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 BAA14333 for ; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 01:02:03 -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 BAA19816 for ; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 01:02:01 -0400 (EDT) From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: "Digest Recipients" Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Subject: Digest for the period 06/16/00 - 06/17/00 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 01:01:55 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC6571B800C" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 1 Status: --Next_Part_SYNC6571B800C Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Table of contents ------------------------------------------------------ Re: Fruit beer and classic styles (BrewInfo) --Next_Part_SYNC6571B800C Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from mail.xnet.com ([198.147.221.67]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC6231B79ED for judge at synchro.com; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 15:12:03 -0400 Received: from hurricane.xnet.com (typhoon.xnet.com [198.147.221.66]) by mail.xnet.com (8.9.3+Sun/XNet-3.0R) with ESMTP id OAA12654 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:12:00 -0500 (CDT) Received: by hurricane.xnet.com (Postfix, from userid 4947) id 9D6A638650; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:12:00 -0500 (CDT) To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: Re: Fruit beer and classic styles Message-Id: <20000615191200.9D6A638650 at hurricane.xnet.com> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:12:00 -0500 (CDT) From: brewinfo at xnet.com (BrewInfo) Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Although this contradicts Dave's post on this subject, if I recall correctly (I was on the committee), the idea was to force the entrant to specify a classic style. It appears that some text was left in that doesn't make sense given that requirement and there may have been some confusion regarding this issue (clearly Dave recalls our motives differently than I do... but that was many beers ago ;^). I was in favour of removing the "Other" subcategory because it is far to easy for the entrant to simply brew a beer with fruit and enter it without specifying what base beer was intended. It also makes it harder for judges who are forced to judge strictly on "how they like it" or "how well the beer works." Judging is supposed to be as impartial as possible and therefore more restrictive guidelines make it easier for judges to be impartial. As it has been mentioned the hoppiness of a German Pils simply won't work with most fruit (maybe all fruit), so you, as a brewer, just have to rule out that base beer. I think that the committee does need to readdress these styles to correct the contradictions and ambiguity. Al. --Next_Part_SYNC6571B800C-- 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 BAA14333 for ; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 01:02:03 -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 BAA19816 for ; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 01:02:01 -0400 (EDT) From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: "Digest Recipients" Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Subject: Digest for the period 06/16/00 - 06/17/00 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 01:01:55 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC6571B800C" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 1 Status: --Next_Part_SYNC6571B800C Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Table of contents ------------------------------------------------------ Re: Fruit beer and classic styles (BrewInfo) --Next_Part_SYNC6571B800C Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from mail.xnet.com ([198.147.221.67]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC6231B79ED for judge at synchro.com; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 15:12:03 -0400 Received: from hurricane.xnet.com (typhoon.xnet.com [198.147.221.66]) by mail.xnet.com (8.9.3+Sun/XNet-3.0R) with ESMTP id OAA12654 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:12:00 -0500 (CDT) Received: by hurricane.xnet.com (Postfix, from userid 4947) id 9D6A638650; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:12:00 -0500 (CDT) To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: Re: Fruit beer and classic styles Message-Id: <20000615191200.9D6A638650 at hurricane.xnet.com> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:12:00 -0500 (CDT) From: brewinfo at xnet.com (BrewInfo) Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Although this contradicts Dave's post on this subject, if I recall correctly (I was on the committee), the idea was to force the entrant to specify a classic style. It appears that some text was left in that doesn't make sense given that requirement and there may have been some confusion regarding this issue (clearly Dave recalls our motives differently than I do... but that was many beers ago ;^). I was in favour of removing the "Other" subcategory because it is far to easy for the entrant to simply brew a beer with fruit and enter it without specifying what base beer was intended. It also makes it harder for judges who are forced to judge strictly on "how they like it" or "how well the beer works." Judging is supposed to be as impartial as possible and therefore more restrictive guidelines make it easier for judges to be impartial. As it has been mentioned the hoppiness of a German Pils simply won't work with most fruit (maybe all fruit), so you, as a brewer, just have to rule out that base beer. I think that the committee does need to readdress these styles to correct the contradictions and ambiguity. Al. --Next_Part_SYNC6571B800C--