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 BAA00488 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 01:06:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from synchro.com (cccox.ne.mediaone.net [24.147.232.105]) by srvr20.engin.umich.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA22138 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 01:06:22 -0500 (EST) From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: "Digest Recipients" Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Subject: Digest for the period 02/27/01 - 02/28/01 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 01:03:04 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 1 Status: O --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Table of contents ------------------------------------------------------ Re: Lack of Required Info (Alan D. Hord) Re: Lack of Required Info (Joel Plutchak) RE: Lack of Required Info (Houseman, David L) Re: Lack of info (Spencer W Thomas) RE: Lack of Required Info (Mark Tumarkin) (Dennis Waltman) Re: Lack of required info (Will Fields) --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from mail1.foxinternet.net ([208.8.213.22]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC67782937AD for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 02:10:07 -0500 Received: from lambic ([208.26.190.30]) by mail1.foxinternet.net (Post.Office MTA v3.1.2 release (PO205-101c) ID# 0-32329U10000L100S10000) with ESMTP id AAA238 for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 22:52:25 -0800 Message-ID: <002e01c0a08c$485a7fd0$3a65fea9 at lambic> Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" From: "Alan D. Hord" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest References: Subject: Re: Lack of Required Info Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 23:09:53 -0800 Organization: Hords Of Fun MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message RE: Lack of Required Info (Mark Tumarkin) Mark, you bring up an excellent point! I've organized four (counting this year's) competitions. I learned important lessons after the first, that being hand-written entries are very prone to errors of interpretation, correct style, spelling, style name vs. style number, and most importantly - the missing required information. This is truly the bane of any organizer/registrar. As a judge, if information is missing - and it's required, specifically as you've detailed - I certainly make a comment, and I do ding accordingly based on the infraction. But as an organizer I feel that I am also responsible for giving human nature the benefit of doubt, and thereby offer a guiding hand in resolving the brewer's dilemma: what style best matches my creation? I wrote an online Registration Wizard! Anyone can do it if they know a little DHTML. I used to have the AHA styles in a database, and by virtue of many shared barley-inspired moments came up with a list of suitable commercial examples. This year I migrated to the BJCP version. It's significantly more robust in description and example. I like the history component as well :o) When the entrant enters the Wizard, I garner all the important stuff about them, and their potential brew buddy. Next - I display all the categories in the left frame as a collapsed list. Selecting a category reveals the subcategories if applicable. Selecting a subcategory displays the appropriate information in the right frame. Here's the part you'd be interested in: If the style requires special information, still/sparkly, classic style emulation, fruit/veg/spice, varietal species, eye of newt, whatever, the appropriate options are displayed and you cannot continue the wizard without giving the information. Granted - I'm a lowly developer and I didn't get paid for this, so there's not much in the way of error trapping; you can fake me out if you want. But most brewer's - and I mean 99.9% - are pretty doggoned honest to a fault. The best part of waking up in the morning leading up to the competition is knowing that your entries are already entered into the database without typos on my part - and knowing that the special information of some sort is given. Now the challenge becomes weaning people off paper entries, but hey - if you're already online - your three points closer to winning! Cheers, Alan Cascade Brewers Guild.Org ----- Original Message ----- From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: "Digest Recipients" Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 10:02 PM Subject: Digest for the period 02/26/01 - 02/27/01 > Table of contents > ------------------------------------------------------ > Lack of Required Info (Mark Tumarkin) > > -------------------------------------------------------- > From: Mark Tumarkin Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 20:25:30 -0500 > Subject: Lack of Required Info > > > In several competitions that I've judge in recently, variations of the same > problem have come up. The problem concerns the lack of required info that the > brewer is supposed to provide. In a number of categories specific info is > required of the brewer - these requirements are underlined in the style > guidelines. > > For example, with mead "Entrants must specify whether the entry is still or > sparkling mead. Entrants must also indicate whether the mead is dry, > semi-sweet, or sweet". Other info is required for some beer styles, in fruit > Lambics the "Entrant must specify the type of fruit used in making the entry." > S/H/V, Smoked beer, and Specialty/Exp/Hist all require certain information to > be given. > > My problem, and my question, is if the info is not specified how much do you > ding the score? Would you prevent such an entry from placing (if it would do > so otherwise)? Or maybe it's not all that serious an issue. But at this point > the guidelines do say the info MUST be specified. How do you deal with this > situation? > > In part, I feel this should be a problem for the competition registrar or > organizer - not the judges. They should look for this information in the few > styles where it's required. If it's not there, they could call the brewer and > fill in the missing info. I know this is extra work so if they don't have > time, maybe they should simply disqualify the entry. Or perhaps simply let the > judges know how serious an infraction this is (or isn't) and how they'd like > us to deal with it at their competition. In a way, I hate being such a > stickler for rules/styles - but without them, what would a competition be? At > the very least, I think it's only fair that a level of consistency is applied. > > What do you think? > > Mark Tumarkin > Hogtown Brewers > Gainesville, Fl > > > --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from brew.ncsa.uiuc.edu ([141.142.22.64]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC6785293A9B for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:23:56 -0500 Received: from localhost (plutchak at localhost) by brew.ncsa.uiuc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA15034 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 08:23:55 -0600 X-Authentication-Warning: brew.ncsa.uiuc.edu: plutchak owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 08:23:55 -0600 (CST) From: Joel Plutchak 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: Re: Lack of Required Info Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Mark Tumarkin wrote: >In several competitions that I've judge in recently, variations of the >same problem have come up. The problem concerns the lack of required info >that the brewer is supposed to provide. In a number of categories >specific info is required of the brewer - these requirements are >underlined in the style guidelines. >My problem, and my question, is if the info is not specified how much do >you ding the score? Would you prevent such an entry from placing (if it >would do so otherwise)? Or maybe it's not all that serious an issue. But >at this point the guidelines do say the info MUST be specified. How do >you deal with this situation? I've noticed that happening at competitions I've judged, too. In the worst case, people who filled out the form correctly got dinged for minor variance from the stated parameters, while people who failed to fill it out correctly got the benefit of the doubt (over my mild objections; I don't "outstubborn"). Thinking about it just a little bit makes me inclined to perhaps ding the score as if the particular component were wrong, e.g., if they didn't specify carbonation at all for a mead that is still, mark off as if it were sparkling, and note why on the score sheet. I anticipate the most popular response to the problem will be to leave it to the individual competition organizers, but I too wouldn't mind some guidance from the BJCP on issues like this. -- Joel Plutchak Preparing for the 7th Boneyard Brew-Off, June 2, 2001 --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from eamail1-out.unisys.com ([192.61.61.99]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC6785293B4C for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:59:05 -0500 Received: from us-ea-gtwy-4.ea.unisys.com (us-ea-gtwy-4.ea.unisys.com [192.61.146.122]) by eamail1-out.unisys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA03545 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:58:25 GMT Received: by us-ea-gtwy-4.ea.unisys.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 08:58:59 -0600 Message-ID: From: "Houseman, David L" 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: RE: Lack of Required Info Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 08:58:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message To address Mark's question, you're right, this is a problem for the registrar and organizer, not the judges, although it does make their job more difficult. Whenever possible the entrant should be contacted for the additional information in advance. If not possible then provide whatever information you have to the judges. The judges, IMHO, should not ding any points; if the entry has been provided to them, then it's passed the organizers/registrars. But the judges will have to guess about whether the entry was supposed to be still or sparkling, sweet or dry, or what special ingredients were in the entry. Then the judges have to judge to what they guess it to be. This may work out for the entrant or the judges may have guessed wrong and in which case the entrant gets what s/he deserves. I've judges a number of entries where this was the case. You do the best you can and give the entrant feedback, some of which is "what is this supposed to be?" Dave Houseman -------------------------------------------------------- From: Mark Tumarkin Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 20:25:30 -0500 Subject: Lack of Required Info In several competitions that I've judge in recently, variations of the same problem have come up. The problem concerns the lack of required info that the brewer is supposed to provide. In a number of categories specific info is required of the brewer - these requirements are underlined in the style guidelines. For example, with mead "Entrants must specify whether the entry is still or sparkling mead. Entrants must also indicate whether the mead is dry, semi-sweet, or sweet". Other info is required for some beer styles, in fruit Lambics the "Entrant must specify the type of fruit used in making the entry." S/H/V, Smoked beer, and Specialty/Exp/Hist all require certain information to be given. My problem, and my question, is if the info is not specified how much do you ding the score? Would you prevent such an entry from placing (if it would do so otherwise)? Or maybe it's not all that serious an issue. But at this point the guidelines do say the info MUST be specified. How do you deal with this situation? In part, I feel this should be a problem for the competition registrar or organizer - not the judges. They should look for this information in the few styles where it's required. If it's not there, they could call the brewer and fill in the missing info. I know this is extra work so if they don't have time, maybe they should simply disqualify the entry. Or perhaps simply let the judges know how serious an infraction this is (or isn't) and how they'd like us to deal with it at their competition. In a way, I hate being such a stickler for rules/styles - but without them, what would a competition be? At the very least, I think it's only fair that a level of consistency is applied. What do you think? Mark Tumarkin Hogtown Brewers Gainesville, Fl --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from srvr22.engin.umich.edu ([141.213.75.21]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC67872940A5 for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:54:06 -0500 Received: from hubris.engin.umich.edu (root at hubris.engin.umich.edu [207.75.146.24]) by srvr22.engin.umich.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA18186; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:54:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (spencer at localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hubris.engin.umich.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA20372; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:54:03 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200102271654.LAA20372 at hubris.engin.umich.edu> To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest cc: JudgeNet Subject: Re: Lack of info Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:54:03 -0500 From: Spencer W Thomas Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message My feeling is that it is the responsibility of the competition organizer to decide what to do here. If you as a judge feel that you cannot fairly judge the beer based on the information you have been given, then you should talk to the organizer. Generally, the options are to judge it as well as possible, or to DQ the entry. Sometimes the organizer can look at the entry form and gather some more information for you. A couple of examples: the entry may include a recipe, in which case the organizer can pull the specialty ingredients from the recipe; or as a last resort there may be a clue in the name of the entry. If the organizer can't help, and s/he refuses to DQ the entry, then you judge it as a "generic" entry, write in big letters "I CAN'T JUDGE THIS COMPLETELY BECAUSE YOU LEFT OUT INFORMATION," and give it as fair a score as you can. We're not called "judges" for nothing. :-) Sometimes judges have to make "judgement calls." =Spencer in Ann Arbor, MI --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from EMAIL.SABLAW.COM ([199.250.216.3]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC67902946D9 for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:31:04 -0500 Received: from SAB-Message_Server by EMAIL.SABLAW.COM with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:30:28 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 5.5.3.1 Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:30:14 -0500 From: "Dennis Waltman" 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: RE: Lack of Required Info (Mark Tumarkin) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Guinevere: 1.0.13 ; Sutherland Asbill Br X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Mark's inquiry is one I too have struggled with in competitions. I have seen entries marked down because they were really sweet and not = medium. And in the same flight entries that did not specify not have to = pass that test. It goes further for the specifying beer styles on fruit, herb, smoked and = specialty beers where a beer style is supposed to be indicated. If someone = specifies Ale, is that enough? Is a category needed? a sub-category? I = have seen an entry where the style was Belgian Strong Ale. While that = tells a little of what is expected, the range of flavors and aromas and = characteristics of the range of Belgian Ales that are strong, really = doesn't give much information to the judges. I've have made good fruit and = herb beers in the past, before a beer style was needed to be specified. = Now for competitions I wonder if I should say Porter or Brown Porter, or = Light Ale or Blonde Ale. And how about carbonation levels on ciders? Sometimes the brewer did indicate the information, it is just the flight = sheet does not reflect that information. My guess the right answer is that the judge should never be put in that = position. Entries without the right information should have their entering = person contacted about the missing information, before competition day. Dennis Waltman =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Lack of Required Info (Mark Tumarkin) =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D From: Mark Tumarkin Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 20:25:30 -0500 Subject: Lack of Required Info In several competitions that I've judge in recently, variations of the = same problem have come up. The problem concerns the lack of required info that = the brewer is supposed to provide. In a number of categories specific info is required of the brewer - these requirements are underlined in the style guidelines. ..... =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D --------------------------------------------------- The information contained in this message from Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP and any attachments is confidential and intended only for the named recipient(s). If you have received this message in error, you are prohibited from copying, distributing or using the information. Please contact the sender immediately by return email and delete the original message. --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from maverick.spiderwebhost.net ([216.141.121.19]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC6790294741 for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:51:12 -0500 Received: from GANISTER-IC3BJG (10-126.024.popsite.net [66.19.6.126]) by maverick.spiderwebhost.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA20812 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:43:33 -0500 Message-Id: <4.2.2.20010227091723.00ad6780 at gfarch.net> X-Sender: will at gfarch.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:52:40 -0500 To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest From: Will Fields Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com Subject: Re: Lack of required info In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message In response to Mark Tumarkin's appeal for our thoughts... I think you can add fruit beer to that list. I am often not informed of the base beer by the brewer when judging this category. A review of the BJCP guidelines for this category will show them to be comprehensive and specifically ask for this information. The base beer is sometimes obvious but unless the brewer specifically states his or her intention how are we to know for sure? Brewers sometimes enter beers in incorrect categories and when they do they suffer the consequence. It is unfair to other brewers in this category for a judge to make this decision for the brewer. I look at this lack of information not as an accidental exclusion, which it very well could be, but more of a hedge by the brewer who may or may not know for certain what the base beer is. I share Mark's concerns. Do we "ding" an otherwise good entry in deference to another brewer who followed instructions? What about an entry in a Bass or Sam Adams bottle with raised lettering or a bottle so carelessly prepared it's a standout? Fussy point maybe but is generally an entry requirement that bottles be unremarkable. It could be argued that if an entry reaches the judge, that decision has already been made by the entry coordinator. We therefore need to judge the entry but should understand that a judges attitude may affect the judging of that entry just as work load and other factors contribute to the level of prejudice involved. Personally, I detest a sloppily presented bottle. It bothers me when I see a bottle with only a half-hearted attempt to remove the label or one that has duct tape goop all over it. I don't feel it passes the test to keep the competition anonymous. Will Fields South Hamilton MA --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B-- 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 BAA00488 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 01:06:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from synchro.com (cccox.ne.mediaone.net [24.147.232.105]) by srvr20.engin.umich.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA22138 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 01:06:22 -0500 (EST) From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: "Digest Recipients" Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Subject: Digest for the period 02/27/01 - 02/28/01 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 01:03:04 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 1 Status: O --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Table of contents ------------------------------------------------------ Re: Lack of Required Info (Alan D. Hord) Re: Lack of Required Info (Joel Plutchak) RE: Lack of Required Info (Houseman, David L) Re: Lack of info (Spencer W Thomas) RE: Lack of Required Info (Mark Tumarkin) (Dennis Waltman) Re: Lack of required info (Will Fields) --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from mail1.foxinternet.net ([208.8.213.22]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC67782937AD for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 02:10:07 -0500 Received: from lambic ([208.26.190.30]) by mail1.foxinternet.net (Post.Office MTA v3.1.2 release (PO205-101c) ID# 0-32329U10000L100S10000) with ESMTP id AAA238 for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 22:52:25 -0800 Message-ID: <002e01c0a08c$485a7fd0$3a65fea9 at lambic> Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" From: "Alan D. Hord" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest References: Subject: Re: Lack of Required Info Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 23:09:53 -0800 Organization: Hords Of Fun MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message RE: Lack of Required Info (Mark Tumarkin) Mark, you bring up an excellent point! I've organized four (counting this year's) competitions. I learned important lessons after the first, that being hand-written entries are very prone to errors of interpretation, correct style, spelling, style name vs. style number, and most importantly - the missing required information. This is truly the bane of any organizer/registrar. As a judge, if information is missing - and it's required, specifically as you've detailed - I certainly make a comment, and I do ding accordingly based on the infraction. But as an organizer I feel that I am also responsible for giving human nature the benefit of doubt, and thereby offer a guiding hand in resolving the brewer's dilemma: what style best matches my creation? I wrote an online Registration Wizard! Anyone can do it if they know a little DHTML. I used to have the AHA styles in a database, and by virtue of many shared barley-inspired moments came up with a list of suitable commercial examples. This year I migrated to the BJCP version. It's significantly more robust in description and example. I like the history component as well :o) When the entrant enters the Wizard, I garner all the important stuff about them, and their potential brew buddy. Next - I display all the categories in the left frame as a collapsed list. Selecting a category reveals the subcategories if applicable. Selecting a subcategory displays the appropriate information in the right frame. Here's the part you'd be interested in: If the style requires special information, still/sparkly, classic style emulation, fruit/veg/spice, varietal species, eye of newt, whatever, the appropriate options are displayed and you cannot continue the wizard without giving the information. Granted - I'm a lowly developer and I didn't get paid for this, so there's not much in the way of error trapping; you can fake me out if you want. But most brewer's - and I mean 99.9% - are pretty doggoned honest to a fault. The best part of waking up in the morning leading up to the competition is knowing that your entries are already entered into the database without typos on my part - and knowing that the special information of some sort is given. Now the challenge becomes weaning people off paper entries, but hey - if you're already online - your three points closer to winning! Cheers, Alan Cascade Brewers Guild.Org ----- Original Message ----- From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: "Digest Recipients" Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 10:02 PM Subject: Digest for the period 02/26/01 - 02/27/01 > Table of contents > ------------------------------------------------------ > Lack of Required Info (Mark Tumarkin) > > -------------------------------------------------------- > From: Mark Tumarkin Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 20:25:30 -0500 > Subject: Lack of Required Info > > > In several competitions that I've judge in recently, variations of the same > problem have come up. The problem concerns the lack of required info that the > brewer is supposed to provide. In a number of categories specific info is > required of the brewer - these requirements are underlined in the style > guidelines. > > For example, with mead "Entrants must specify whether the entry is still or > sparkling mead. Entrants must also indicate whether the mead is dry, > semi-sweet, or sweet". Other info is required for some beer styles, in fruit > Lambics the "Entrant must specify the type of fruit used in making the entry." > S/H/V, Smoked beer, and Specialty/Exp/Hist all require certain information to > be given. > > My problem, and my question, is if the info is not specified how much do you > ding the score? Would you prevent such an entry from placing (if it would do > so otherwise)? Or maybe it's not all that serious an issue. But at this point > the guidelines do say the info MUST be specified. How do you deal with this > situation? > > In part, I feel this should be a problem for the competition registrar or > organizer - not the judges. They should look for this information in the few > styles where it's required. If it's not there, they could call the brewer and > fill in the missing info. I know this is extra work so if they don't have > time, maybe they should simply disqualify the entry. Or perhaps simply let the > judges know how serious an infraction this is (or isn't) and how they'd like > us to deal with it at their competition. In a way, I hate being such a > stickler for rules/styles - but without them, what would a competition be? At > the very least, I think it's only fair that a level of consistency is applied. > > What do you think? > > Mark Tumarkin > Hogtown Brewers > Gainesville, Fl > > > --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from brew.ncsa.uiuc.edu ([141.142.22.64]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC6785293A9B for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:23:56 -0500 Received: from localhost (plutchak at localhost) by brew.ncsa.uiuc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA15034 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 08:23:55 -0600 X-Authentication-Warning: brew.ncsa.uiuc.edu: plutchak owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 08:23:55 -0600 (CST) From: Joel Plutchak 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: Re: Lack of Required Info Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Mark Tumarkin wrote: >In several competitions that I've judge in recently, variations of the >same problem have come up. The problem concerns the lack of required info >that the brewer is supposed to provide. In a number of categories >specific info is required of the brewer - these requirements are >underlined in the style guidelines. >My problem, and my question, is if the info is not specified how much do >you ding the score? Would you prevent such an entry from placing (if it >would do so otherwise)? Or maybe it's not all that serious an issue. But >at this point the guidelines do say the info MUST be specified. How do >you deal with this situation? I've noticed that happening at competitions I've judged, too. In the worst case, people who filled out the form correctly got dinged for minor variance from the stated parameters, while people who failed to fill it out correctly got the benefit of the doubt (over my mild objections; I don't "outstubborn"). Thinking about it just a little bit makes me inclined to perhaps ding the score as if the particular component were wrong, e.g., if they didn't specify carbonation at all for a mead that is still, mark off as if it were sparkling, and note why on the score sheet. I anticipate the most popular response to the problem will be to leave it to the individual competition organizers, but I too wouldn't mind some guidance from the BJCP on issues like this. -- Joel Plutchak Preparing for the 7th Boneyard Brew-Off, June 2, 2001 --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from eamail1-out.unisys.com ([192.61.61.99]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC6785293B4C for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:59:05 -0500 Received: from us-ea-gtwy-4.ea.unisys.com (us-ea-gtwy-4.ea.unisys.com [192.61.146.122]) by eamail1-out.unisys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA03545 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:58:25 GMT Received: by us-ea-gtwy-4.ea.unisys.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 08:58:59 -0600 Message-ID: From: "Houseman, David L" 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: RE: Lack of Required Info Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 08:58:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message To address Mark's question, you're right, this is a problem for the registrar and organizer, not the judges, although it does make their job more difficult. Whenever possible the entrant should be contacted for the additional information in advance. If not possible then provide whatever information you have to the judges. The judges, IMHO, should not ding any points; if the entry has been provided to them, then it's passed the organizers/registrars. But the judges will have to guess about whether the entry was supposed to be still or sparkling, sweet or dry, or what special ingredients were in the entry. Then the judges have to judge to what they guess it to be. This may work out for the entrant or the judges may have guessed wrong and in which case the entrant gets what s/he deserves. I've judges a number of entries where this was the case. You do the best you can and give the entrant feedback, some of which is "what is this supposed to be?" Dave Houseman -------------------------------------------------------- From: Mark Tumarkin Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 20:25:30 -0500 Subject: Lack of Required Info In several competitions that I've judge in recently, variations of the same problem have come up. The problem concerns the lack of required info that the brewer is supposed to provide. In a number of categories specific info is required of the brewer - these requirements are underlined in the style guidelines. For example, with mead "Entrants must specify whether the entry is still or sparkling mead. Entrants must also indicate whether the mead is dry, semi-sweet, or sweet". Other info is required for some beer styles, in fruit Lambics the "Entrant must specify the type of fruit used in making the entry." S/H/V, Smoked beer, and Specialty/Exp/Hist all require certain information to be given. My problem, and my question, is if the info is not specified how much do you ding the score? Would you prevent such an entry from placing (if it would do so otherwise)? Or maybe it's not all that serious an issue. But at this point the guidelines do say the info MUST be specified. How do you deal with this situation? In part, I feel this should be a problem for the competition registrar or organizer - not the judges. They should look for this information in the few styles where it's required. If it's not there, they could call the brewer and fill in the missing info. I know this is extra work so if they don't have time, maybe they should simply disqualify the entry. Or perhaps simply let the judges know how serious an infraction this is (or isn't) and how they'd like us to deal with it at their competition. In a way, I hate being such a stickler for rules/styles - but without them, what would a competition be? At the very least, I think it's only fair that a level of consistency is applied. What do you think? Mark Tumarkin Hogtown Brewers Gainesville, Fl --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from srvr22.engin.umich.edu ([141.213.75.21]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC67872940A5 for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:54:06 -0500 Received: from hubris.engin.umich.edu (root at hubris.engin.umich.edu [207.75.146.24]) by srvr22.engin.umich.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA18186; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:54:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (spencer at localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hubris.engin.umich.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA20372; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:54:03 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200102271654.LAA20372 at hubris.engin.umich.edu> To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest cc: JudgeNet Subject: Re: Lack of info Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:54:03 -0500 From: Spencer W Thomas Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message My feeling is that it is the responsibility of the competition organizer to decide what to do here. If you as a judge feel that you cannot fairly judge the beer based on the information you have been given, then you should talk to the organizer. Generally, the options are to judge it as well as possible, or to DQ the entry. Sometimes the organizer can look at the entry form and gather some more information for you. A couple of examples: the entry may include a recipe, in which case the organizer can pull the specialty ingredients from the recipe; or as a last resort there may be a clue in the name of the entry. If the organizer can't help, and s/he refuses to DQ the entry, then you judge it as a "generic" entry, write in big letters "I CAN'T JUDGE THIS COMPLETELY BECAUSE YOU LEFT OUT INFORMATION," and give it as fair a score as you can. We're not called "judges" for nothing. :-) Sometimes judges have to make "judgement calls." =Spencer in Ann Arbor, MI --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from EMAIL.SABLAW.COM ([199.250.216.3]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC67902946D9 for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:31:04 -0500 Received: from SAB-Message_Server by EMAIL.SABLAW.COM with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:30:28 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 5.5.3.1 Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:30:14 -0500 From: "Dennis Waltman" 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: RE: Lack of Required Info (Mark Tumarkin) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Guinevere: 1.0.13 ; Sutherland Asbill Br X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Mark's inquiry is one I too have struggled with in competitions. I have seen entries marked down because they were really sweet and not = medium. And in the same flight entries that did not specify not have to = pass that test. It goes further for the specifying beer styles on fruit, herb, smoked and = specialty beers where a beer style is supposed to be indicated. If someone = specifies Ale, is that enough? Is a category needed? a sub-category? I = have seen an entry where the style was Belgian Strong Ale. While that = tells a little of what is expected, the range of flavors and aromas and = characteristics of the range of Belgian Ales that are strong, really = doesn't give much information to the judges. I've have made good fruit and = herb beers in the past, before a beer style was needed to be specified. = Now for competitions I wonder if I should say Porter or Brown Porter, or = Light Ale or Blonde Ale. And how about carbonation levels on ciders? Sometimes the brewer did indicate the information, it is just the flight = sheet does not reflect that information. My guess the right answer is that the judge should never be put in that = position. Entries without the right information should have their entering = person contacted about the missing information, before competition day. Dennis Waltman =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Lack of Required Info (Mark Tumarkin) =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D From: Mark Tumarkin Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 20:25:30 -0500 Subject: Lack of Required Info In several competitions that I've judge in recently, variations of the = same problem have come up. The problem concerns the lack of required info that = the brewer is supposed to provide. In a number of categories specific info is required of the brewer - these requirements are underlined in the style guidelines. ..... =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D --------------------------------------------------- The information contained in this message from Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP and any attachments is confidential and intended only for the named recipient(s). If you have received this message in error, you are prohibited from copying, distributing or using the information. Please contact the sender immediately by return email and delete the original message. --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Received: from maverick.spiderwebhost.net ([216.141.121.19]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.4.1123) id SYNC6790294741 for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:51:12 -0500 Received: from GANISTER-IC3BJG (10-126.024.popsite.net [66.19.6.126]) by maverick.spiderwebhost.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA20812 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:43:33 -0500 Message-Id: <4.2.2.20010227091723.00ad6780 at gfarch.net> X-Sender: will at gfarch.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:52:40 -0500 To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest From: Will Fields Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner at synchro.com Sender: judge at synchro.com Subject: Re: Lack of required info In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message In response to Mark Tumarkin's appeal for our thoughts... I think you can add fruit beer to that list. I am often not informed of the base beer by the brewer when judging this category. A review of the BJCP guidelines for this category will show them to be comprehensive and specifically ask for this information. The base beer is sometimes obvious but unless the brewer specifically states his or her intention how are we to know for sure? Brewers sometimes enter beers in incorrect categories and when they do they suffer the consequence. It is unfair to other brewers in this category for a judge to make this decision for the brewer. I look at this lack of information not as an accidental exclusion, which it very well could be, but more of a hedge by the brewer who may or may not know for certain what the base beer is. I share Mark's concerns. Do we "ding" an otherwise good entry in deference to another brewer who followed instructions? What about an entry in a Bass or Sam Adams bottle with raised lettering or a bottle so carelessly prepared it's a standout? Fussy point maybe but is generally an entry requirement that bottles be unremarkable. It could be argued that if an entry reaches the judge, that decision has already been made by the entry coordinator. We therefore need to judge the entry but should understand that a judges attitude may affect the judging of that entry just as work load and other factors contribute to the level of prejudice involved. Personally, I detest a sloppily presented bottle. It bothers me when I see a bottle with only a half-hearted attempt to remove the label or one that has duct tape goop all over it. I don't feel it passes the test to keep the competition anonymous. Will Fields South Hamilton MA --Next_Part_SYNC6801294E2B--