Subject: Digest for the period 3/11/02 - 3/12/02 Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 01:04:37 -0500 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC5849444C95" --Next_Part_SYNC5849444C95 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Post for Bob Grossman (Houseman, David L) Pro brewers in BJCP (Norman Dickenson) "attack" (Fred Scheer) --Next_Part_SYNC5849444C95 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Message_Part_SYNC5849444C95" --Message_Part_SYNC5849444C95 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from bbmail1-out.unisys.com ([192.63.108.40]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC58324440FA for judge`at`synchro.com; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 08:36:47 -0500 Received: from us-bb-gtwy-1.bb.unisys.com (us-bb-gtwy-1.bb.unisys.com [192.63.78.151]) by bbmail1-out.unisys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA05259 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 13:36:10 GMT Received: by us-bb-gtwy-1.bb.unisys.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 08:36:46 -0500 Message-ID: <2AC56C48182B4349AB1906257952AF98390228`at`USTR-EXCH2.na.uis.unisys.com> From: "Houseman, David L" Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: Post for Bob Grossman Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 08:36:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Of course a judge will be able determine what type of mead they are drinking once the bottle is opened (pressure is released & bubbles appear or it's still) and the mead is poured into a glass and tasted (dry/semi/sweet taste to the palate). It makes no difference to me what the brewers original intent was, what matters is how they have listed the mead to be judged. For example, they may have had a wonderful still mead that was properly aged in a secondary and bottled after no signs of further fermentation were seen. But after some time in the bottle, the mead mysteriously made a secondary fermentation on it's own and became a sparkler. This scenario can easily happen when keeping in mind that it only takes a drop of 2 SG points to create a reasonable level of carbonation. Now I would only be guessing what the original intent of the brewer was if the entrant naively enters the mead as a still and it appears as a sparkler. Did they make a! mistake on the entry form and select the wrong category or were they unaware that the mead had become carbonated? Either way, I'm at a loss and am left guessing how to judge the mead. The real reason I must know what category and type of mead has been entered is to be able to organize the flight of meads for a smooth and proper evaluation. I like to start with the dry meads and then go to the sweeter ones. Sparkling or still is only a secondary consideration. It's quite difficult to go back and forth on the sweetness scale while judging mead and maintain a fresh palate. The other big problem I have when evaluating mead is determining the alcohol level from it's relative OG and FG. For example, a sweet mead can brewed to be low alcohol with a OG 90 and FG 30 or high alcohol with a OG 1120 and FG 30. Both will taste sweet, but each will have quite different flavors and profiles. The current entry forms do not inform the judges of the strength of the mead, only the relative finish along the dry/sweetness scale. The guidelines allow a brewing spread of over 50 gravity points and this can result in quite a range of meads being evaluated together. Bob Grossman >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. Bob Grossman --Message_Part_SYNC5849444C95 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 SYNC58364443E3 for judge`at`synchro.com; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 12:03:33 -0500 Received: from conversion.sonoma.edu by SONOMA.EDU (PMDF V5.2-32 #39389) id <01KF88ZYEAW093E9EV`at`SONOMA.EDU> for judge at synchro.com; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 09:03:22 PST Received: from ndickenson ([130.157.152.111]) by SONOMA.EDU (PMDF V5.2-32 #39389) with SMTP id <01KF88Z4HTAM93F7CZ`at`SONOMA.EDU> for judge at synchro.com; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 09:02:38 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 09:04:02 -0800 From: Norman Dickenson Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com Subject: Pro brewers in BJCP To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Message-id: <002501c1c91e$bef825a0$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 >TYLER WROTE: >Ok, now I'm curious: Are there a large number of >professional brewers involved with the BJCP? Are >Pro brewers helping to make up the style guidelines, >certify new judges, judge in competitions, and >otherwise run the BJCP? Maybe you Pro Brewers >would speak up, and let us know you're reading. Well, while I am not currently employed as a professonal brewer, I did put in a two year stint as brewer in a brewpub. I think it's pretty hard to be active as a pro and stay interested in homebrewing and the BJCP. I made a choice to return to the amateur ranks. Norman Dickenson BJCP Western Representative --Message_Part_SYNC5849444C95 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from hotmail.com ([64.4.32.215]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC5841444765 for judge`at`synchro.com; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 17:15:21 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 14:15:17 -0800 Received: from 67.232.182.165 by pv0fd.pav0.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 22:15:17 GMT X-Originating-IP: [67.232.182.165] From: "Fred Scheer" 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: "attack" Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 16:15:17 -0600 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Mar 2002 22:15:17.0328 (UTC) FILETIME=[398B5500:01C1C94A] X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Grammar/proofreading (BillPierce`at`aol.com) > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks Bill for the nice posting. But, because of that "attack", or improper posting of that "Gentleman", we will unsubscribe to the Judge net. People like him make it uncomfterable to be a member of that list. Thanks again, Fred _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com --Message_Part_SYNC5849444C95-- --Next_Part_SYNC5849444C95-- Subject: Digest for the period 3/11/02 - 3/12/02 Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 01:04:37 -0500 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC5849444C95" --Next_Part_SYNC5849444C95 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Post for Bob Grossman (Houseman, David L) Pro brewers in BJCP (Norman Dickenson) "attack" (Fred Scheer) --Next_Part_SYNC5849444C95 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Message_Part_SYNC5849444C95" --Message_Part_SYNC5849444C95 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from bbmail1-out.unisys.com ([192.63.108.40]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC58324440FA for judge`at`synchro.com; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 08:36:47 -0500 Received: from us-bb-gtwy-1.bb.unisys.com (us-bb-gtwy-1.bb.unisys.com [192.63.78.151]) by bbmail1-out.unisys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA05259 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 13:36:10 GMT Received: by us-bb-gtwy-1.bb.unisys.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 08:36:46 -0500 Message-ID: <2AC56C48182B4349AB1906257952AF98390228`at`USTR-EXCH2.na.uis.unisys.com> From: "Houseman, David L" Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Subject: Post for Bob Grossman Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 08:36:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Of course a judge will be able determine what type of mead they are drinking once the bottle is opened (pressure is released & bubbles appear or it's still) and the mead is poured into a glass and tasted (dry/semi/sweet taste to the palate). It makes no difference to me what the brewers original intent was, what matters is how they have listed the mead to be judged. For example, they may have had a wonderful still mead that was properly aged in a secondary and bottled after no signs of further fermentation were seen. But after some time in the bottle, the mead mysteriously made a secondary fermentation on it's own and became a sparkler. This scenario can easily happen when keeping in mind that it only takes a drop of 2 SG points to create a reasonable level of carbonation. Now I would only be guessing what the original intent of the brewer was if the entrant naively enters the mead as a still and it appears as a sparkler. Did they make a! mistake on the entry form and select the wrong category or were they unaware that the mead had become carbonated? Either way, I'm at a loss and am left guessing how to judge the mead. The real reason I must know what category and type of mead has been entered is to be able to organize the flight of meads for a smooth and proper evaluation. I like to start with the dry meads and then go to the sweeter ones. Sparkling or still is only a secondary consideration. It's quite difficult to go back and forth on the sweetness scale while judging mead and maintain a fresh palate. The other big problem I have when evaluating mead is determining the alcohol level from it's relative OG and FG. For example, a sweet mead can brewed to be low alcohol with a OG 90 and FG 30 or high alcohol with a OG 1120 and FG 30. Both will taste sweet, but each will have quite different flavors and profiles. The current entry forms do not inform the judges of the strength of the mead, only the relative finish along the dry/sweetness scale. The guidelines allow a brewing spread of over 50 gravity points and this can result in quite a range of meads being evaluated together. Bob Grossman >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. Bob Grossman --Message_Part_SYNC5849444C95 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 SYNC58364443E3 for judge`at`synchro.com; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 12:03:33 -0500 Received: from conversion.sonoma.edu by SONOMA.EDU (PMDF V5.2-32 #39389) id <01KF88ZYEAW093E9EV`at`SONOMA.EDU> for judge at synchro.com; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 09:03:22 PST Received: from ndickenson ([130.157.152.111]) by SONOMA.EDU (PMDF V5.2-32 #39389) with SMTP id <01KF88Z4HTAM93F7CZ`at`SONOMA.EDU> for judge at synchro.com; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 09:02:38 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 09:04:02 -0800 From: Norman Dickenson Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com Subject: Pro brewers in BJCP To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest Message-id: <002501c1c91e$bef825a0$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 >TYLER WROTE: >Ok, now I'm curious: Are there a large number of >professional brewers involved with the BJCP? Are >Pro brewers helping to make up the style guidelines, >certify new judges, judge in competitions, and >otherwise run the BJCP? Maybe you Pro Brewers >would speak up, and let us know you're reading. Well, while I am not currently employed as a professonal brewer, I did put in a two year stint as brewer in a brewpub. I think it's pretty hard to be active as a pro and stay interested in homebrewing and the BJCP. I made a choice to return to the amateur ranks. Norman Dickenson BJCP Western Representative --Message_Part_SYNC5849444C95 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from hotmail.com ([64.4.32.215]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC5841444765 for judge`at`synchro.com; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 17:15:21 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 14:15:17 -0800 Received: from 67.232.182.165 by pv0fd.pav0.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 22:15:17 GMT X-Originating-IP: [67.232.182.165] From: "Fred Scheer" 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: "attack" Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 16:15:17 -0600 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Mar 2002 22:15:17.0328 (UTC) FILETIME=[398B5500:01C1C94A] X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Grammar/proofreading (BillPierce`at`aol.com) > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks Bill for the nice posting. But, because of that "attack", or improper posting of that "Gentleman", we will unsubscribe to the Judge net. People like him make it uncomfterable to be a member of that list. Thanks again, Fred _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com --Message_Part_SYNC5849444C95-- --Next_Part_SYNC5849444C95--