Subject: Digest for the period 2/15/02 - 2/16/02 Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2002 01:02:05 -0500 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC5273430BDD" --Next_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Re: ...Judging in General (John C. Tull) specifying base style for spice/herb/veg (Great Scott!) categories (Jeff & Ellen) Comparing beers (Lyle C Brown) Re: Base Styles (David Houseman) beers A and B (Dave Sapsis) Re: Combining Styles (Bill Wible) Commercial Beers vs. Homebrew (Bill Wible) --Next_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD" --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from equinox.unr.edu ([134.197.1.2]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC523742FC1B for judge`at`synchro.com; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 13:07:31 -0500 Received: from jctull.biology.unr.edu (jctull.biology.unr.edu [134.197.55.114]) by equinox.unr.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g1EIEnu21141 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 10:14:49 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 10:07:29 -0800 Subject: Re: ...Judging in General Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v480) From: "John C. Tull" 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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.480) X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Roger Ayotte wrote about a kit beer made with bad malt and poorly handled yeast versus an all-grain beer barely making the style parameters on the low end, but otherwise without issue: > How does one score this situation? I have seen beers with accurate > 'recipe' parameters, but with 'process' problems score higher than > beers that were beautifully made, no 'process' problems, but were not > what was expected from the 'recipe' side of things? My preference is > to side with the well made beer even if it really stretches the style > guidelines (not too much). Any suggestions out there? I am sure all > of you have met with this kind of judging situation, how do you handle > it? How should one handle it? First, I'd like to say the lurking payed off. You must have been keeping notes, as you made some very good points IMO. Regarding your question, I would expect judges to be able to detect off flavors in the beer made from poor ingredients and poorly-handled yeast. Those problems alone should knock it down to the 'Fair' or possible 'Good' scoring ranges (anywhere from 14-29 points of 50). I would imagine if it nails the style parameters but only tastes off due to the malt and yeast issues, it would end up as a mid to upper-20's beer, but certainly no more. The beer that falls on the lower end of the style parameters should not be penalized based on style whatsoever, as long as it is in the range. Unfortunately, as judges we tend to think beers in the lower end are actually out of range, whereas beers above the upper on gravity and IBU tend to be accepted as within style. Nonetheless, the beer should manage the 'Very Good' scoring range at a minimum without problems as it would only have minor stylistic problems at worst (assuming no other problems with the beer). Experienced or keen judges would detect that it was within style, thus placing the beer into 'Excellent' or better without other flaws. Basically, the beer you described as a kit beer would certainly have detectable flaws. That beer would not be a contender. John Tull, Reno NV --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from gilgamesh.nh.ultra.net ([207.172.11.22]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC524442FD99 for judge`at`synchro.com; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 20:33:34 -0500 Received: from [209.6.136.172] (209-6-136-172.s172.tnt1.mnh.nh.dialup.rcn.com [209.6.136.172]) by gilgamesh.nh.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult.n14767) with ESMTP id TAA13881 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 19:52:34 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 19:34:40 -0500 To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest From: Great Scott! Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com Subject: specifying base style for spice/herb/veg X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Hello one and all. I'm pleased to see my missive has generated many comments..... It was intended to stir the pot, and I see that I have. Some well worded responses.... >From: Mark Tumarkin Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 07:41:08 -0500 > >This pushes one of my buttons too, though I'd expand it to the related issue >of specifying all required info. The mead category requires that the brewer >specify sparkling or still, and dry/semi/or sweet. A good point, but a judge should be able to tell upon tasting whether a mead is sparkling or still, and dry/semi/sweet. The question then is what was the meadmaker's intent. But yes, it should be specified or the staff should ask for more info. >I think disqualifying is a bit harsh since one important >reason for entering comps is to get feedback I agree. The "disqualification" clause I stated is harsh (but intended to gin up discussion), and I do intend to provide the best constructive feedback I can. >I then make my >best guess as to what the brewer was trying to do, note this on the score >sheet, and judge it accordingly. I refer you to my prior comment about that mysterious black beer that defied categorization. >From: Mike Dixon Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 08:47:51 -0500 > >This information should be tracked down by the competition organizer prior >to the day of competiton and provided to the judges. I agree, and when I was an organizer, I made several phone calls myself to track down additional information. >I disagree. In most cases it is the fault of the organizer, the registrar, >or the judge director that the judges do not know the base style. I disagree with your disagreement. I've found in most cases the info was not provided by the brewer in the first place despite the fact that the style guidelines state it. >From: Dennis Waltman Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 09:04:37 -0500 >Subject: Non-specific Fruit, Spice, etc Beers, Etc. > > >As one who has entered and judged beers that require an underlying >style, I would agree with the sentiment. I can make a very nice fruit >beer with no specific style match; the difficulty is tying the fruit >beer to a style. Then you yourself have overlooked the specification that a base style need be provided. If you're not brewing to a specific style, then perhaps just stating "American Amber/Blonde Ale" or "American Light Lager" (depending on yeast, etc...) would be enough. These styles are sufficiently generic enough to at least specify something (if I read your comments right). >Or the BJCP could recommend >that beers without underlying styles should not win 1st, 2nd or 3rd >place; This is of course up to the judging panel too. Judges always have the discretion to award or not award ribbons. Let's say that on a panel only one beer scores above 25 (it's happened to me). The judges have the right to award or not award that beer any specific ribbon they choose, and not award the rest of the ribbons. >And what constitutes naming the underlying style? Should we specify a >BJCP category? a subcategory? With twenty-something major styles and a host of substyles to choose from, I find it hard to believe any brewer couldn't find a match of some sort. >Is Ale good enough? I don't believe so. See prior comment. >Also how do you judge fruit beer or spice beers without the type of >fruit or spice listed? My original "rant" applies here. You don't tell me what's in there, I can't match it to a guideline to go by. Scott Kaplan gr8scott`at`nh.ultranet.com --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.ij.net ([207.100.203.149]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC524642FE26 for judge`at`synchro.com; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 22:12:16 -0500 Received: (qmail 1184 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2002 23:10:22 -0000 Received: from p17-127.tnt3.ij.net (HELO JeffNGladish) (209.4.17.127) by smtp1-ij.ij.net with SMTP; 14 Feb 2002 23:10:22 -0000 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 18:06:44 -0500 Message-ID: <01C1B582.5CA6DD60.JeffNGladish`at`ij.net> From: Jeff & Ellen Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: categories Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 18:05:53 -0500 Organization: Stone & Wing / Maztech / Homebrewers X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message I've enjoyed the recent discussions on both changing or expanding some of the style guidelines and entering beers in competition with or without pertinent ingredient specifications. I agree that it would be better both for the judges and for the entrants to subdivide the IPA style into Traditional and American. We may want to put the American IPA in the American Pale Ale category, 6., and leave the Traditional IPA in category 7. Even if both substyles stayed in 7, at least the judges would know which ones not to judge first. I also agree that most judges make a very serious effort NOT to have the lighter flavored beers overwhelmed by the stronger ones. The recent competition having a Mild win a BOS reinforces this. It is up to the judge director of the competition to place the most competent judges in appropriate categories. It is also up to the judge to let the director know that he or she is not comfortable with any styles. I find that it is more common for a judge to favor a beer that he is giving the benefit of a doubt than one that he is completely familiar with. If he knows and brews a beer style, he is apt to be more critical, don't you think? My first ever BOS was a Berlinerweisse, this before we could get a commercial example in the state. It is also up to the organizers and the registrars to get the info sent in by the entrants to the judges. There are certain competitions that I just will not enter again because the judges didn't know what style of beer my smoked ale was supposed to be. I had to ask for my money back once. It's so disappointing to see a score sheet with "nice beer, wish I knew what style it was..." What's so hard about getting the steward to ask the registrar? Lyle Brown has a nice point about "no base style intended." As a matter of fact, I used this in the AHA Nationals several years ago. It wasn't quite a Porter, either Brown or Robust, just a very nice smoked beer. I entered it with no base style specified and it took the Gold. I thank the judges for seeing beyond the guidelines on this one. Having no style to judge against does make the process more subjective, but sometimes that's what judging is all about. Sometimes balance and technical quality are more important than adherence to the base style. I think it would be a good idea for the entry forms to add one more line for beers in the pepper, spice and smoke subcategories. "Entrant should approximate the intensity level or pepper, spice or smoke" so that the judges are not immediately overwhelmed by the very first beer in the flight. This way they could be staged in order of intensity. The pablano beer may not seem so small if it's tasted in front of the habanero beer instead of after it. Jeff Gladish, Tampa, Fl. --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from m10.boston.juno.com ([64.136.24.73]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC524642FE33 for judge`at`synchro.com; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 22:18:25 -0500 Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for <"extssRca8ocTdEyjEoV6ma5YngBCOW+PIvYlKIc7wg+ScnoPHclSXA=="> Received: (from beerking1`at`juno.com) by m10.boston.juno.com (jqueuemail) id GTNKSZS6; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 22:17:59 EST To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 22:04:04 -0500 Subject: Comparing beers Message-ID: <20020214.221735.1292.4.beerking1`at`juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.33 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 3-4,13-15 From: Lyle C Brown 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 Roger Ayotte writes about 2 different beers, and gives much information regarding "Beer A" and "Beer B." While his question is interesting, I must first ask: How would the judges know all the information you provide? (eg that "Beer A" was made with old extract) The judges should not even know (overtly) whether either of these was even extract or all grain (except in competitions which separate, I believe today few do). The important part of the judging is how it tastes/smells/feels, not how it was made, etc. I have found it to be "bad form" to assume your perceptions are 100%. I have certainly encountered beers I thought were extract (or whatever), and it turned out I was wrong. Haven't we all? If the judges truly know all the information about the 2 beers which Roger provided, it is not a blind judging, and should not influence ribbon awards. Lyle C. Brown ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.62]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC52564305E2 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 08:52:37 -0500 Received: from user-2inim74.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.88.228] helo=winxp) by snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16bimw-0006Ul-00 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 05:52:35 -0800 Message-ID: <005501c1b628$02413720$0100a8c0`at`winxp> Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" From: "David Houseman" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest References: Subject: Re: Base Styles Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 08:52:27 -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 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message How do you just a beer without a base beer specified? The experienced judge is looking for balance and presentation. As Spencer relates judging to the topical olympics, the technical merit is judging whether there are faults and what they might be, not whether there are too much or too few aroma hops since there isn't a style to which to judge it. However, the presentation portion of the judging is how do the hops, malt and specialty ingredinents balance one another? In judging there is "completeness" in "perceiving" the characteristics of the beer, "describing" this to the entrant, with "feedback" (positive and negative). All of this can still be accomplished. The scoring and some of the feedback WILL be more subjective because there is more of an emphasis on balance and the overall presentation. I've judged specialty, fruit, herb and vegetable beers numerous times and it is both a challenging and rewarding opportunity. I've found some really delightful beers in these categories, such as the BOS winner at the NHC a few years ago, a Toasted Coconut Porter. I judged this beer in the second round and it was a clear winner. The one word that came to mind was "balanced." In the BOS round, the BOS judges reached consensus within minutes of having tasted that beer. It was a hands down unamimous winner. Maybe it is as has been said of pornography: "I may not be able to define it but I know it when I see it." Dave Houseman --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.12]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC5258430644 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 10:02:13 -0500 Received: from sdn-ar-021casfrmp191.dialsprint.net ([158.252.249.193] helo=dsapsislp2) by harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16bjsI-0004a2-00 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 07:02:11 -0800 Message-ID: <002101c1b5a2$ba78e8a0$c1f9fc9e`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: beers A and B Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 13:58:24 -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 Roger Ayotte presents us with (hypothetical?) situation: >Here is the judges dilemma, Beer A was made with old extract, was only >partially boiled, under pitched low quality dry yeast that was not >properly re-hydrated, while the other beer was fresh tasting, high >quality brew but on the ragged edge of the style. The beer, however >works, and is very pleasant to drink, very enjoyable. Unfortunately, the ascriptions assigned to beer A are, or least should be, unknown to the judge. You can only compare aromas and flavors perceived in the glass and then make gentle but not absolute assumptions about what may be causing the perceptions. Presumably there were flavors/flaws that triggered the linkage to these causes, and wouldn't those cause deductions in points? That is, if you can sense flavors that indicate "low quality yeast was used" (I have no idea how one would make connections to improperly hydrated yeast other than generic and widespread ferment problems which implicate a whole range of potential problems associated with the pitch) dont those flaws significantly outweigh any marginal impression of the style edges being pushed? Possibly Roger is posing a more clear but general dialectic: weighting perceived process/technical issues against style-based ones, and just chose a somewhat murky example situation. In this case I would say it is up to the individual judge's impressions of which is a stronger problem. Both issues are not binary, but actually form a spectrum of low to high problems. You can search the archives for some spirited discussions regarding what to do with style non-conformance, but I'll tell you my general philosophy: well made beers that have minor perceived style issues typically score higher than in-style but process flawed ones. --dave sapsis --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from diskless7.axs2000.net ([209.120.196.45]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC5260430801 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 12:58:07 -0500 Received: from [64.80.86.63] (ppp-086-63.verio.axs2000.net [64.80.86.63]) by diskless7.axs2000.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id g1FHvAw21062 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 12:57:11 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 12:58:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Combining Styles From: Bill Wible 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 Message-ID: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message >Of course in an effort to be fair judges ask themselves >if beer number five is as good as number two. What's >wrong with that? What's wrong with that s that it's comparing the entries to each other, which a number of judges have written and sworn they don't do in the past week or so. Here's some of what has been written so far: >From: Tyler Yarbrough Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 07:13:22 -0800 >Subject: Re: Perspective >When we combine styles in a competition, the beers are being >judged, not against each other, but rather against a standard. >From: Vernon, Mark Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 09:29:23 -0600 >Subject: Combining Styles > >Now I may be new to the BJCP - (Passed test in March '01). But >when I judge I am not comparing the beer I am drinking to anything >but the style guideline. >From: Stephen Johnson Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 18:09:54 -0600 >Subject: Combining Styles and Categories > >Again, I come back to the issue of the importance of judges >judging according to style guidelines and the one with the >highest score from a given flight wins. >From: Steve Jones Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 09:55:13 -0500 >Subject: Competition Groupings / New Styles >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. So which is it - are we judging the beers against each other, or are we judging the beers against the style guidelines? I believe it's not right to compare each beer in a flight to all of the ones that happend to come before it. It's luck of the draw in which order the entry numbers are assigned, and in what order the beers come to the table. A good one that happened to come first should not have an advantage over good ones that come later. Yet that's what can happen, because that first good one is always fresh in a judge's mind, especially if it happens to come after or be mixed with a couple stinkers. The score for the current beer you happen to be judging should have absolutely nothing to do with any beers that happened to have come before it in the round. Yet this is what you're saying you're doing. Bill -------------------------- Brew By You 3504 Cottman Ave. Philadelphia, PA 19149 215-335-BREW (PA) 888-542-BREW (Outside PA) 215-335-0712 (Fax) www.brewbyyou.net --------------------------- --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from diskless7.axs2000.net ([209.120.196.45]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC5262430885 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 14:35:25 -0500 Received: from [64.80.86.63] (ppp-086-63.verio.axs2000.net [64.80.86.63]) by diskless7.axs2000.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id g1FJYRw32730 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 14:34:27 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 14:35:21 -0500 Subject: Commercial Beers vs. Homebrew From: Bill Wible 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 Message-ID: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message When we write about 'styles' and what professional breweries are and aren't doing, it's important to keep in mind that a brewery is a business. Their job is to make and sell beer, and their survival depends on doing that. To that end, the commercial brewing business is full of tricks and gimmicks to sell beer, from talking frogs to Pseudo-Irish 'Red' Ale which is nothing more than their lager beer with carmel color and flavor added. Professional breweries are not bound by the BJCP style guidelines, or any other style guidelines as far as the makeup of their beers, so long as they are conforming to the laws and are not exceeding legal alcohol limits or poisoning the public. Sierra Nevada, who we all know and love, is one brewery that literally made a name for itself by throwing the Pale Ale style guidelines out the window and brewing a Pale Ale that, at the time, was the hoppiest thing any of us had ever seen. This approach was so popular that they and other breweries pushed the hop levels further and further, and some of today's most popular beers are now being brewed with incredible hop levels. The history of beer shows us things like the fact that Mild Ale used to be brewed with an original gravity that exceeds most of today's Barleywines, The reason the English Bitter family has such a low starting gravity today is due to taxation levels on beer, and American Beer is in the sad state it is because of a combination of the beer industry being shut down for a number of years due to Prohibition, plus the Big Breweries brewed beer during WWII to suit women while most of the men were overseas. Commercial beer has changed over time to conform to everything from new laws to wars to changing tastes, and will continue to adapt itself. The commercial beer industry will do what it has to do to sell beer. But homebrewers are not commercial brewers. For most if not all of us, our jobs and livelihoods do not depend on making and selling beer. So when we ask about the style guidelines, and whether they should be changed to reflect current new styles, or whether we shoul dbe keeping historic styles alive, I think we first need to go back and take a look at the answer to - "what is the purpose of the BJCP? The broad answer of "To promote an interest in homebrewing and home brewed beverages" doesn't answer questions like whether goals of the BJCP are to keep alive historic styles, or to adequately reflect current commercial beers styles in homebrewing, or even to go off and create new styles on our own. Keeping alive historic styles seems to be a goal of the BJCP, as we see so many historic styles. To include all brewed beverages, we even include cider and mead, though many feel these aren't styles of "beer". Yet, as Bruce says, we don't include Sake. What style of brewed beverage is older or has more history? If reflecting current commercial styles is a goal, then maybe there are some new styles that we should take a look at and consider adding. But I personally don't necessarily always see the need to maintain a connection between what professional breweries are selling vs what homebrewers brew. Hard Cider is currently being marketed heavily, and I haven't seen any rush to include that in the style guidelines. Somebody is making this thing called Tequiza, which is a malt beverage flavored like Tequila. Again, nobody from the BJCP is jumping on that bandwagon. Then there's Zima. There' also been a trend toward sweeter and fruitier malt beverages recently, over which some are accusing the brewing industry of catering to underage drinkers. So how about it - what do people out there feel are goals of the BJCP as far as keeping alive historic styles and/or reflecting current styles? Do we do both? Or do we just pick and choose the styles we like, whether they're historic or current? Bill -------------------------- Brew By You 3504 Cottman Ave. Philadelphia, PA 19149 215-335-BREW (PA) 215-335-0712 (Fax) www.brewbyyou.net --------------------------- --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD-- --Next_Part_SYNC5273430BDD-- Subject: Digest for the period 2/15/02 - 2/16/02 Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2002 01:02:05 -0500 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC5273430BDD" --Next_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Re: ...Judging in General (John C. Tull) specifying base style for spice/herb/veg (Great Scott!) categories (Jeff & Ellen) Comparing beers (Lyle C Brown) Re: Base Styles (David Houseman) beers A and B (Dave Sapsis) Re: Combining Styles (Bill Wible) Commercial Beers vs. Homebrew (Bill Wible) --Next_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD" --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from equinox.unr.edu ([134.197.1.2]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC523742FC1B for judge`at`synchro.com; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 13:07:31 -0500 Received: from jctull.biology.unr.edu (jctull.biology.unr.edu [134.197.55.114]) by equinox.unr.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g1EIEnu21141 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 10:14:49 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 10:07:29 -0800 Subject: Re: ...Judging in General Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v480) From: "John C. Tull" 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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.480) X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Roger Ayotte wrote about a kit beer made with bad malt and poorly handled yeast versus an all-grain beer barely making the style parameters on the low end, but otherwise without issue: > How does one score this situation? I have seen beers with accurate > 'recipe' parameters, but with 'process' problems score higher than > beers that were beautifully made, no 'process' problems, but were not > what was expected from the 'recipe' side of things? My preference is > to side with the well made beer even if it really stretches the style > guidelines (not too much). Any suggestions out there? I am sure all > of you have met with this kind of judging situation, how do you handle > it? How should one handle it? First, I'd like to say the lurking payed off. You must have been keeping notes, as you made some very good points IMO. Regarding your question, I would expect judges to be able to detect off flavors in the beer made from poor ingredients and poorly-handled yeast. Those problems alone should knock it down to the 'Fair' or possible 'Good' scoring ranges (anywhere from 14-29 points of 50). I would imagine if it nails the style parameters but only tastes off due to the malt and yeast issues, it would end up as a mid to upper-20's beer, but certainly no more. The beer that falls on the lower end of the style parameters should not be penalized based on style whatsoever, as long as it is in the range. Unfortunately, as judges we tend to think beers in the lower end are actually out of range, whereas beers above the upper on gravity and IBU tend to be accepted as within style. Nonetheless, the beer should manage the 'Very Good' scoring range at a minimum without problems as it would only have minor stylistic problems at worst (assuming no other problems with the beer). Experienced or keen judges would detect that it was within style, thus placing the beer into 'Excellent' or better without other flaws. Basically, the beer you described as a kit beer would certainly have detectable flaws. That beer would not be a contender. John Tull, Reno NV --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from gilgamesh.nh.ultra.net ([207.172.11.22]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC524442FD99 for judge`at`synchro.com; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 20:33:34 -0500 Received: from [209.6.136.172] (209-6-136-172.s172.tnt1.mnh.nh.dialup.rcn.com [209.6.136.172]) by gilgamesh.nh.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult.n14767) with ESMTP id TAA13881 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 19:52:34 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 19:34:40 -0500 To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest From: Great Scott! Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com Subject: specifying base style for spice/herb/veg X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Hello one and all. I'm pleased to see my missive has generated many comments..... It was intended to stir the pot, and I see that I have. Some well worded responses.... >From: Mark Tumarkin Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 07:41:08 -0500 > >This pushes one of my buttons too, though I'd expand it to the related issue >of specifying all required info. The mead category requires that the brewer >specify sparkling or still, and dry/semi/or sweet. A good point, but a judge should be able to tell upon tasting whether a mead is sparkling or still, and dry/semi/sweet. The question then is what was the meadmaker's intent. But yes, it should be specified or the staff should ask for more info. >I think disqualifying is a bit harsh since one important >reason for entering comps is to get feedback I agree. The "disqualification" clause I stated is harsh (but intended to gin up discussion), and I do intend to provide the best constructive feedback I can. >I then make my >best guess as to what the brewer was trying to do, note this on the score >sheet, and judge it accordingly. I refer you to my prior comment about that mysterious black beer that defied categorization. >From: Mike Dixon Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 08:47:51 -0500 > >This information should be tracked down by the competition organizer prior >to the day of competiton and provided to the judges. I agree, and when I was an organizer, I made several phone calls myself to track down additional information. >I disagree. In most cases it is the fault of the organizer, the registrar, >or the judge director that the judges do not know the base style. I disagree with your disagreement. I've found in most cases the info was not provided by the brewer in the first place despite the fact that the style guidelines state it. >From: Dennis Waltman Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 09:04:37 -0500 >Subject: Non-specific Fruit, Spice, etc Beers, Etc. > > >As one who has entered and judged beers that require an underlying >style, I would agree with the sentiment. I can make a very nice fruit >beer with no specific style match; the difficulty is tying the fruit >beer to a style. Then you yourself have overlooked the specification that a base style need be provided. If you're not brewing to a specific style, then perhaps just stating "American Amber/Blonde Ale" or "American Light Lager" (depending on yeast, etc...) would be enough. These styles are sufficiently generic enough to at least specify something (if I read your comments right). >Or the BJCP could recommend >that beers without underlying styles should not win 1st, 2nd or 3rd >place; This is of course up to the judging panel too. Judges always have the discretion to award or not award ribbons. Let's say that on a panel only one beer scores above 25 (it's happened to me). The judges have the right to award or not award that beer any specific ribbon they choose, and not award the rest of the ribbons. >And what constitutes naming the underlying style? Should we specify a >BJCP category? a subcategory? With twenty-something major styles and a host of substyles to choose from, I find it hard to believe any brewer couldn't find a match of some sort. >Is Ale good enough? I don't believe so. See prior comment. >Also how do you judge fruit beer or spice beers without the type of >fruit or spice listed? My original "rant" applies here. You don't tell me what's in there, I can't match it to a guideline to go by. Scott Kaplan gr8scott`at`nh.ultranet.com --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.ij.net ([207.100.203.149]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC524642FE26 for judge`at`synchro.com; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 22:12:16 -0500 Received: (qmail 1184 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2002 23:10:22 -0000 Received: from p17-127.tnt3.ij.net (HELO JeffNGladish) (209.4.17.127) by smtp1-ij.ij.net with SMTP; 14 Feb 2002 23:10:22 -0000 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 18:06:44 -0500 Message-ID: <01C1B582.5CA6DD60.JeffNGladish`at`ij.net> From: Jeff & Ellen Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: categories Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 18:05:53 -0500 Organization: Stone & Wing / Maztech / Homebrewers X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message I've enjoyed the recent discussions on both changing or expanding some of the style guidelines and entering beers in competition with or without pertinent ingredient specifications. I agree that it would be better both for the judges and for the entrants to subdivide the IPA style into Traditional and American. We may want to put the American IPA in the American Pale Ale category, 6., and leave the Traditional IPA in category 7. Even if both substyles stayed in 7, at least the judges would know which ones not to judge first. I also agree that most judges make a very serious effort NOT to have the lighter flavored beers overwhelmed by the stronger ones. The recent competition having a Mild win a BOS reinforces this. It is up to the judge director of the competition to place the most competent judges in appropriate categories. It is also up to the judge to let the director know that he or she is not comfortable with any styles. I find that it is more common for a judge to favor a beer that he is giving the benefit of a doubt than one that he is completely familiar with. If he knows and brews a beer style, he is apt to be more critical, don't you think? My first ever BOS was a Berlinerweisse, this before we could get a commercial example in the state. It is also up to the organizers and the registrars to get the info sent in by the entrants to the judges. There are certain competitions that I just will not enter again because the judges didn't know what style of beer my smoked ale was supposed to be. I had to ask for my money back once. It's so disappointing to see a score sheet with "nice beer, wish I knew what style it was..." What's so hard about getting the steward to ask the registrar? Lyle Brown has a nice point about "no base style intended." As a matter of fact, I used this in the AHA Nationals several years ago. It wasn't quite a Porter, either Brown or Robust, just a very nice smoked beer. I entered it with no base style specified and it took the Gold. I thank the judges for seeing beyond the guidelines on this one. Having no style to judge against does make the process more subjective, but sometimes that's what judging is all about. Sometimes balance and technical quality are more important than adherence to the base style. I think it would be a good idea for the entry forms to add one more line for beers in the pepper, spice and smoke subcategories. "Entrant should approximate the intensity level or pepper, spice or smoke" so that the judges are not immediately overwhelmed by the very first beer in the flight. This way they could be staged in order of intensity. The pablano beer may not seem so small if it's tasted in front of the habanero beer instead of after it. Jeff Gladish, Tampa, Fl. --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from m10.boston.juno.com ([64.136.24.73]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC524642FE33 for judge`at`synchro.com; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 22:18:25 -0500 Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for <"extssRca8ocTdEyjEoV6ma5YngBCOW+PIvYlKIc7wg+ScnoPHclSXA=="> Received: (from beerking1`at`juno.com) by m10.boston.juno.com (jqueuemail) id GTNKSZS6; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 22:17:59 EST To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 22:04:04 -0500 Subject: Comparing beers Message-ID: <20020214.221735.1292.4.beerking1`at`juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.33 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 3-4,13-15 From: Lyle C Brown 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 Roger Ayotte writes about 2 different beers, and gives much information regarding "Beer A" and "Beer B." While his question is interesting, I must first ask: How would the judges know all the information you provide? (eg that "Beer A" was made with old extract) The judges should not even know (overtly) whether either of these was even extract or all grain (except in competitions which separate, I believe today few do). The important part of the judging is how it tastes/smells/feels, not how it was made, etc. I have found it to be "bad form" to assume your perceptions are 100%. I have certainly encountered beers I thought were extract (or whatever), and it turned out I was wrong. Haven't we all? If the judges truly know all the information about the 2 beers which Roger provided, it is not a blind judging, and should not influence ribbon awards. Lyle C. Brown ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.62]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC52564305E2 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 08:52:37 -0500 Received: from user-2inim74.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.88.228] helo=winxp) by snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16bimw-0006Ul-00 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 05:52:35 -0800 Message-ID: <005501c1b628$02413720$0100a8c0`at`winxp> Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" From: "David Houseman" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest References: Subject: Re: Base Styles Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 08:52:27 -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 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message How do you just a beer without a base beer specified? The experienced judge is looking for balance and presentation. As Spencer relates judging to the topical olympics, the technical merit is judging whether there are faults and what they might be, not whether there are too much or too few aroma hops since there isn't a style to which to judge it. However, the presentation portion of the judging is how do the hops, malt and specialty ingredinents balance one another? In judging there is "completeness" in "perceiving" the characteristics of the beer, "describing" this to the entrant, with "feedback" (positive and negative). All of this can still be accomplished. The scoring and some of the feedback WILL be more subjective because there is more of an emphasis on balance and the overall presentation. I've judged specialty, fruit, herb and vegetable beers numerous times and it is both a challenging and rewarding opportunity. I've found some really delightful beers in these categories, such as the BOS winner at the NHC a few years ago, a Toasted Coconut Porter. I judged this beer in the second round and it was a clear winner. The one word that came to mind was "balanced." In the BOS round, the BOS judges reached consensus within minutes of having tasted that beer. It was a hands down unamimous winner. Maybe it is as has been said of pornography: "I may not be able to define it but I know it when I see it." Dave Houseman --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.12]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC5258430644 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 10:02:13 -0500 Received: from sdn-ar-021casfrmp191.dialsprint.net ([158.252.249.193] helo=dsapsislp2) by harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16bjsI-0004a2-00 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 07:02:11 -0800 Message-ID: <002101c1b5a2$ba78e8a0$c1f9fc9e`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: beers A and B Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 13:58:24 -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 Roger Ayotte presents us with (hypothetical?) situation: >Here is the judges dilemma, Beer A was made with old extract, was only >partially boiled, under pitched low quality dry yeast that was not >properly re-hydrated, while the other beer was fresh tasting, high >quality brew but on the ragged edge of the style. The beer, however >works, and is very pleasant to drink, very enjoyable. Unfortunately, the ascriptions assigned to beer A are, or least should be, unknown to the judge. You can only compare aromas and flavors perceived in the glass and then make gentle but not absolute assumptions about what may be causing the perceptions. Presumably there were flavors/flaws that triggered the linkage to these causes, and wouldn't those cause deductions in points? That is, if you can sense flavors that indicate "low quality yeast was used" (I have no idea how one would make connections to improperly hydrated yeast other than generic and widespread ferment problems which implicate a whole range of potential problems associated with the pitch) dont those flaws significantly outweigh any marginal impression of the style edges being pushed? Possibly Roger is posing a more clear but general dialectic: weighting perceived process/technical issues against style-based ones, and just chose a somewhat murky example situation. In this case I would say it is up to the individual judge's impressions of which is a stronger problem. Both issues are not binary, but actually form a spectrum of low to high problems. You can search the archives for some spirited discussions regarding what to do with style non-conformance, but I'll tell you my general philosophy: well made beers that have minor perceived style issues typically score higher than in-style but process flawed ones. --dave sapsis --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from diskless7.axs2000.net ([209.120.196.45]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC5260430801 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 12:58:07 -0500 Received: from [64.80.86.63] (ppp-086-63.verio.axs2000.net [64.80.86.63]) by diskless7.axs2000.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id g1FHvAw21062 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 12:57:11 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 12:58:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Combining Styles From: Bill Wible 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 Message-ID: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message >Of course in an effort to be fair judges ask themselves >if beer number five is as good as number two. What's >wrong with that? What's wrong with that s that it's comparing the entries to each other, which a number of judges have written and sworn they don't do in the past week or so. Here's some of what has been written so far: >From: Tyler Yarbrough Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 07:13:22 -0800 >Subject: Re: Perspective >When we combine styles in a competition, the beers are being >judged, not against each other, but rather against a standard. >From: Vernon, Mark Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 09:29:23 -0600 >Subject: Combining Styles > >Now I may be new to the BJCP - (Passed test in March '01). But >when I judge I am not comparing the beer I am drinking to anything >but the style guideline. >From: Stephen Johnson Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 18:09:54 -0600 >Subject: Combining Styles and Categories > >Again, I come back to the issue of the importance of judges >judging according to style guidelines and the one with the >highest score from a given flight wins. >From: Steve Jones Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 09:55:13 -0500 >Subject: Competition Groupings / New Styles >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. So which is it - are we judging the beers against each other, or are we judging the beers against the style guidelines? I believe it's not right to compare each beer in a flight to all of the ones that happend to come before it. It's luck of the draw in which order the entry numbers are assigned, and in what order the beers come to the table. A good one that happened to come first should not have an advantage over good ones that come later. Yet that's what can happen, because that first good one is always fresh in a judge's mind, especially if it happens to come after or be mixed with a couple stinkers. The score for the current beer you happen to be judging should have absolutely nothing to do with any beers that happened to have come before it in the round. Yet this is what you're saying you're doing. Bill -------------------------- Brew By You 3504 Cottman Ave. Philadelphia, PA 19149 215-335-BREW (PA) 888-542-BREW (Outside PA) 215-335-0712 (Fax) www.brewbyyou.net --------------------------- --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from diskless7.axs2000.net ([209.120.196.45]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC5262430885 for judge`at`synchro.com; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 14:35:25 -0500 Received: from [64.80.86.63] (ppp-086-63.verio.axs2000.net [64.80.86.63]) by diskless7.axs2000.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id g1FJYRw32730 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 14:34:27 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 14:35:21 -0500 Subject: Commercial Beers vs. Homebrew From: Bill Wible 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 Message-ID: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message When we write about 'styles' and what professional breweries are and aren't doing, it's important to keep in mind that a brewery is a business. Their job is to make and sell beer, and their survival depends on doing that. To that end, the commercial brewing business is full of tricks and gimmicks to sell beer, from talking frogs to Pseudo-Irish 'Red' Ale which is nothing more than their lager beer with carmel color and flavor added. Professional breweries are not bound by the BJCP style guidelines, or any other style guidelines as far as the makeup of their beers, so long as they are conforming to the laws and are not exceeding legal alcohol limits or poisoning the public. Sierra Nevada, who we all know and love, is one brewery that literally made a name for itself by throwing the Pale Ale style guidelines out the window and brewing a Pale Ale that, at the time, was the hoppiest thing any of us had ever seen. This approach was so popular that they and other breweries pushed the hop levels further and further, and some of today's most popular beers are now being brewed with incredible hop levels. The history of beer shows us things like the fact that Mild Ale used to be brewed with an original gravity that exceeds most of today's Barleywines, The reason the English Bitter family has such a low starting gravity today is due to taxation levels on beer, and American Beer is in the sad state it is because of a combination of the beer industry being shut down for a number of years due to Prohibition, plus the Big Breweries brewed beer during WWII to suit women while most of the men were overseas. Commercial beer has changed over time to conform to everything from new laws to wars to changing tastes, and will continue to adapt itself. The commercial beer industry will do what it has to do to sell beer. But homebrewers are not commercial brewers. For most if not all of us, our jobs and livelihoods do not depend on making and selling beer. So when we ask about the style guidelines, and whether they should be changed to reflect current new styles, or whether we shoul dbe keeping historic styles alive, I think we first need to go back and take a look at the answer to - "what is the purpose of the BJCP? The broad answer of "To promote an interest in homebrewing and home brewed beverages" doesn't answer questions like whether goals of the BJCP are to keep alive historic styles, or to adequately reflect current commercial beers styles in homebrewing, or even to go off and create new styles on our own. Keeping alive historic styles seems to be a goal of the BJCP, as we see so many historic styles. To include all brewed beverages, we even include cider and mead, though many feel these aren't styles of "beer". Yet, as Bruce says, we don't include Sake. What style of brewed beverage is older or has more history? If reflecting current commercial styles is a goal, then maybe there are some new styles that we should take a look at and consider adding. But I personally don't necessarily always see the need to maintain a connection between what professional breweries are selling vs what homebrewers brew. Hard Cider is currently being marketed heavily, and I haven't seen any rush to include that in the style guidelines. Somebody is making this thing called Tequiza, which is a malt beverage flavored like Tequila. Again, nobody from the BJCP is jumping on that bandwagon. Then there's Zima. There' also been a trend toward sweeter and fruitier malt beverages recently, over which some are accusing the brewing industry of catering to underage drinkers. So how about it - what do people out there feel are goals of the BJCP as far as keeping alive historic styles and/or reflecting current styles? Do we do both? Or do we just pick and choose the styles we like, whether they're historic or current? Bill -------------------------- Brew By You 3504 Cottman Ave. Philadelphia, PA 19149 215-335-BREW (PA) 215-335-0712 (Fax) www.brewbyyou.net --------------------------- --Message_Part_SYNC5273430BDD-- --Next_Part_SYNC5273430BDD--