have judged at large competitions where it was stated that the classic style doesn't need to be specified for any of these categories and I entered a smoked beer in the National competition this year and had points severely docked because the classic style wasn't specified altho they said overall it was a very nice well blended beer but didn't fit any classic style which is precisely why I didn't enter it as a classic style. I aggree judging is hard and really want to get opinions on this so that I can direct the judges at our competition in the fall the best way to judge these categories. Thanks for your help, Susan Ruud --Next_Part_SYNC4891B3A18 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from host.warwick.net ([204.255.24.254]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC4701B354F for judge at synchro.com; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 06:30:09 -0400 Received: from rastus (w128-2-p22.warwick.net [216.6.128.77]) by host.warwick.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with SMTP id e59AU8p22016 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 06:30:08 -0400 (EDT) Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" From: "Sherfey" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: RE: Specified Info Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 06:27:39 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message My approach... Regarding bottle size, if the entry is brought to the table without the organizer instructing the judges to disqualify for size, the entry is judged on the merit of its contents only. If the organizer has made note of bottle size as a disqualifier and the entry turns out to be a contender, I will attempt to sweet-talk the organizer into bending the packaging rule. The judge should not take the responsibility to score down for packaging rules. In the case of a mead/cider that was announced as still but turned out to be sparkling, that is a style issue just like a robust porter that was actually a dry stout. However, before the entry is scored, the competition organizer needs to research the entry information to make sure something wasn't missed at check-in. If the organizer cannot make the statement (with the entrant's paperwork in hand) that the "entrant failed to include the required information," then the benefit of doubt goes to the entrant, and the entry gets judged for what it is, and if it makes it all the way to BOS, then great! If the entrant *did* fail to include the information, the entry gets judged with the numerical scoring accurate to style issues, and the comments accurate to what is in the bottle, with tag comments along the way that say something like "but this is not accurate to *style*." Opinion: Under no circumstances should an entry that is not-to-style get a ribbon. This may seem like a no-brainer, but I have judged BOS several times in the past where at least one of the entries gets a comment like "this is a....what?" and is clearly not to style. Any comments to this? David Sherfey Warwick, NY --Next_Part_SYNC4891B3A18 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from imo-r14.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.68]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC4731B3616 for judge at synchro.com; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 09:11:41 -0400 Received: from BruDr at aol.com by imo-r14.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.9.) id u.c0.4c807aa (4386) for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 09:11:20 -0400 (EDT) From: BruDr at aol.com Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 09:11:20 EDT Subject: Mt. Brewer Open 2000 To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 104 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message CALL FOR JUDGES!!! The Mt. Brewer Open 2000 will be held July 22nd in Huntington, WV. This AHA and BJCP sanctioned competition will be held in conjunction with the "Summer Sounds Festival," which is a fund raising event for The huntington Museum of Art. This is the second annual event. Last years competition drew around 90 entries and we are expecting 100+ this year. All judges receive free tickets to the festival. This years festival features live music, catered dinner, and over 20 beer and food booths from local brewpubs, beer distributors, and restaurants. The Greater Huntington Homebrewers Association sponsors the event and will also have a booth at the festival. Lunch is provided for all judges during the competition and judging takes place within the museum grounds. Anyone interested should contact Jeff Boggess (National Judge) at Brudr at aol.com or 304-757-0337. --Next_Part_SYNC4891B3A18--