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 BAA20028 for ; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 01:02:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from synchro.com (cccox.ne.mediaone.net [24.147.232.109]) by srvr22.engin.umich.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA01411 for ; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 01:02:52 -0400 (EDT) From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: "Digest Recipients" Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Subject: Digest for the period 06/10/00 - 06/11/00 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 01:02:44 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC5131B462F" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 1 Status: RO --Next_Part_SYNC5131B462F Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Table of contents ------------------------------------------------------ Mead & Cider guidelines (Alison, Colin, Scott Birdwell) Re: Digest for the period 06/09/00 - 06/10/00 (David Houseman) --Next_Part_SYNC5131B462F Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from sneety.insync.net ([209.113.65.5]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC4771B37DE for judge at synchro.com; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 13:19:47 -0400 Received: from insync.net (209-113-110-3.insync.net [209.113.110.3]) by sneety.insync.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA29406; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 12:19:38 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <394143EC.A9D4E431 at insync.net> Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 12:22:21 -0700 From: "Alison, Colin, Scott Birdwell" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: Mead & Cider guidelines Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message The recent discussion on HBD about inadequacies of the Mead and Cider styles in the new Beer Judge Certification Program style guide has not gone un-noticed. The BJCP has commissioned a small styles team to focus on a more thorough update of the Mead and Cider styles. This team will be lead by David Houseman. However, he expects to utilize the experts in the these beverages rather than rely just on beer brewers and judges. If you are such an expert in Mead or Cider, please contact David at dhousema at cccbi.org to volunteer your time to work with this committee. Thanking you in advance, Scott Birdwell DeFalco's Home Wine & Beer Supplies Houston (aka "Bonhamville") TX BJCP Competition Committee Chairman --Next_Part_SYNC5131B462F Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from munin.btcwcu.org ([204.108.253.90]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC4971B42E3 for judge at synchro.com; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 09:01:08 -0400 Received: from TR-housemdlrem (shiva2.btcwcu.org [204.108.253.141]) by munin.btcwcu.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id FAA00515 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 05:00:49 -0400 Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 05:00:49 -0400 Message-Id: <200006100900.FAA00515 at munin.btcwcu.org> X-Sender: dhousema at mail.cccbi.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest From: David Houseman Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com Subject: Re: Digest for the period 06/09/00 - 06/10/00 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Susan Ruud asks several questions about "classic styles" for the Fruit, Herb, Spice and Vegetable cageories in the new style guide. Good questions. I can provide some insight into the thinking of the style guide committee when we created the most recent version. If you will recall the previous guide had in fact (A) Classic Style and (B) Other for these categories. The new guide tried to simplify the categorization somewhat by simply having the entrant specify a classic style (any of the other 20 styles/60+ substyles) if s/he wanted the beer to be judged as that style with the added fruit, spice, herb or vegetable. Otherwise it would be judged as the previous open "Other." As previously stated if one is left with "Other," simply as a Fruit Beer with, say blueberries, then one cannot judge the beer on whether the base beer is too bitter for style, the correct color for style, etc. But the judge of such specialities has to put more weight on how the whole beer comes together. A green blueberry beer wouldn't be as appropriate as a nice blue/purple beer for example. If the beer seems to be a crisp blueberry pilsner one would expect greater clarity than a blueberry weizen as another example. Are the blueberries appropriate for the base beer? Is there a balance between the berry flavor and aroma and the malt and hops? To state that the beer is an American Pale Ale with Blueberries sets different expectations for the judge than if the classic style were not specified. If the classic style is specified then it needs to be judged on both the classic style and how well the special ingredient comes forth. If the classic style is not specified then one can only judge as stated above. Specifically for smoked beers, same as fruit, spice, herb one can specify a classic style (robust porter for example) or not. And the judges shouldn't be docking points because the style isn't specified. But IMHO the job of judging beers without a specified style is more difficult and judges may not do as good a job as if it were specified. The existing style guide is now intended to be a living document. It's not perfect and the authors expected that it would be updated on some periodic basis as needed. If the wording is problematic or the collective would like to return to a clearer differentiation of the (A) Classic, (B) Other substyles for these categories, then by all means we should consider it. Scott Birdwell, the BJCP Competition Director has the style guide responsibility and would add this to any other requests for consideration in the next revision. I personally hope that this version of the style guide as a whole is an improvement over the previous version and that those entering BJCP and AHA sanctioned competitions find the common guide a benefit that avoids confusion. David Houseman --Next_Part_SYNC5131B462F-- 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 BAA20028 for ; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 01:02:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from synchro.com (cccox.ne.mediaone.net [24.147.232.109]) by srvr22.engin.umich.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA01411 for ; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 01:02:52 -0400 (EDT) From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: "Digest Recipients" Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Subject: Digest for the period 06/10/00 - 06/11/00 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 01:02:44 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC5131B462F" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 1 Status: RO --Next_Part_SYNC5131B462F Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Table of contents ------------------------------------------------------ Mead & Cider guidelines (Alison, Colin, Scott Birdwell) Re: Digest for the period 06/09/00 - 06/10/00 (David Houseman) --Next_Part_SYNC5131B462F Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from sneety.insync.net ([209.113.65.5]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC4771B37DE for judge at synchro.com; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 13:19:47 -0400 Received: from insync.net (209-113-110-3.insync.net [209.113.110.3]) by sneety.insync.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA29406; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 12:19:38 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <394143EC.A9D4E431 at insync.net> Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 12:22:21 -0700 From: "Alison, Colin, Scott Birdwell" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: Mead & Cider guidelines Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message The recent discussion on HBD about inadequacies of the Mead and Cider styles in the new Beer Judge Certification Program style guide has not gone un-noticed. The BJCP has commissioned a small styles team to focus on a more thorough update of the Mead and Cider styles. This team will be lead by David Houseman. However, he expects to utilize the experts in the these beverages rather than rely just on beer brewers and judges. If you are such an expert in Mead or Cider, please contact David at dhousema at cccbi.org to volunteer your time to work with this committee. Thanking you in advance, Scott Birdwell DeFalco's Home Wine & Beer Supplies Houston (aka "Bonhamville") TX BJCP Competition Committee Chairman --Next_Part_SYNC5131B462F Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from munin.btcwcu.org ([204.108.253.90]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC4971B42E3 for judge at synchro.com; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 09:01:08 -0400 Received: from TR-housemdlrem (shiva2.btcwcu.org [204.108.253.141]) by munin.btcwcu.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id FAA00515 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 05:00:49 -0400 Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 05:00:49 -0400 Message-Id: <200006100900.FAA00515 at munin.btcwcu.org> X-Sender: dhousema at mail.cccbi.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest From: David Houseman Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com Subject: Re: Digest for the period 06/09/00 - 06/10/00 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Susan Ruud asks several questions about "classic styles" for the Fruit, Herb, Spice and Vegetable cageories in the new style guide. Good questions. I can provide some insight into the thinking of the style guide committee when we created the most recent version. If you will recall the previous guide had in fact (A) Classic Style and (B) Other for these categories. The new guide tried to simplify the categorization somewhat by simply having the entrant specify a classic style (any of the other 20 styles/60+ substyles) if s/he wanted the beer to be judged as that style with the added fruit, spice, herb or vegetable. Otherwise it would be judged as the previous open "Other." As previously stated if one is left with "Other," simply as a Fruit Beer with, say blueberries, then one cannot judge the beer on whether the base beer is too bitter for style, the correct color for style, etc. But the judge of such specialities has to put more weight on how the whole beer comes together. A green blueberry beer wouldn't be as appropriate as a nice blue/purple beer for example. If the beer seems to be a crisp blueberry pilsner one would expect greater clarity than a blueberry weizen as another example. Are the blueberries appropriate for the base beer? Is there a balance between the berry flavor and aroma and the malt and hops? To state that the beer is an American Pale Ale with Blueberries sets different expectations for the judge than if the classic style were not specified. If the classic style is specified then it needs to be judged on both the classic style and how well the special ingredient comes forth. If the classic style is not specified then one can only judge as stated above. Specifically for smoked beers, same as fruit, spice, herb one can specify a classic style (robust porter for example) or not. And the judges shouldn't be docking points because the style isn't specified. But IMHO the job of judging beers without a specified style is more difficult and judges may not do as good a job as if it were specified. The existing style guide is now intended to be a living document. It's not perfect and the authors expected that it would be updated on some periodic basis as needed. If the wording is problematic or the collective would like to return to a clearer differentiation of the (A) Classic, (B) Other substyles for these categories, then by all means we should consider it. Scott Birdwell, the BJCP Competition Director has the style guide responsibility and would add this to any other requests for consideration in the next revision. I personally hope that this version of the style guide as a whole is an improvement over the previous version and that those entering BJCP and AHA sanctioned competitions find the common guide a benefit that avoids confusion. David Houseman --Next_Part_SYNC5131B462F--