Subject: Digest for the period 2/10/02 - 2/11/02 Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 01:03:46 -0500 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC515342D2F9" --Next_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Re: Digest for the period 2/9/02 - 2/10/02 (Ted Hausotter) Re: Digest for the period 2/9/02 - 2/10/02 (OudBruin`at`aol.com) The Big Combine (David Perez) Competition Groupings / New Styles (Steve Jones) New Styles (blutick`at`juno.com) Entry #'s and such (Wayne Wambles) Modern English IPAs (Gordon Strong) --Next_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9" --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from hotmail.com ([64.4.32.217]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC512942CC3B for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 01:51:51 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat, 9 Feb 2002 22:51:44 -0800 Received: from 209.63.112.211 by pv0fd.pav0.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 06:51:44 GMT X-Originating-IP: [209.63.112.211] From: "Ted Hausotter" 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 Bcc: Subject: Re: Digest for the period 2/9/02 - 2/10/02 Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2002 22:51:44 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Feb 2002 06:51:44.0727 (UTC) FILETIME=[6714AE70:01C1B1FF] X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Bill Wible poits out that it is hard for a Helles or cream ale to win against a N Ger Pilsner. My experience in having judged many competition and as organizer at 5 competitions is that the Pils normally win. I attribute this to the fact that helles are easier to screw up while brewing. There is a lot less flavor from hops to hide any flaws. Inaddition the Bohemian Pilsners and N German are the most entered beer in the light Lager category. By odds they will win more. This last year I sent my Helles to many competitions. While it scored good it was not a ribbon contender. To place in this catogory a 40 is usually needed. My thoughts were similar to Bill's that a Pilsner will always win. In retrospect I think I can make a Helles that will beat a pilsner. I just do not want to drink all that Helles when I can have a Pilsner. Ted Hausotter, Dundee Oregon _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from imo-d07.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.39]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC513142CCB7 for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 03:06:23 -0500 Received: from OudBruin`at`aol.com by imo-d07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id u.143.9491a03 (3981) for ; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 03:06:15 -0500 (EST) From: OudBruin`at`aol.com Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com Message-ID: <143.9491a03.299783f6`at`aol.com> Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 03:06:14 EST Subject: Re: Digest for the period 2/9/02 - 2/10/02 To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Mac - Post-GM sub 147 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message my 2 cents worth on styles- I'm finding the entire debate on styles about as informative as lisitening to politicians debating on who let the country down in the wake of the 9/11 debacle. Every one points fingers, and makes loud noises, and misses the entire point. First, I would argue that the view point of the BJCP is very ethnocentric, in that it only allows "certain styles of beer", , Yet it allows honeywine(mead). The products we are judging are very european, I have yet to see anyone approve any competition where millet beer or tchang is being entered. (Now some fool is going to say:"well sure-thats because no-one is making it..") Thats not the point. Beer is a product of fermented grains- (not fruit or honey like mead or wine) , It is pandemic and arguably, is the first example where man utilized chemistry to make a better living for himself. If we want to be a bunch of eurocentric beer snobs & geeks (yes I've seen the viterol fly over hops and malts ad nausium) , fine. lets just realize that others may view that position as ill chosen, ignorant. I would like to proffer that the BJCP ought to consider a more enlightened view of beer and brewing- First, sake and it's progeny should be admitted as a bona fide style family, Second, w the BJCP should be prepared to accept beer styles not currently on the "official list" Nothing sounds more pius than to hear some BJCP voice wail "'OHNO IT'S NOT AN OFFICIAL BEER STYLE" Because millet beer from africa hasn't been described by some one in the BJCP HIERACHY, does that make millet beer any less authentic??? Third, instead of listing strict style perameters for english barleywines and a separete guideline for american barleywines- why not lump barleywines and strong ales into the same class-""OH NO WE CAN'T DO THAT, IT'S TOO DIFFICULT- IT'S NEVER BEEN DONE THAT WAY "-Wailed the court eunich. "lets see what happens " says the voice of reason --- instead of maddining hair splitting over belgie styles, lets make some general families. -Of course we can really get crazy- belgium steam beers brewed in the fall vs belgium steam beers brewed in the spring, or maybe lambics brewed in brussels verses lambics brewed in drie fontaine... cincinatti american light lagers verses st lous american light lagers...(I can see some beer weenie describing the differance..."the beers of st lous are slightly more sour , but only slightly..as opposed to the delicate flavor and slightly unfermented maltiness of cincinatti light lagers" how about german hells brewed with czech malt verses "real" german malt: can we really call a light colored beer made with northern brewer and american malt a hells? I fear that these discussions are getting out of hand. Trying to describe styles is difficult- like trying to grasp water with one hand. If we really wanted to be authentic, only beer made with windmalt , and unmalted wheat and using the inverted decotion technique made within a 25 mile radius of Brussels could be called "lambic" I suggest that instead of specific style guidelines, broad generalisations about lambics could be made. Likewise the same thing can be done about strong ales and barleywines....hairsplitting only obfuscates the real truth of the beer... Likewise, I have found that folks who want to make "it official" , generally make things more complex than needed. Our founding fathers started with a simple bill of rights which has been amended to the point of lunacy... once again simple ideas were obfuscated in the shouting for changes are needed. The bottom line is do we want to keep it simple?? Or are we gonna get nuts with flavor descriptors that outline one or two commercial labels as opposed to a family of styles? Now everyone is agravated with me again, I'll shut up. And by the way, I'm putting my money where my mouth is... I'm running the national sake competition. --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from grucom2.gru.net ([209.251.129.7]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC513742CF57 for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 09:53:36 -0500 Received: from [209.251.150.148] by grucom2.gator.net (NTMail 7.00.0022/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id mjrdvaaa for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 09:53:34 -0500 Message-ID: <3C6687FF.2030706`at`gator.net> Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 09:47:27 -0500 From: David Perez Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: The Big Combine References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Bill Wible and others express their concerns that combining styles may be unfair. I had the distinct pleasure of judging a couple of rounds with Wayne Wambles and Robert Riley at this years Big Bend Brew Off (great job Tallahassians). and both rounds involved combining categories. While I don't remember us discussing the need to do this, we judged each beer according to it's respective style guidelines and then compared it to the quality of the competition in their respective styles. Maybe the emphasis should be placed on pairing novices like myself with strong experienced judges and on teaching all judges to follow the guidelines not their own personal preferences for a style. Both Wayne and Robert were comfortable enough with themselves to accept comments and suggestions from a novice, which made for a great first formal competition experience for me and a very fair judging for the entrants. Dave Perez Gainesville, FL Hogtown Brewers --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from pop.chartertn.net ([24.158.96.17]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC513742CF62 for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 09:56:24 -0500 Received: (qmail 74359 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2002 14:58:26 -0000 Received: from jc-c-24-159-47-238.chartertn.net (HELO JonesPC) (24.159.47.238) by fs.chartertn.net with SMTP; 10 Feb 2002 14:58:26 -0000 Message-ID: <000701c1b242$f2aa0960$ee2f9f18`at`chartertn.net> From: "Steve Jones" 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 References: Subject: Competition Groupings / New Styles Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 09:55:13 -0500 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Some very good points have been made by many folks on the subjects of competition groupings of styles and of New Styles. I don't agree that it is inherently flawed to group differing styles (with some common factor) into the same 'multi-style' category for the purpose of awarding prizes. I believe that a beer should always be judged against the guidelines rather than against another beer, and awarded a score base on how well it meets the guidelines. If this practice is followed, then I think you can group certain styles together in competitions for the purposes of awards. The scores will take care of determining 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. If you require that categories be kept separate, then you may end up with prizes that aren't awarded because there wasn't a beer that scored the minimum for a 1st/2nd/3rd, or there weren't 3 entries in that category. This can cause some problems for competition organizers, especially for the smaller comps. If you have to have 81 awards (1st ,2nd, 3rd in 27 categories) then that is 1+ award(s) per entry for a lot of comps. Specifying minimums for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place awards may be a good idea, but I don't think it should be an argument for keeping categories separate. If a beer is good enough for a 1st place in it's own category, then it stands a good chance of a 1st place in a combined category - almost certainly a top 3. And, should a beer that scores a 27 receive a 1st place ribbon just because it was the best entry in that category. So, combining categories for the purposes of determining awards is OK, and many times even necessary, IMNSHO. On the subject of new styles, I believe that it is a good idea to split the reporting from the awards. That is, report the entries in the BJCP styles, not in the combined categories. This will give us a good method to track the number of entries in each style. But, I don't think it is right to decide if a style should live or die based on what is being brewed either by homebrewers or comercially. If it is a distinct style differing from any existing style and has any basis in historical fact, and can be sufficiently defined in the format for the guidelines, then I say it belongs, even if there are no commercial examples. And I think that adding new SUBCATEGORIES won't generally cause problems in competitions since most awards are based on CATEGORIES. For example, altering the existing categories like so (just an example) should only serve to differentiate between entries in the same category for the purposes of evaluation: 7A. English IPA 7B. American IPA 11. Strong Ale 11A. Old Ale 11B. Strong Scotch Ale 11C. Strong English Ale 11D. Strong American Ale 15C American Porter 16E American Stout As for Golden ale, it is just a slightly more flavorful version of Blond Ale. The existing the guidelines could be modified just enough to allow a wider range of aromas, flavors & body to enable it to fit. Just another opinion to throw into the pot, Steve Jones Johnson City, TN http://users.chartertn.net/franklinbrew --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from m5.jersey.juno.com ([64.136.16.68]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC513942CF8D for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 11:14:07 -0500 Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for <"uJiHWT5fQ41kJ23IKgbni1NY/3U9G+vKv/g8zsGImuO75TNHpP7O/A=="> Received: (from blutick`at`juno.com) by m5.jersey.juno.com (jqueuemail) id GTA375U2; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 11:13:54 EST To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 10:16:53 -0600 Subject: New Styles Message-ID: <20020210.101656.-241933.1.blutick`at`juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.27 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,3-5,11-12,15-26,31-38,41-42,45-46 From: blutick`at`juno.com 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 Great discussion here on new competition styles. >Are the style guidelines intended to keep styles alive (PreProLager?), or >are they to serve as a resource to judging beer? The cover sheet on the BJCP guidelines reads "Guide to Beer Styles For Home Brew Beer Competitions". That explains it well enough for me. Within this guide are judging guidelines for one historical beer with no current commercial examples (CAP), and beers with many commercial equivalents but not much history (Blond Ale, American Wheat, American Brown). That's fine, as these styles are well entered in HB competitions. Speaking of styles that don't receive many entries, here are the lowest subcategories for last year's Bluebonnet. Out of 798 beer entries, not counting mead and cider: 1b. Dark American Lager, 0 14d. Eisbock, 2 19d. Saison, 2 20a. Straight Lambic, 1 20b. Gueuze, 1 20e. Flanders Red, 2 >If you want to win Light Lagers, you pretty >much have to enter a Pilsener or a Dortmund Export. That's >just how it is. Not in my experience. Back in 1998, I had a Munich Helles that won BOS at Crescent City and runner-up BOS at Sunshine Challenge. I think it was 1999 when an American Light/Standard/Premium won BOS at Sunshine Challenge and Dixie Cup. Good judges are not of the "bigger is better" persuasion. >So I just ask you to stop and think before you say you want >new styles added, when we're not supporting and in fact many >judges don't even know some of the currently recognized styles. We've never let that stop us before:) Actually, most judges that I know would be do a better job with West Coast Porter, English IPA, and Irish Ale than they do on Lambics, Saison, Flanders Red, and Berliner Weisse. I'd like to see more competitions have one or more of these oddball categories, that's the way to see how much support there is for these styles. Jim Layton --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from maynard.mail.mindspring.net ([207.69.200.243]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC513942CF94 for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 11:16:34 -0500 Received: from pool-63.49.68.88.tmpa.grid.net ([63.49.68.88] helo=beernazimindspring) by maynard.mail.mindspring.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16ZweR-0006sQ-00 for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 11:16:28 -0500 Message-ID: <000901c1b250$98ff98e0$5844313f`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: Entry #'s and such Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 11:32:56 -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 I understand some of Wible's concerns over beers getting flighted into the same category and being possibly at a disadvantage. I also understand the sparse number of entries in certain categories(what about the ones that are really rarely entered like lambic?). These two things when brought into perspective should have nothing at all to do with adding new styles to the guidelines. Maybe we should remove Lambics(I am giving an example, I am not for removing any of the currently in place guidelines)? The organization and its judges just have to suck it in and put appropriate guidelines in place with consideration to the evolution or birth of particular styles. Without these changes taking place there will be no continuation of education for the judges and the homebrewers of the U.S. I personally tend to get tired of stagnancy. Bill mentions less experienced judges might be responsible for sending poor examples of styles that they are familiar with onto the following rounds. I think that if you don't feel educated or comfortable enough judging a combined flight(any of the styles) then you do not belong on the judging panel for that particular flight. That is the reason that I stay away from certain flights personally, because I don't like the style in general or because I don't feel comfortable enough with the style to judge it. If this is of interest to you then think about the qualifications of judges who might be judging Specialty, Historical and Experimental, Fruit, Herb and Vegetable. They now will be faced with an underlying style in addition to having to be familiar with a genre of different ingredients and processes. Who's to say you won't end up running into something you don't feel qualified to judge in flights like these? Part of the complications of this argument may be answered by simply saying that we have a JUDGING PANEL to correct this. If one of the judges is not real crazy about or doesn't feel well versed in a certain style then one of the other judges or hopefully the judge director for the table will be knowledgeable about it. You most certainly would not put two apprentice level judges on a panel alone. I once watched a best of show round with Greg Noonan and Ray Daniels on the panel(in addition to other knowledgeable judges) and one gentleman on the panel disliked smoked beers. The round rolled on and the best of show ended up being the classic german rauchbier with one of the gentlemen on the panel never even tasting of it at all. Is it fair to flight different styles together? I would say no but it is a necessary evil. It might also be considered relatively fair if the judges follow the guidelines and aren't swayed by gravity and IBU's. I personally would pick a blonde ale over a Munich Helles or German Pils if it was good enough. You have to judge by the guidelines and this is a problem for some judges. They want to be partial(an overly malty Schwarzbier might taste really good) but they are this way because they are not using the guidelines. As far as introducing new styles, we can't look at this in an Eeyore sort of manner(if we introduce new styles nothing is going to change and everyone will make the same things they have been making for the last how ever many years). If you never try then you never know. If you never enter then you never even stand a chance of winning. I think that there will be a response to the introduction of new styles but maybe some of them might be a little slower to gain a large following. In closing I would like to say that regardless of whether we think that English IPA is alive(if we are speaking historically about this style and putting it on boats with dry hops in casks and floating it around the ocean for three months and so on then no this style does not exist) or a dying breed commercially, we need to separate the English/American. The guidelines that would be put in place would draw a more appropriate picture of two slightly different things for judges to use as an overview when trying to pick the best of two styles. Take care, Wayne Wambles Tallahassee FL --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.120]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC514542D15C for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 17:13:25 -0500 Received: from pool-63.49.208.188.troy.grid.net ([63.49.208.188] helo=buzzcut) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16a2Dp-0006tO-00 for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 14:13:21 -0800 Message-ID: <000d01c1b27e$e2d50800$bcd0313f`at`compaq.com> From: "Gordon Strong" 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: Modern English IPAs Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 17:04:16 -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 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message I've enjoyed the recent style discussions in general, and the thread about IPAs in particular. I have a couple points to contribute. First, on the distinctions between modern English IPAs and other bitter ales, I've found a somewhat simplistic difference. I've found that modern bitters tend to favor the flavor dimension, whether hop, malt or yeast-based, over the aroma dimension. Different types of bitters tended to compete on the relative complexity of hops, character malts, esters, sometimes diacetyl, (and in strong bitters, alcohol) in the flavor profile but having relatively muted aromas. Whereas the (admittedly smaller sample) of beers labelled "IPA" tended to be otherwise similar to bitters except having a much more aggressive hop aroma. In the UK, I believe I found IPAs from Burton Bridge, Trafalgar, and Deuchars (Caledonian). I think some were labelled as low as 3.8% ABV, but that recollection is suspect. I found that the style family of bitters allows for a fairly wide range of discretion among brewers in the various flavor and aromatic components. As such, I think that when judging bitters that you should pay attention to that section called "overall impression". Try to set aside any personal biases based on your opinion of what a bitter should be, and see how well what the brewer put in the cask works. I think this more holistic style of judging is somewhat more in line with the British attitudes of beer judging as well, but again this is empirical. As to historical distinctions between IPAs, bitters and pale ales (and interesting musings on IPAs), I recommend the CAMRA book, Homebrew Classics: India Pale Ale by Clive la Pensee and Roger Protz (ISBN 1-85249-129-9). Clive was sellings these books at the AHA HNC in LA last summer, and I finally got around to reading it. Clive did the brewing section and the esteemed Mr Protz wrote the historical section. I quote from one of these passages (p.32): "The terms IPA, pale and bitter are not interchangeable. Historically, IPA meant a 'keeping beer' brewed to withstand long journeys and with bitterness levels that would have made them undrinkable save for the fact that the beers softened during sea voyages. Pale ale was a modified version of IPA brewed for the domestic market with a lower alcohol level anda considerable reduction in hop bitterness. Over time, pale ale came to mean a bottled beer while bitter indicated draught. Whiel the term "bitter" was used as early as 1858 [...], it did not come into vogue until the 20th century and the development of 'running ales'." The book contains 25 historical English and Scottish IPA recipes, and is mostly a brewing history book, as opposed to a modern brewing book like the AHA style guide series tries to be. Anyway, I think it would be useful for those who are interested in trying to understand the historical IPA to read this book. Much better than making dubious and speculative assertions about such things as oak character in an IPA. As for my opinion on how these things should affect our style guidelines, I'd probably fall into the category of those who would like to see a distinction between English and American IPAs. After all, there are modern interpretations of both and the styles can be defined. One open question would be how to treat historical vs modern English IPAs. I guess I'd be in favor of either (1) having a somewhat broad style that would allow for some brewer interpretation, (2) placing historical IPAs into their own section with other historical beers, or (3) letting the brewer supply additional information (like with fruit or specialty beers, or meads and ciders) to understand how best to evaluate the beer against brewer intent. I think any of these approaches would work and would represent an improvement over the situation of today (which is still much better than a few years ago). I think these ideas could also be used in combination; for example, creating a historical class of beers with certain historical sub-classes (and move pre-pro pils to this class), and allowing brewers to specify type of IPA and/or other beer. But at least you need to allow for differences in the style, because good, moderate-strength English IPAs never seem to win against beers that may suggest a drinking experience not unlike a mixture of grapefruit juice and vodka. Food for thought. Contrary opinions and discussion welcome. Gordon Strong Beavercreek, Ohio strongg`at`earthlink.net --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9-- --Next_Part_SYNC515342D2F9-- Subject: Digest for the period 2/10/02 - 2/11/02 Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 01:03:46 -0500 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC515342D2F9" --Next_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Re: Digest for the period 2/9/02 - 2/10/02 (Ted Hausotter) Re: Digest for the period 2/9/02 - 2/10/02 (OudBruin`at`aol.com) The Big Combine (David Perez) Competition Groupings / New Styles (Steve Jones) New Styles (blutick`at`juno.com) Entry #'s and such (Wayne Wambles) Modern English IPAs (Gordon Strong) --Next_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9" --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from hotmail.com ([64.4.32.217]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC512942CC3B for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 01:51:51 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat, 9 Feb 2002 22:51:44 -0800 Received: from 209.63.112.211 by pv0fd.pav0.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 06:51:44 GMT X-Originating-IP: [209.63.112.211] From: "Ted Hausotter" 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 Bcc: Subject: Re: Digest for the period 2/9/02 - 2/10/02 Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2002 22:51:44 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Feb 2002 06:51:44.0727 (UTC) FILETIME=[6714AE70:01C1B1FF] X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Bill Wible poits out that it is hard for a Helles or cream ale to win against a N Ger Pilsner. My experience in having judged many competition and as organizer at 5 competitions is that the Pils normally win. I attribute this to the fact that helles are easier to screw up while brewing. There is a lot less flavor from hops to hide any flaws. Inaddition the Bohemian Pilsners and N German are the most entered beer in the light Lager category. By odds they will win more. This last year I sent my Helles to many competitions. While it scored good it was not a ribbon contender. To place in this catogory a 40 is usually needed. My thoughts were similar to Bill's that a Pilsner will always win. In retrospect I think I can make a Helles that will beat a pilsner. I just do not want to drink all that Helles when I can have a Pilsner. Ted Hausotter, Dundee Oregon _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from imo-d07.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.39]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC513142CCB7 for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 03:06:23 -0500 Received: from OudBruin`at`aol.com by imo-d07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id u.143.9491a03 (3981) for ; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 03:06:15 -0500 (EST) From: OudBruin`at`aol.com Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com Message-ID: <143.9491a03.299783f6`at`aol.com> Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 03:06:14 EST Subject: Re: Digest for the period 2/9/02 - 2/10/02 To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Mac - Post-GM sub 147 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message my 2 cents worth on styles- I'm finding the entire debate on styles about as informative as lisitening to politicians debating on who let the country down in the wake of the 9/11 debacle. Every one points fingers, and makes loud noises, and misses the entire point. First, I would argue that the view point of the BJCP is very ethnocentric, in that it only allows "certain styles of beer", , Yet it allows honeywine(mead). The products we are judging are very european, I have yet to see anyone approve any competition where millet beer or tchang is being entered. (Now some fool is going to say:"well sure-thats because no-one is making it..") Thats not the point. Beer is a product of fermented grains- (not fruit or honey like mead or wine) , It is pandemic and arguably, is the first example where man utilized chemistry to make a better living for himself. If we want to be a bunch of eurocentric beer snobs & geeks (yes I've seen the viterol fly over hops and malts ad nausium) , fine. lets just realize that others may view that position as ill chosen, ignorant. I would like to proffer that the BJCP ought to consider a more enlightened view of beer and brewing- First, sake and it's progeny should be admitted as a bona fide style family, Second, w the BJCP should be prepared to accept beer styles not currently on the "official list" Nothing sounds more pius than to hear some BJCP voice wail "'OHNO IT'S NOT AN OFFICIAL BEER STYLE" Because millet beer from africa hasn't been described by some one in the BJCP HIERACHY, does that make millet beer any less authentic??? Third, instead of listing strict style perameters for english barleywines and a separete guideline for american barleywines- why not lump barleywines and strong ales into the same class-""OH NO WE CAN'T DO THAT, IT'S TOO DIFFICULT- IT'S NEVER BEEN DONE THAT WAY "-Wailed the court eunich. "lets see what happens " says the voice of reason --- instead of maddining hair splitting over belgie styles, lets make some general families. -Of course we can really get crazy- belgium steam beers brewed in the fall vs belgium steam beers brewed in the spring, or maybe lambics brewed in brussels verses lambics brewed in drie fontaine... cincinatti american light lagers verses st lous american light lagers...(I can see some beer weenie describing the differance..."the beers of st lous are slightly more sour , but only slightly..as opposed to the delicate flavor and slightly unfermented maltiness of cincinatti light lagers" how about german hells brewed with czech malt verses "real" german malt: can we really call a light colored beer made with northern brewer and american malt a hells? I fear that these discussions are getting out of hand. Trying to describe styles is difficult- like trying to grasp water with one hand. If we really wanted to be authentic, only beer made with windmalt , and unmalted wheat and using the inverted decotion technique made within a 25 mile radius of Brussels could be called "lambic" I suggest that instead of specific style guidelines, broad generalisations about lambics could be made. Likewise the same thing can be done about strong ales and barleywines....hairsplitting only obfuscates the real truth of the beer... Likewise, I have found that folks who want to make "it official" , generally make things more complex than needed. Our founding fathers started with a simple bill of rights which has been amended to the point of lunacy... once again simple ideas were obfuscated in the shouting for changes are needed. The bottom line is do we want to keep it simple?? Or are we gonna get nuts with flavor descriptors that outline one or two commercial labels as opposed to a family of styles? Now everyone is agravated with me again, I'll shut up. And by the way, I'm putting my money where my mouth is... I'm running the national sake competition. --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from grucom2.gru.net ([209.251.129.7]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC513742CF57 for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 09:53:36 -0500 Received: from [209.251.150.148] by grucom2.gator.net (NTMail 7.00.0022/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id mjrdvaaa for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 09:53:34 -0500 Message-ID: <3C6687FF.2030706`at`gator.net> Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 09:47:27 -0500 From: David Perez Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: The Big Combine References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Bill Wible and others express their concerns that combining styles may be unfair. I had the distinct pleasure of judging a couple of rounds with Wayne Wambles and Robert Riley at this years Big Bend Brew Off (great job Tallahassians). and both rounds involved combining categories. While I don't remember us discussing the need to do this, we judged each beer according to it's respective style guidelines and then compared it to the quality of the competition in their respective styles. Maybe the emphasis should be placed on pairing novices like myself with strong experienced judges and on teaching all judges to follow the guidelines not their own personal preferences for a style. Both Wayne and Robert were comfortable enough with themselves to accept comments and suggestions from a novice, which made for a great first formal competition experience for me and a very fair judging for the entrants. Dave Perez Gainesville, FL Hogtown Brewers --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from pop.chartertn.net ([24.158.96.17]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC513742CF62 for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 09:56:24 -0500 Received: (qmail 74359 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2002 14:58:26 -0000 Received: from jc-c-24-159-47-238.chartertn.net (HELO JonesPC) (24.159.47.238) by fs.chartertn.net with SMTP; 10 Feb 2002 14:58:26 -0000 Message-ID: <000701c1b242$f2aa0960$ee2f9f18`at`chartertn.net> From: "Steve Jones" 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 References: Subject: Competition Groupings / New Styles Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 09:55:13 -0500 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Some very good points have been made by many folks on the subjects of competition groupings of styles and of New Styles. I don't agree that it is inherently flawed to group differing styles (with some common factor) into the same 'multi-style' category for the purpose of awarding prizes. I believe that a beer should always be judged against the guidelines rather than against another beer, and awarded a score base on how well it meets the guidelines. If this practice is followed, then I think you can group certain styles together in competitions for the purposes of awards. The scores will take care of determining 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. If you require that categories be kept separate, then you may end up with prizes that aren't awarded because there wasn't a beer that scored the minimum for a 1st/2nd/3rd, or there weren't 3 entries in that category. This can cause some problems for competition organizers, especially for the smaller comps. If you have to have 81 awards (1st ,2nd, 3rd in 27 categories) then that is 1+ award(s) per entry for a lot of comps. Specifying minimums for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place awards may be a good idea, but I don't think it should be an argument for keeping categories separate. If a beer is good enough for a 1st place in it's own category, then it stands a good chance of a 1st place in a combined category - almost certainly a top 3. And, should a beer that scores a 27 receive a 1st place ribbon just because it was the best entry in that category. So, combining categories for the purposes of determining awards is OK, and many times even necessary, IMNSHO. On the subject of new styles, I believe that it is a good idea to split the reporting from the awards. That is, report the entries in the BJCP styles, not in the combined categories. This will give us a good method to track the number of entries in each style. But, I don't think it is right to decide if a style should live or die based on what is being brewed either by homebrewers or comercially. If it is a distinct style differing from any existing style and has any basis in historical fact, and can be sufficiently defined in the format for the guidelines, then I say it belongs, even if there are no commercial examples. And I think that adding new SUBCATEGORIES won't generally cause problems in competitions since most awards are based on CATEGORIES. For example, altering the existing categories like so (just an example) should only serve to differentiate between entries in the same category for the purposes of evaluation: 7A. English IPA 7B. American IPA 11. Strong Ale 11A. Old Ale 11B. Strong Scotch Ale 11C. Strong English Ale 11D. Strong American Ale 15C American Porter 16E American Stout As for Golden ale, it is just a slightly more flavorful version of Blond Ale. The existing the guidelines could be modified just enough to allow a wider range of aromas, flavors & body to enable it to fit. Just another opinion to throw into the pot, Steve Jones Johnson City, TN http://users.chartertn.net/franklinbrew --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from m5.jersey.juno.com ([64.136.16.68]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC513942CF8D for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 11:14:07 -0500 Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for <"uJiHWT5fQ41kJ23IKgbni1NY/3U9G+vKv/g8zsGImuO75TNHpP7O/A=="> Received: (from blutick`at`juno.com) by m5.jersey.juno.com (jqueuemail) id GTA375U2; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 11:13:54 EST To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 10:16:53 -0600 Subject: New Styles Message-ID: <20020210.101656.-241933.1.blutick`at`juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.27 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,3-5,11-12,15-26,31-38,41-42,45-46 From: blutick`at`juno.com 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 Great discussion here on new competition styles. >Are the style guidelines intended to keep styles alive (PreProLager?), or >are they to serve as a resource to judging beer? The cover sheet on the BJCP guidelines reads "Guide to Beer Styles For Home Brew Beer Competitions". That explains it well enough for me. Within this guide are judging guidelines for one historical beer with no current commercial examples (CAP), and beers with many commercial equivalents but not much history (Blond Ale, American Wheat, American Brown). That's fine, as these styles are well entered in HB competitions. Speaking of styles that don't receive many entries, here are the lowest subcategories for last year's Bluebonnet. Out of 798 beer entries, not counting mead and cider: 1b. Dark American Lager, 0 14d. Eisbock, 2 19d. Saison, 2 20a. Straight Lambic, 1 20b. Gueuze, 1 20e. Flanders Red, 2 >If you want to win Light Lagers, you pretty >much have to enter a Pilsener or a Dortmund Export. That's >just how it is. Not in my experience. Back in 1998, I had a Munich Helles that won BOS at Crescent City and runner-up BOS at Sunshine Challenge. I think it was 1999 when an American Light/Standard/Premium won BOS at Sunshine Challenge and Dixie Cup. Good judges are not of the "bigger is better" persuasion. >So I just ask you to stop and think before you say you want >new styles added, when we're not supporting and in fact many >judges don't even know some of the currently recognized styles. We've never let that stop us before:) Actually, most judges that I know would be do a better job with West Coast Porter, English IPA, and Irish Ale than they do on Lambics, Saison, Flanders Red, and Berliner Weisse. I'd like to see more competitions have one or more of these oddball categories, that's the way to see how much support there is for these styles. Jim Layton --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from maynard.mail.mindspring.net ([207.69.200.243]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC513942CF94 for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 11:16:34 -0500 Received: from pool-63.49.68.88.tmpa.grid.net ([63.49.68.88] helo=beernazimindspring) by maynard.mail.mindspring.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16ZweR-0006sQ-00 for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 11:16:28 -0500 Message-ID: <000901c1b250$98ff98e0$5844313f`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: Entry #'s and such Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 11:32:56 -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 I understand some of Wible's concerns over beers getting flighted into the same category and being possibly at a disadvantage. I also understand the sparse number of entries in certain categories(what about the ones that are really rarely entered like lambic?). These two things when brought into perspective should have nothing at all to do with adding new styles to the guidelines. Maybe we should remove Lambics(I am giving an example, I am not for removing any of the currently in place guidelines)? The organization and its judges just have to suck it in and put appropriate guidelines in place with consideration to the evolution or birth of particular styles. Without these changes taking place there will be no continuation of education for the judges and the homebrewers of the U.S. I personally tend to get tired of stagnancy. Bill mentions less experienced judges might be responsible for sending poor examples of styles that they are familiar with onto the following rounds. I think that if you don't feel educated or comfortable enough judging a combined flight(any of the styles) then you do not belong on the judging panel for that particular flight. That is the reason that I stay away from certain flights personally, because I don't like the style in general or because I don't feel comfortable enough with the style to judge it. If this is of interest to you then think about the qualifications of judges who might be judging Specialty, Historical and Experimental, Fruit, Herb and Vegetable. They now will be faced with an underlying style in addition to having to be familiar with a genre of different ingredients and processes. Who's to say you won't end up running into something you don't feel qualified to judge in flights like these? Part of the complications of this argument may be answered by simply saying that we have a JUDGING PANEL to correct this. If one of the judges is not real crazy about or doesn't feel well versed in a certain style then one of the other judges or hopefully the judge director for the table will be knowledgeable about it. You most certainly would not put two apprentice level judges on a panel alone. I once watched a best of show round with Greg Noonan and Ray Daniels on the panel(in addition to other knowledgeable judges) and one gentleman on the panel disliked smoked beers. The round rolled on and the best of show ended up being the classic german rauchbier with one of the gentlemen on the panel never even tasting of it at all. Is it fair to flight different styles together? I would say no but it is a necessary evil. It might also be considered relatively fair if the judges follow the guidelines and aren't swayed by gravity and IBU's. I personally would pick a blonde ale over a Munich Helles or German Pils if it was good enough. You have to judge by the guidelines and this is a problem for some judges. They want to be partial(an overly malty Schwarzbier might taste really good) but they are this way because they are not using the guidelines. As far as introducing new styles, we can't look at this in an Eeyore sort of manner(if we introduce new styles nothing is going to change and everyone will make the same things they have been making for the last how ever many years). If you never try then you never know. If you never enter then you never even stand a chance of winning. I think that there will be a response to the introduction of new styles but maybe some of them might be a little slower to gain a large following. In closing I would like to say that regardless of whether we think that English IPA is alive(if we are speaking historically about this style and putting it on boats with dry hops in casks and floating it around the ocean for three months and so on then no this style does not exist) or a dying breed commercially, we need to separate the English/American. The guidelines that would be put in place would draw a more appropriate picture of two slightly different things for judges to use as an overview when trying to pick the best of two styles. Take care, Wayne Wambles Tallahassee FL --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.120]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC514542D15C for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 17:13:25 -0500 Received: from pool-63.49.208.188.troy.grid.net ([63.49.208.188] helo=buzzcut) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16a2Dp-0006tO-00 for judge`at`synchro.com; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 14:13:21 -0800 Message-ID: <000d01c1b27e$e2d50800$bcd0313f`at`compaq.com> From: "Gordon Strong" 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: Modern English IPAs Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 17:04:16 -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 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message I've enjoyed the recent style discussions in general, and the thread about IPAs in particular. I have a couple points to contribute. First, on the distinctions between modern English IPAs and other bitter ales, I've found a somewhat simplistic difference. I've found that modern bitters tend to favor the flavor dimension, whether hop, malt or yeast-based, over the aroma dimension. Different types of bitters tended to compete on the relative complexity of hops, character malts, esters, sometimes diacetyl, (and in strong bitters, alcohol) in the flavor profile but having relatively muted aromas. Whereas the (admittedly smaller sample) of beers labelled "IPA" tended to be otherwise similar to bitters except having a much more aggressive hop aroma. In the UK, I believe I found IPAs from Burton Bridge, Trafalgar, and Deuchars (Caledonian). I think some were labelled as low as 3.8% ABV, but that recollection is suspect. I found that the style family of bitters allows for a fairly wide range of discretion among brewers in the various flavor and aromatic components. As such, I think that when judging bitters that you should pay attention to that section called "overall impression". Try to set aside any personal biases based on your opinion of what a bitter should be, and see how well what the brewer put in the cask works. I think this more holistic style of judging is somewhat more in line with the British attitudes of beer judging as well, but again this is empirical. As to historical distinctions between IPAs, bitters and pale ales (and interesting musings on IPAs), I recommend the CAMRA book, Homebrew Classics: India Pale Ale by Clive la Pensee and Roger Protz (ISBN 1-85249-129-9). Clive was sellings these books at the AHA HNC in LA last summer, and I finally got around to reading it. Clive did the brewing section and the esteemed Mr Protz wrote the historical section. I quote from one of these passages (p.32): "The terms IPA, pale and bitter are not interchangeable. Historically, IPA meant a 'keeping beer' brewed to withstand long journeys and with bitterness levels that would have made them undrinkable save for the fact that the beers softened during sea voyages. Pale ale was a modified version of IPA brewed for the domestic market with a lower alcohol level anda considerable reduction in hop bitterness. Over time, pale ale came to mean a bottled beer while bitter indicated draught. Whiel the term "bitter" was used as early as 1858 [...], it did not come into vogue until the 20th century and the development of 'running ales'." The book contains 25 historical English and Scottish IPA recipes, and is mostly a brewing history book, as opposed to a modern brewing book like the AHA style guide series tries to be. Anyway, I think it would be useful for those who are interested in trying to understand the historical IPA to read this book. Much better than making dubious and speculative assertions about such things as oak character in an IPA. As for my opinion on how these things should affect our style guidelines, I'd probably fall into the category of those who would like to see a distinction between English and American IPAs. After all, there are modern interpretations of both and the styles can be defined. One open question would be how to treat historical vs modern English IPAs. I guess I'd be in favor of either (1) having a somewhat broad style that would allow for some brewer interpretation, (2) placing historical IPAs into their own section with other historical beers, or (3) letting the brewer supply additional information (like with fruit or specialty beers, or meads and ciders) to understand how best to evaluate the beer against brewer intent. I think any of these approaches would work and would represent an improvement over the situation of today (which is still much better than a few years ago). I think these ideas could also be used in combination; for example, creating a historical class of beers with certain historical sub-classes (and move pre-pro pils to this class), and allowing brewers to specify type of IPA and/or other beer. But at least you need to allow for differences in the style, because good, moderate-strength English IPAs never seem to win against beers that may suggest a drinking experience not unlike a mixture of grapefruit juice and vodka. Food for thought. Contrary opinions and discussion welcome. Gordon Strong Beavercreek, Ohio strongg`at`earthlink.net --Message_Part_SYNC515342D2F9-- --Next_Part_SYNC515342D2F9--