Subject: Digest for the period 2/19/02 - 2/20/02 Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 01:01:31 -0500 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC5369433A82" --Next_Part_SYNC5369433A82 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Re:BJCP Purpose (Bill Wible) Judging Responsibilities (Norman Dickenson) ESB? (Bill Wible) --Next_Part_SYNC5369433A82 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Message_Part_SYNC5369433A82" --Message_Part_SYNC5369433A82 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 SYNC53554336DF for judge`at`synchro.com; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 11:35:59 -0500 Received: from [64.80.87.222] (ppp-087-222.verio.axs2000.net [64.80.87.222]) by diskless7.axs2000.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id g1JGYuw01330 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 11:34:56 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 11:35:51 -0500 Subject: Re:BJCP Purpose 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 >I think that overall the BJCP is responsible for the revival of >historic styles and the preservation of them. I would agree with this, based on seeing so much "history of styles" included in both the full BJCP guidelines and also on the BJCP examination. We as judges are basically required to learn the history of styles for the exam, and we're asked about it. I'm in agreement with this, no argument here. >It is individuals inside the BJCP that do the research and >test batches that are partly responsible for the revival of >these historic styles Cream Ale( Jeff Renner) and Pre-Prohibition >Pils. Not only Jeff, who posts regularly on HBD, who I've traded emails with several times and found to be very friendly and insightful, but others like Ben Jankowski (sp?) who wrote at least one very good article on Pre-Pro lager for BT, and articles on many other styles as well. >A good example is Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. Just look what happened! I thought I wrote that. >We all share ideas and it is impossible to separate homebrewing and >commercial brewing from one another. I think that they desperately >need each other. I respectfully disagree. Breweries like Sierra Nevada are the exception, not the rule. The three biggest breweries are still AB, Miller and Coors. They control most of the US market. And they are turning out what you too kindly described as "relatively bland large corporate beer" in massive volumes, so much so that most beer drinkers in the US don't even know there is any other kind of 'beer'. Do you think that's going to change anytime soon? In between enormous batches of that stuff, they're turning out sweet, fruit flavored alcoholic beverages and gimmick drinks. (and are being accused of catering to underage drinkers, which I'm close to believing there is some truth in - after all, it's all about the money no matter where it comes from.) Commercial breweries would have killed off real cask ale in the UK for good, had it not been for CAMRA. And they are all but destroying English Pale Ale today by packaging everything in those cursed nitro cans, which were never intended for anything but stout. Why are they doing it? BECAUSE IT SELLS - The brewery's primary motivation is making money. It's a business. In commercial brewing, the beer is secondary. Once again, commercial breweries are not bound by anything in the course of making beer, other than whether or not they can sell it and make money. They have a few guidelines as far as alcohol limits and food service inspections to make sure they're not poisoning the public. That's it. They've demonstrated no regard for history and they don't feel obligated to keep any styles alive, or anything like that. If people really want to know the kind of things that go on in the brewing business (not that I don't think you know, Wayne) all they need to do is read the book "Beer Blast" by Philip Van Munching. It's all about the internal goings-on of the big breweries and how they jockey for your dollars and try to cut each other's throats. And you want us to let these big breweries guide us and determine our direction? I don't think so. Bill -------------------------- Brew By You 3504 Cottman Ave. Philadelphia, PA 19149 215-335-BREW (PA) 215-335-0712 (Fax) www.brewbyyou.net --------------------------- --Message_Part_SYNC5369433A82 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from libaxp.sonoma.edu ([130.157.2.3]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC535743377C for judge`at`synchro.com; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 13:16:35 -0500 Received: from conversion.sonoma.edu by SONOMA.EDU (PMDF V5.2-32 #39389) id <01KEGDOPDTB495PULS`at`SONOMA.EDU> for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 10:15:37 PST Received: from ndickenson ([130.157.152.111]) by SONOMA.EDU (PMDF V5.2-32 #39389) with SMTP id <01KEGDNGPPUG95PQYN`at`SONOMA.EDU> for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 10:14:36 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 10:14:35 -0800 From: Norman Dickenson Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com Subject: Judging Responsibilities To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Message-id: <024f01c1b971$49640820$6f989d82`at`sonoma.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Scott Kaplan posted: >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. >This is of course up to the judging panel too. >Judges always have the discretion to award or not >award ribbons. I have to disagree. It isn't and never has been the judges perogative whether or not ribbons are awarded at a competition. Neither can they disqualify a beer. They may, of course, offer recommendations, but it seems to me that the award of prizes is strictly the purview of the competition organizer. The judges' role is simply to judge the beer and assign a score, or comparatively rank beers in the case of BOS or mini BOS. Norman Dickenson --Message_Part_SYNC5369433A82 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 SYNC5362433948 for judge`at`synchro.com; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:40:04 -0500 Received: from [64.80.86.35] (ppp-086-35.verio.axs2000.net [64.80.86.35]) by diskless7.axs2000.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id g1JNd2w17989 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:39:03 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:39:59 -0500 Subject: ESB? 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 Has anybody else seen this? Apparently, "ESB" is no longer a generic term, or a name for a style of beer. It's a trademark of Fuller's. FULLER'S WINS BATTLE OVER BRAND NAME RIGHTS Fuller's, one of Britain's best-known regional brewers, has won a court battle to protect its rights to its flagship brand, ESB. The case was heard in the High Court in London. The dispute was between Fuller's and Dave West, who trades as EastEnders in Calais, France. West has exploited the gap between duty rates on beer in Britain and France by selling large amounts of cheap French beer to Britain in recent years. More recently, he has attempted to register the trademark for a lager labeled ESP in Britain. Fullers claimed that ESP and ESB (short for Extra Special Bitter) were too close for comfort, would confuse consumers, and infringed Fuller's rights to the term ESB. The court held that ESB was not a generic term and was distinctive of Fuller's. http://www.protzonbeer.com/documents/27660-001662.html -------------------------- Brew By You 3504 Cottman Ave. Philadelphia, PA 19149 215-335-BREW (PA) 215-335-0712 (Fax) www.brewbyyou.net --------------------------- --Message_Part_SYNC5369433A82-- --Next_Part_SYNC5369433A82-- Subject: Digest for the period 2/19/02 - 2/20/02 Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 01:01:31 -0500 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC5369433A82" --Next_Part_SYNC5369433A82 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Re:BJCP Purpose (Bill Wible) Judging Responsibilities (Norman Dickenson) ESB? (Bill Wible) --Next_Part_SYNC5369433A82 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Message_Part_SYNC5369433A82" --Message_Part_SYNC5369433A82 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 SYNC53554336DF for judge`at`synchro.com; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 11:35:59 -0500 Received: from [64.80.87.222] (ppp-087-222.verio.axs2000.net [64.80.87.222]) by diskless7.axs2000.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id g1JGYuw01330 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 11:34:56 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 11:35:51 -0500 Subject: Re:BJCP Purpose 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 >I think that overall the BJCP is responsible for the revival of >historic styles and the preservation of them. I would agree with this, based on seeing so much "history of styles" included in both the full BJCP guidelines and also on the BJCP examination. We as judges are basically required to learn the history of styles for the exam, and we're asked about it. I'm in agreement with this, no argument here. >It is individuals inside the BJCP that do the research and >test batches that are partly responsible for the revival of >these historic styles Cream Ale( Jeff Renner) and Pre-Prohibition >Pils. Not only Jeff, who posts regularly on HBD, who I've traded emails with several times and found to be very friendly and insightful, but others like Ben Jankowski (sp?) who wrote at least one very good article on Pre-Pro lager for BT, and articles on many other styles as well. >A good example is Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. Just look what happened! I thought I wrote that. >We all share ideas and it is impossible to separate homebrewing and >commercial brewing from one another. I think that they desperately >need each other. I respectfully disagree. Breweries like Sierra Nevada are the exception, not the rule. The three biggest breweries are still AB, Miller and Coors. They control most of the US market. And they are turning out what you too kindly described as "relatively bland large corporate beer" in massive volumes, so much so that most beer drinkers in the US don't even know there is any other kind of 'beer'. Do you think that's going to change anytime soon? In between enormous batches of that stuff, they're turning out sweet, fruit flavored alcoholic beverages and gimmick drinks. (and are being accused of catering to underage drinkers, which I'm close to believing there is some truth in - after all, it's all about the money no matter where it comes from.) Commercial breweries would have killed off real cask ale in the UK for good, had it not been for CAMRA. And they are all but destroying English Pale Ale today by packaging everything in those cursed nitro cans, which were never intended for anything but stout. Why are they doing it? BECAUSE IT SELLS - The brewery's primary motivation is making money. It's a business. In commercial brewing, the beer is secondary. Once again, commercial breweries are not bound by anything in the course of making beer, other than whether or not they can sell it and make money. They have a few guidelines as far as alcohol limits and food service inspections to make sure they're not poisoning the public. That's it. They've demonstrated no regard for history and they don't feel obligated to keep any styles alive, or anything like that. If people really want to know the kind of things that go on in the brewing business (not that I don't think you know, Wayne) all they need to do is read the book "Beer Blast" by Philip Van Munching. It's all about the internal goings-on of the big breweries and how they jockey for your dollars and try to cut each other's throats. And you want us to let these big breweries guide us and determine our direction? I don't think so. Bill -------------------------- Brew By You 3504 Cottman Ave. Philadelphia, PA 19149 215-335-BREW (PA) 215-335-0712 (Fax) www.brewbyyou.net --------------------------- --Message_Part_SYNC5369433A82 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from libaxp.sonoma.edu ([130.157.2.3]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC535743377C for judge`at`synchro.com; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 13:16:35 -0500 Received: from conversion.sonoma.edu by SONOMA.EDU (PMDF V5.2-32 #39389) id <01KEGDOPDTB495PULS`at`SONOMA.EDU> for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 10:15:37 PST Received: from ndickenson ([130.157.152.111]) by SONOMA.EDU (PMDF V5.2-32 #39389) with SMTP id <01KEGDNGPPUG95PQYN`at`SONOMA.EDU> for judge at synchro.com; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 10:14:36 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 10:14:35 -0800 From: Norman Dickenson Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com Subject: Judging Responsibilities To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Message-id: <024f01c1b971$49640820$6f989d82`at`sonoma.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Scott Kaplan posted: >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. >This is of course up to the judging panel too. >Judges always have the discretion to award or not >award ribbons. I have to disagree. It isn't and never has been the judges perogative whether or not ribbons are awarded at a competition. Neither can they disqualify a beer. They may, of course, offer recommendations, but it seems to me that the award of prizes is strictly the purview of the competition organizer. The judges' role is simply to judge the beer and assign a score, or comparatively rank beers in the case of BOS or mini BOS. Norman Dickenson --Message_Part_SYNC5369433A82 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 SYNC5362433948 for judge`at`synchro.com; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:40:04 -0500 Received: from [64.80.86.35] (ppp-086-35.verio.axs2000.net [64.80.86.35]) by diskless7.axs2000.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id g1JNd2w17989 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:39:03 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:39:59 -0500 Subject: ESB? 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 Has anybody else seen this? Apparently, "ESB" is no longer a generic term, or a name for a style of beer. It's a trademark of Fuller's. FULLER'S WINS BATTLE OVER BRAND NAME RIGHTS Fuller's, one of Britain's best-known regional brewers, has won a court battle to protect its rights to its flagship brand, ESB. The case was heard in the High Court in London. The dispute was between Fuller's and Dave West, who trades as EastEnders in Calais, France. West has exploited the gap between duty rates on beer in Britain and France by selling large amounts of cheap French beer to Britain in recent years. More recently, he has attempted to register the trademark for a lager labeled ESP in Britain. Fullers claimed that ESP and ESB (short for Extra Special Bitter) were too close for comfort, would confuse consumers, and infringed Fuller's rights to the term ESB. The court held that ESB was not a generic term and was distinctive of Fuller's. http://www.protzonbeer.com/documents/27660-001662.html -------------------------- Brew By You 3504 Cottman Ave. Philadelphia, PA 19149 215-335-BREW (PA) 215-335-0712 (Fax) www.brewbyyou.net --------------------------- --Message_Part_SYNC5369433A82-- --Next_Part_SYNC5369433A82--