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 BAA04901
	for <spencer at srvr5.engin.umich.edu>; Tue, 4 Jul 2000 01:04:44 -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 BAA26232
	for <spencer at engin.umich.edu>; Tue, 4 Jul 2000 01:04:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" <judge at synchro.com>
To: "Digest Recipients" <judge at synchro.com>
Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" <judge at synchro.com>
Subject: Digest for the period 07/03/00 - 07/04/00
Message-ID: <SYNC10651C15CE at synchro.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2000 01:02:48 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC10651C148F"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Hops: 1
Status: RO

--Next_Part_SYNC10651C148F
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Table of contents
------------------------------------------------------
guidelines (Nathaniel P. Lansing)
--Next_Part_SYNC10651C148F
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Return-Path: <delbrew at compuserve.com>
Received: from spdmgaab.compuserve.com ([149.174.206.135]) by synchro.com
          with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC10511C12F4
          for judge at synchro.com; Mon, 03 Jul 2000 11:10:15 -0400
Received: (from mailgate at localhost)
	by spdmgaab.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.9) id LAA22521
	for judge at synchro.com; Mon, 3 Jul 2000 11:10:13 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2000 11:09:51 -0400
From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com>
Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" <judge at synchro.com>
Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com
Subject: guidelines
Sender: judge at synchro.com
To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest <judge at synchro.com>
Message-ID: <200007031110_MC2-AAF6-F841 at compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	 charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Hops: 3
X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message


Bruce makes a few comments on "slavish" obedience to
style descriptions. The descriptions are at least as much for
the brewer as the judge. So when a beer is presented _hopefully_
it is at least close to the right color and hopped reasonably close
to expectations. Clearer guidelines help a new brewer more than
the judge.
  >>I humbly suggest the we take a page from our brethern who judge =

wine,  broadly know the styles but are more interested in the technical =

competancies of the individual brewers..<<
  Having been at a few tastings beside wine judges I have to say
it is hard to draw parallels. If a wine smells like a Zin, tastes like a
Zin,
and is the proper color without sediment, it gets a 3rd place at least.
When in the final analysis it is the technical competancy of the brewer
that sorts out "is this the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place beer?" Is the aroma
fresh
enough, is the hops/malt balance better than beer #153, is the finish
cleaner. Is that a "house" flavor? or old extract? =

 The BJCP guidelines help get reasonably suitable beers to the final
line-up, then the competancy sorts out 1st, 2nd, 3rd place.
  The problem I see with Sake is not enough people drink it, there aren't=

enough proper examples to use as benchmark. And the character changes
radically from brewer to brewer. None being more right or wrong. At least=

when someone says "Munich Helles" we know not to expect much if
any hop aroma and a balance toward sweet malt aroma and flavor.
With Sake since it may or may not be "nutty"
may or may not be grassy,
may or may not be winey,
may or may not have berry tones.
That leaves Sake judging to be very subjective.
By writing clear guidelines beer judging is trying to be more objective.
 If we have this much confusion judging beer, judging Sake would get
really grim.

N.P.(Del) Lansing

             =

--Next_Part_SYNC10651C148F--
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 BAA04901
	for <spencer at srvr5.engin.umich.edu>; Tue, 4 Jul 2000 01:04:44 -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 BAA26232
	for <spencer at engin.umich.edu>; Tue, 4 Jul 2000 01:04:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" <judge at synchro.com>
To: "Digest Recipients" <judge at synchro.com>
Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" <judge at synchro.com>
Subject: Digest for the period 07/03/00 - 07/04/00
Message-ID: <SYNC10651C15CE at synchro.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2000 01:02:48 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC10651C148F"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Hops: 1
Status: RO

--Next_Part_SYNC10651C148F
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Table of contents
------------------------------------------------------
guidelines (Nathaniel P. Lansing)
--Next_Part_SYNC10651C148F
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Return-Path: <delbrew at compuserve.com>
Received: from spdmgaab.compuserve.com ([149.174.206.135]) by synchro.com
          with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC10511C12F4
          for judge at synchro.com; Mon, 03 Jul 2000 11:10:15 -0400
Received: (from mailgate at localhost)
	by spdmgaab.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.9) id LAA22521
	for judge at synchro.com; Mon, 3 Jul 2000 11:10:13 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2000 11:09:51 -0400
From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com>
Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" <judge at synchro.com>
Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com
Subject: guidelines
Sender: judge at synchro.com
To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest <judge at synchro.com>
Message-ID: <200007031110_MC2-AAF6-F841 at compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	 charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Hops: 3
X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message


Bruce makes a few comments on "slavish" obedience to
style descriptions. The descriptions are at least as much for
the brewer as the judge. So when a beer is presented _hopefully_
it is at least close to the right color and hopped reasonably close
to expectations. Clearer guidelines help a new brewer more than
the judge.
  >>I humbly suggest the we take a page from our brethern who judge =

wine,  broadly know the styles but are more interested in the technical =

competancies of the individual brewers..<<
  Having been at a few tastings beside wine judges I have to say
it is hard to draw parallels. If a wine smells like a Zin, tastes like a
Zin,
and is the proper color without sediment, it gets a 3rd place at least.
When in the final analysis it is the technical competancy of the brewer
that sorts out "is this the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place beer?" Is the aroma
fresh
enough, is the hops/malt balance better than beer #153, is the finish
cleaner. Is that a "house" flavor? or old extract? =

 The BJCP guidelines help get reasonably suitable beers to the final
line-up, then the competancy sorts out 1st, 2nd, 3rd place.
  The problem I see with Sake is not enough people drink it, there aren't=

enough proper examples to use as benchmark. And the character changes
radically from brewer to brewer. None being more right or wrong. At least=

when someone says "Munich Helles" we know not to expect much if
any hop aroma and a balance toward sweet malt aroma and flavor.
With Sake since it may or may not be "nutty"
may or may not be grassy,
may or may not be winey,
may or may not have berry tones.
That leaves Sake judging to be very subjective.
By writing clear guidelines beer judging is trying to be more objective.
 If we have this much confusion judging beer, judging Sake would get
really grim.

N.P.(Del) Lansing

             =

--Next_Part_SYNC10651C148F--