Subject: Digest for the period 2/2/02 - 2/3/02 Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2002 01:04:26 -0500 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC496142644D" --Next_Part_SYNC496142644D Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Irish-style amber and the PPBT (Wayne Wambles) BUZZ OFF Homebrew Competition (Houseman, David L) flavor space (Dave Sapsis) --Next_Part_SYNC496142644D Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Message_Part_SYNC496142644D" --Message_Part_SYNC496142644D Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from johnson.mail.mindspring.net ([207.69.200.177]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC4924425D99 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 01 Feb 2002 12:14:55 -0500 Received: from pool-63.49.55.131.tmpa.grid.net ([63.49.55.131] helo=beernazimindspring) by johnson.mail.mindspring.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16WhH1-0000hv-00 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 01 Feb 2002 12:14:51 -0500 Message-ID: <000901c1ab46$361830e0$8337313f`at`com> From: "Wayne Wambles" 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: Irish-style amber and the PPBT Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 12:30:56 -0500 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 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message When I was asking where the Irish-style amber ale category was, I was referring to where is it within the BJCP guidelines. This is a style that has been produced for some time(Killian's Red and Michael Shea's Amber(which is actually an Irish-style amber lager but the intent is the same)). These beers tend to drink very pleasantly and are also quite social. It seems that this might be a style that is seeing some production at home but has no guideline within the BJCP to be entered. Shouldn't we consider adding this category to the BJCP guidelines Paul? The Golden ale category is another category that the PPBT uses that might be a fine addition to the BJCP guidelines. The light ale category is similar to the Golden but the hop profile is reduced because it is leaning toward the light side of this particular style. Commercial brewers are replicating American style premium lagers using ale yeast strains in order to turn out a product more rapidly. The result of doing this(and sometimes using small amounts of American hops)has resulted in the slightly drier Golden ale category. A commercial example of this style would be Sweetwater 420 Extra Pale, which took second place for this category in '98 at the WBC. Another is Goose Island Blonde Ale, which took a gold in the '99 GABF. Golden ale definitely has a place with the BJCP due to the fact that most homebrewers are limited not by needing to turn out a product in a certain time frame but by not having adequate refrigeration to make an American Premium Lager. I am not saying that the BJCP should become the PPBT and I am realizing that I was not actually saying that the PPBT is any more thorough with its guideline descriptions. I think that I just want more from the BJCP in reference to what is being produced commercially and is found to be acceptable by the PPBT. How much trouble would it be to add a couple of new styles and change with the times. I am a little disappointed with homebrewers and the BJCP(not angry or heavily disappointed, just slightly) in that my work as a commercial brewer began at home with homebrewing and doing pilot work for outrageous ideas sometimes. I know that we as homebrewers are producing these innovative new styles or new ideas and I would like to continue to see them be noticed and added to the guidelines if their entry levels reach a respectable level. Let's not be proud and try to draw lines between the BJCP and the PPBT just for possible pride or controlling purposes. These two entities should speak to each other in a way and draw things from each other. Regarding Houseman's comment on the BJCP should have nothing to do with the PPBT, that was not my intention. I think that you may have misinterpreted what I was saying. What I meant was that it should have an unofficial indirect effect upon commercial brewing due to the ability of homebrewers to not be limited and their work and making an impression on commercial brewing(maybe at the local festival a homebrewer decides to make a Black Steam Beer and bring it to the festival to serve, the next thing you know the commercial brewer sitting across the way comes over and tastes it and thinks to himself, "I think I will brew this". Then maybe it becomes widely produced commercially and then maybe has an effect on what is being produced at home due to its availability commercially and suddenly more homebrewers are now making Black Steam Beers and then we should think about adding this style to the guidelines). I am surprised that the PPBT judged beers are not allocated a score and that the judges comments are little better than "appropriate". I think that the breweries that are paying quite a bit of money per entry should receive decent feedback for their money. Maybe this could be achieved with more judges. I actually don't know an answer to this and I won't carry on with it too much here in the BJCP forum but I might continue with this in the IBS forum but if you have a chance to answer this one Paul I would appreciate it. Thanks for listening to me ramble, Wayne Wambles Buckhead Brewery & Grill Tallahassee FL --Message_Part_SYNC496142644D Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from bbmail1-out.unisys.com ([192.63.108.40]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC4926425E52 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 01 Feb 2002 14:21:49 -0500 Received: from us-bb-gtwy-1.bb.unisys.com (us-bb-gtwy-1.bb.unisys.com [192.63.78.151]) by bbmail1-out.unisys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA26924 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 19:21:29 GMT Received: by us-bb-gtwy-1.bb.unisys.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 14:21:38 -0500 Message-ID: <2AC56C48182B4349AB1906257952AF9838FE19`at`USTR-EXCH2.na.uis.unisys.com> 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: BUZZ OFF Homebrew Competition Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 14:21:31 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message For those scheduling other regional competitions or who want to judge, steward or enter the BUZZ OFF Homebrew Competition, please take note that this competition will be held on Saturday, June 1st, at the Iron Hill Restaurant and Brewery in West Chester, PA. As has been the custom, the BUZZ OFF will be an MCAB V qualifying event. More information and logistics will be posted at a later date and on the BUZZ web site. Dave Houseman --Message_Part_SYNC496142644D Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.22]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC4932426040 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 01 Feb 2002 20:09:45 -0500 Received: from sdn-ar-021casfrmp019.dialsprint.net ([158.252.249.21] helo=dsapsislp2) by hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16WogU-0005LZ-00 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 01 Feb 2002 17:09:39 -0800 Message-ID: <003501c1ab86$22fa9760$b7f8fc9e`at`dsapsislp2> From: "Dave Sapsis" 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: flavor space Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 17:08:32 -0800 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Steve Casselman's ideas concerning discriminating beers in flavor "hyperspace" is not a new one, and in fact I believe owes its basic techniques largely not to physics, but to the discipline of ecology -- specifically community ecology, where the structure of species populations are of primary interest. In the case of ecological communities, they are described by the types of species present, and some measure of their abundance (usually numbers or density, but it can be something else). The multivariate analog for a beer is a series of metrics or characteristics, and some attribute score of that characteristic...its size, power, abundance. It is easy to fathom a large, but not unruly set of characteristics (think of these as axes) that adequately describe the aromas, flavors, and sensations from beer. A trickier element is quantifying their abundance or "score". This can be done by mechanical measurement of individual physical and chemical properties, and/or in conjunction with taste panels and questionnaires. The resulting data is a matrix of samples (beers) by characteristics, with the table full of scores. Most techniques then generate from these raw data a correlation matrix, where each individual characteristic's scores are normalized by their relationship to other characteristic's scores. This allows the characteristics to be assessed for how they work together or divergent; good examples of similarity (positive correlation) of characteristics might be malty and sweet, and in divergence (negative correlation) might be sweet and bitter. A tricky element to using these techniques for beer discrimination is that the scoring numbers need to be scaled (weighted) equivalently such that the correlations across characteristics are uniform expressions -- while counting individuals of various species is straightforward, scoring bitterness along an axis similar to scoring roastiness or some other attribute in the matrix may not be. No matter. We can likely develop specific methods to deal with that. The picture of numbers is a half-filled table (the other half is redundant) of beer characteristics by beer characteristics, with 1's in the orthogonal and correlation coefficients between characteristics in the other cells. This matrix allows us to see how various components or characteristics relate to each other across a bunch of samples. Based on sample size and variances, we can even test for significance of these relationships. But what about testing for differences between the samples? While three variables is easily plotted, smart people have figured out a whole bunch of models for synthesizing a whole bunch more (axes). There are numerous statistical techniques available -- each with a fantastic name of seeming scientific pomposity (you probably couldn't invent anything more dazzling): Detrended Correspondence, Cononical Correlation, Descriminant Function Analysis, Principal Component Analysis, others; they all attempt to characterize the set of attributes as they relate to various samples. An example of these techniques for beer discrimination can be found in the sensory chapter in Stout (Lewis, 1995) where scores were panel consensus marks for a set of descriptive attributes, and he used PCA to plot the samples over their first two principal components. Often, these techniques reveal that the main explanations for variance can be actually interpreted. Said another way, multivariate techniques can be illustrative in showing underlying features that are driving the differences. I'd be willing to help design an experimental approach using multivariate techniques to explore how current styles bunch, as well as portions of the space that appear open and unaccounted for. With the recent posting of the diverse list of beer style classifications used out there, its quite amazing to me that names of styles often seem to have little to do with finding clear distinctions of flavor space, but it would be cool to test it. I know, because I brew it regularly, that the Mexican oscura lager I make has no home, but it would be really interesting to compare it to some well regarded potential neighbors. cheers, --dave sapsis (an ecologist by training, a brewer by choice), sacramento --Message_Part_SYNC496142644D-- --Next_Part_SYNC496142644D-- Subject: Digest for the period 2/2/02 - 2/3/02 Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2002 01:04:26 -0500 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC496142644D" --Next_Part_SYNC496142644D Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Irish-style amber and the PPBT (Wayne Wambles) BUZZ OFF Homebrew Competition (Houseman, David L) flavor space (Dave Sapsis) --Next_Part_SYNC496142644D Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Message_Part_SYNC496142644D" --Message_Part_SYNC496142644D Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from johnson.mail.mindspring.net ([207.69.200.177]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC4924425D99 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 01 Feb 2002 12:14:55 -0500 Received: from pool-63.49.55.131.tmpa.grid.net ([63.49.55.131] helo=beernazimindspring) by johnson.mail.mindspring.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16WhH1-0000hv-00 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 01 Feb 2002 12:14:51 -0500 Message-ID: <000901c1ab46$361830e0$8337313f`at`com> From: "Wayne Wambles" 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: Irish-style amber and the PPBT Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 12:30:56 -0500 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 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message When I was asking where the Irish-style amber ale category was, I was referring to where is it within the BJCP guidelines. This is a style that has been produced for some time(Killian's Red and Michael Shea's Amber(which is actually an Irish-style amber lager but the intent is the same)). These beers tend to drink very pleasantly and are also quite social. It seems that this might be a style that is seeing some production at home but has no guideline within the BJCP to be entered. Shouldn't we consider adding this category to the BJCP guidelines Paul? The Golden ale category is another category that the PPBT uses that might be a fine addition to the BJCP guidelines. The light ale category is similar to the Golden but the hop profile is reduced because it is leaning toward the light side of this particular style. Commercial brewers are replicating American style premium lagers using ale yeast strains in order to turn out a product more rapidly. The result of doing this(and sometimes using small amounts of American hops)has resulted in the slightly drier Golden ale category. A commercial example of this style would be Sweetwater 420 Extra Pale, which took second place for this category in '98 at the WBC. Another is Goose Island Blonde Ale, which took a gold in the '99 GABF. Golden ale definitely has a place with the BJCP due to the fact that most homebrewers are limited not by needing to turn out a product in a certain time frame but by not having adequate refrigeration to make an American Premium Lager. I am not saying that the BJCP should become the PPBT and I am realizing that I was not actually saying that the PPBT is any more thorough with its guideline descriptions. I think that I just want more from the BJCP in reference to what is being produced commercially and is found to be acceptable by the PPBT. How much trouble would it be to add a couple of new styles and change with the times. I am a little disappointed with homebrewers and the BJCP(not angry or heavily disappointed, just slightly) in that my work as a commercial brewer began at home with homebrewing and doing pilot work for outrageous ideas sometimes. I know that we as homebrewers are producing these innovative new styles or new ideas and I would like to continue to see them be noticed and added to the guidelines if their entry levels reach a respectable level. Let's not be proud and try to draw lines between the BJCP and the PPBT just for possible pride or controlling purposes. These two entities should speak to each other in a way and draw things from each other. Regarding Houseman's comment on the BJCP should have nothing to do with the PPBT, that was not my intention. I think that you may have misinterpreted what I was saying. What I meant was that it should have an unofficial indirect effect upon commercial brewing due to the ability of homebrewers to not be limited and their work and making an impression on commercial brewing(maybe at the local festival a homebrewer decides to make a Black Steam Beer and bring it to the festival to serve, the next thing you know the commercial brewer sitting across the way comes over and tastes it and thinks to himself, "I think I will brew this". Then maybe it becomes widely produced commercially and then maybe has an effect on what is being produced at home due to its availability commercially and suddenly more homebrewers are now making Black Steam Beers and then we should think about adding this style to the guidelines). I am surprised that the PPBT judged beers are not allocated a score and that the judges comments are little better than "appropriate". I think that the breweries that are paying quite a bit of money per entry should receive decent feedback for their money. Maybe this could be achieved with more judges. I actually don't know an answer to this and I won't carry on with it too much here in the BJCP forum but I might continue with this in the IBS forum but if you have a chance to answer this one Paul I would appreciate it. Thanks for listening to me ramble, Wayne Wambles Buckhead Brewery & Grill Tallahassee FL --Message_Part_SYNC496142644D Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from bbmail1-out.unisys.com ([192.63.108.40]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC4926425E52 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 01 Feb 2002 14:21:49 -0500 Received: from us-bb-gtwy-1.bb.unisys.com (us-bb-gtwy-1.bb.unisys.com [192.63.78.151]) by bbmail1-out.unisys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA26924 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 19:21:29 GMT Received: by us-bb-gtwy-1.bb.unisys.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 14:21:38 -0500 Message-ID: <2AC56C48182B4349AB1906257952AF9838FE19`at`USTR-EXCH2.na.uis.unisys.com> 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: BUZZ OFF Homebrew Competition Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 14:21:31 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message For those scheduling other regional competitions or who want to judge, steward or enter the BUZZ OFF Homebrew Competition, please take note that this competition will be held on Saturday, June 1st, at the Iron Hill Restaurant and Brewery in West Chester, PA. As has been the custom, the BUZZ OFF will be an MCAB V qualifying event. More information and logistics will be posted at a later date and on the BUZZ web site. Dave Houseman --Message_Part_SYNC496142644D Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.22]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC4932426040 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 01 Feb 2002 20:09:45 -0500 Received: from sdn-ar-021casfrmp019.dialsprint.net ([158.252.249.21] helo=dsapsislp2) by hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16WogU-0005LZ-00 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 01 Feb 2002 17:09:39 -0800 Message-ID: <003501c1ab86$22fa9760$b7f8fc9e`at`dsapsislp2> From: "Dave Sapsis" 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: flavor space Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 17:08:32 -0800 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Steve Casselman's ideas concerning discriminating beers in flavor "hyperspace" is not a new one, and in fact I believe owes its basic techniques largely not to physics, but to the discipline of ecology -- specifically community ecology, where the structure of species populations are of primary interest. In the case of ecological communities, they are described by the types of species present, and some measure of their abundance (usually numbers or density, but it can be something else). The multivariate analog for a beer is a series of metrics or characteristics, and some attribute score of that characteristic...its size, power, abundance. It is easy to fathom a large, but not unruly set of characteristics (think of these as axes) that adequately describe the aromas, flavors, and sensations from beer. A trickier element is quantifying their abundance or "score". This can be done by mechanical measurement of individual physical and chemical properties, and/or in conjunction with taste panels and questionnaires. The resulting data is a matrix of samples (beers) by characteristics, with the table full of scores. Most techniques then generate from these raw data a correlation matrix, where each individual characteristic's scores are normalized by their relationship to other characteristic's scores. This allows the characteristics to be assessed for how they work together or divergent; good examples of similarity (positive correlation) of characteristics might be malty and sweet, and in divergence (negative correlation) might be sweet and bitter. A tricky element to using these techniques for beer discrimination is that the scoring numbers need to be scaled (weighted) equivalently such that the correlations across characteristics are uniform expressions -- while counting individuals of various species is straightforward, scoring bitterness along an axis similar to scoring roastiness or some other attribute in the matrix may not be. No matter. We can likely develop specific methods to deal with that. The picture of numbers is a half-filled table (the other half is redundant) of beer characteristics by beer characteristics, with 1's in the orthogonal and correlation coefficients between characteristics in the other cells. This matrix allows us to see how various components or characteristics relate to each other across a bunch of samples. Based on sample size and variances, we can even test for significance of these relationships. But what about testing for differences between the samples? While three variables is easily plotted, smart people have figured out a whole bunch of models for synthesizing a whole bunch more (axes). There are numerous statistical techniques available -- each with a fantastic name of seeming scientific pomposity (you probably couldn't invent anything more dazzling): Detrended Correspondence, Cononical Correlation, Descriminant Function Analysis, Principal Component Analysis, others; they all attempt to characterize the set of attributes as they relate to various samples. An example of these techniques for beer discrimination can be found in the sensory chapter in Stout (Lewis, 1995) where scores were panel consensus marks for a set of descriptive attributes, and he used PCA to plot the samples over their first two principal components. Often, these techniques reveal that the main explanations for variance can be actually interpreted. Said another way, multivariate techniques can be illustrative in showing underlying features that are driving the differences. I'd be willing to help design an experimental approach using multivariate techniques to explore how current styles bunch, as well as portions of the space that appear open and unaccounted for. With the recent posting of the diverse list of beer style classifications used out there, its quite amazing to me that names of styles often seem to have little to do with finding clear distinctions of flavor space, but it would be cool to test it. I know, because I brew it regularly, that the Mexican oscura lager I make has no home, but it would be really interesting to compare it to some well regarded potential neighbors. cheers, --dave sapsis (an ecologist by training, a brewer by choice), sacramento --Message_Part_SYNC496142644D-- --Next_Part_SYNC496142644D--