Subject: Digest for the period 3/19/02 - 3/20/02 Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 01:04:45 -0500 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC604144B4B9" --Next_Part_SYNC604144B4B9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Judging professional competitions (Robert Paolino) Commerial Example of Southern English Brown in US? (J. Scott Watson) Strength specification for Meads (Michael L. Hall) --Next_Part_SYNC604144B4B9 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Message_Part_SYNC604144B4B9" --Message_Part_SYNC604144B4B9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from out4.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net ([169.207.1.77]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC602344A99E for judge`at`synchro.com; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 07:25:55 -0500 Received: from pop1.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (pop1.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.2.115]) by out4.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.11.1/8.11.4/1.7) with ESMTP id g2JCPr502092 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 06:25:53 -0600 (CST) Received: from LOCALNAME (d21.as3.mdsn0.wi.voyager.net [169.207.192.21]) by pop1.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id g2JCPka31529 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 06:25:48 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.16.20020319072357.3757a75a`at`mail.execpc.com> X-Sender: rpaolino`at`mail.execpc.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (16) Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 07:23:57 To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest From: Robert Paolino Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com Subject: Judging professional competitions In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Ed Westemeier wrote on Wed, 13 Mar 2002 07:44:24 -0500: >Subject: Re: World beer cup juding credit A little confusion here... >>Steve Ashton ***didn't*** write: >> >>"To go back to an earlier thread, when registering for World Beer Cup >>judging in Cleveland, I learned that WBC PPBT judges will be getting >>BJCP points this year." I was the one who posted the above, so let's not blame Steve, and I'll try to respond based on what I was told and prior information about it. Then... Steve wrote, or was it OudBruin, now I'm confused about who wrote what :-) >>Can someone confirm if this is true? Unless the WBC has changed its rules >>for judge selection I fail to understand how we can allow this. I have >>served as a Table Captain for this and I am a Master Judge and I still get >>turned down for judging because I am not a professional brewer. Or maybe I >>just don't know the right people. Can someone shed some light on this? > Ed wrote: >This is certainly true. >Although the WBC uses only PPBT judges, there are quite a few PPBT >members who also belong to the BJCP. Those judges will receive BJCP >judging credit for participating. > >The BJCP announced (http://www.bjcp.org/news) last October that this >would be the policy for commercial competitions registered with the >BJCP. The WBC is registered, as shown on the BJCP competitions page. Ed describes this correctly. In the discussion over some number of months, and I may be interpreting it wrong, but there seemed to be some underlying assumption or expectation about making some major change in the PPBT such that they would suddenly be using BJCP judges, when it was really, as Ed described, the other way around--whether those who already qualified as PPBT judges would get BJCP credit and under what conditions. The qualifications for PPBT judges are posted under the GABF/WBC sections of the AOB webpage. Yes, overwhelmingly, they are professional brewers. Others with some kind of connection to the industry and with demonstrated beer evaluation ability are also among the judges (suppliers, beer writers, others), but they form a much smaller part of the judge pool. Some of these people _also_ happen to be BJCP judges and the point of the whole discussion as I understood it was whether their PPBT experience would be acknowledged for BJCP purposes. I honestly do not know whether someone whose sole qualification as a judge (not to diminish the judging ability, I use "sole" simply as a counting word) is through the BJCP would be considered. I imagine it's a case by case decision. Look at the application information (resume of your beer experience plus letters of recommendation from industry people), honestly assess whether you might qualify, and give it a shot. Keep in mind the time factor and when first-year judges are invited--applying now might put you in the pool of applicants not for this autumn but for _next_ year's GABF. Patience, and more patience. After I was a first-year judge at the World Beer Cup, I was on the waiting list for the GABF. I was content to wait for some other year. --Message_Part_SYNC604144B4B9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from web11601.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.172.53]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC603044B05D for judge`at`synchro.com; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 14:25:12 -0500 Message-ID: <20020319192509.84728.qmail`at`web11601.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [143.232.188.79] by web11601.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 11:25:09 PST Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 11:25:09 -0800 (PST) From: "J. Scott Watson" Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com Subject: Commerial Example of Southern English Brown in US? To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Does anyone know of a commerial example of the style "Southern English Brown" (BJCP 10C) brewed in the US? The style guidelines say "Oregon Nut Brown Ale". I recall seeing that beer sold here in California many years ago, but I haven't been able to find it lately. Is it still being brewed? Any other examples commonly available, that I might look for in my travels around the states? Cheers, John S. Watson __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage http://sports.yahoo.com/ --Message_Part_SYNC604144B4B9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from mailrelay3.lanl.gov ([128.165.3.1]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC603244B0F7 for judge`at`synchro.com; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 16:02:36 -0500 Received: from galt.lanl.gov (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mailrelay3.lanl.gov (8.11.6/8.11.6/(ccn-5)) with SMTP id g2JL2Vv27008; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 14:02:31 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15511.42855.446463.139683`at`galt.lanl.gov> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 14:02:31 -0700 (MST) From: "Michael L. Hall" 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: Strength specification for Meads In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: VM 6.72 under 21.1 (patch 9) "Canyonlands" XEmacs Lucid X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Bob Grossman writes: > 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. I agree. Listing the modifiers should mainly help the judges sort out a flight's tasting order. IMO, minor errors like listing a mead as "medium" when the judge thinks that it is really "sweet" shouldn't be counted off much. > 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. I completely agree. I included a modifier of Strength in my "Treatise on Mead Judging" from some years back. Here's an excerpt of the modifier section: Modifiers: The category modifiers are to be provided in addition to the category and subcategory information. Judges should use this information to order meads within a flight and for insight into what the brewer intended. However, judges should not detract heavily from a mead's score because it does not fall distinctly within the range of the modifier specified by the brewer. Varietal modifier: The variety of honey that a mead is made from will often have a large effect on the flavor of the mead. The brewer should specify the varietal honey (for example, clover or orange blossom). The mead should have some character from the varietal honey, especially if it is a traditional mead. Strength (Hydromel / Standard / Sack) modifier: The strength of a mead is primarily based on the original gravity. Hydromels (watered mead) will have specific gravities roughly less than 1.080. Standard strength meads will be in the original gravity range from 1.080 to 1.120. Sack meads will generally be greater than 1.120. This modifier was designed so that well-made delicate hydromels will not be overlooked in favor of the more emphatic sack meads. Make sure to judge each strength of mead according to its own merits. Sweetness (Dry / Medium / Sweet) modifier: The perceived sweetness is largely a function of the final specific gravity, but other variables such as the acidity will also have an effect. Roughly, a dry mead will have a final gravity less than 1.010, a medium mead will fall in the range from 1.010 to 1.025, and a sweet mead will be greater than 1.025. Carbonation Level (Still / Sparkling) modifier: Still meads should have little or no carbonation. Some slight carbonation is acceptable. Sparkling meads should have a definite effervescence and tingly mouthfeel. Tiny bubbles are preferable to large bubbles. (see , currently the first entry, for the full article.) Cheers, -Mike ============================================================================ Michael L. Hall, Ph.D. President, Los Alamos Atom Mashers Member, AHA Board of Advisors ============================================================================ The problem with some people is that when they aren't drunk, they're sober. -- William Butler Yeats --Message_Part_SYNC604144B4B9-- --Next_Part_SYNC604144B4B9-- Subject: Digest for the period 3/19/02 - 3/20/02 Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 01:04:45 -0500 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Next_Part_SYNC604144B4B9" --Next_Part_SYNC604144B4B9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Judging professional competitions (Robert Paolino) Commerial Example of Southern English Brown in US? (J. Scott Watson) Strength specification for Meads (Michael L. Hall) --Next_Part_SYNC604144B4B9 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="Message_Part_SYNC604144B4B9" --Message_Part_SYNC604144B4B9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from out4.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net ([169.207.1.77]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC602344A99E for judge`at`synchro.com; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 07:25:55 -0500 Received: from pop1.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (pop1.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.2.115]) by out4.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.11.1/8.11.4/1.7) with ESMTP id g2JCPr502092 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 06:25:53 -0600 (CST) Received: from LOCALNAME (d21.as3.mdsn0.wi.voyager.net [169.207.192.21]) by pop1.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id g2JCPka31529 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 06:25:48 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.16.20020319072357.3757a75a`at`mail.execpc.com> X-Sender: rpaolino`at`mail.execpc.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (16) Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 07:23:57 To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest From: Robert Paolino Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com Subject: Judging professional competitions In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Ed Westemeier wrote on Wed, 13 Mar 2002 07:44:24 -0500: >Subject: Re: World beer cup juding credit A little confusion here... >>Steve Ashton ***didn't*** write: >> >>"To go back to an earlier thread, when registering for World Beer Cup >>judging in Cleveland, I learned that WBC PPBT judges will be getting >>BJCP points this year." I was the one who posted the above, so let's not blame Steve, and I'll try to respond based on what I was told and prior information about it. Then... Steve wrote, or was it OudBruin, now I'm confused about who wrote what :-) >>Can someone confirm if this is true? Unless the WBC has changed its rules >>for judge selection I fail to understand how we can allow this. I have >>served as a Table Captain for this and I am a Master Judge and I still get >>turned down for judging because I am not a professional brewer. Or maybe I >>just don't know the right people. Can someone shed some light on this? > Ed wrote: >This is certainly true. >Although the WBC uses only PPBT judges, there are quite a few PPBT >members who also belong to the BJCP. Those judges will receive BJCP >judging credit for participating. > >The BJCP announced (http://www.bjcp.org/news) last October that this >would be the policy for commercial competitions registered with the >BJCP. The WBC is registered, as shown on the BJCP competitions page. Ed describes this correctly. In the discussion over some number of months, and I may be interpreting it wrong, but there seemed to be some underlying assumption or expectation about making some major change in the PPBT such that they would suddenly be using BJCP judges, when it was really, as Ed described, the other way around--whether those who already qualified as PPBT judges would get BJCP credit and under what conditions. The qualifications for PPBT judges are posted under the GABF/WBC sections of the AOB webpage. Yes, overwhelmingly, they are professional brewers. Others with some kind of connection to the industry and with demonstrated beer evaluation ability are also among the judges (suppliers, beer writers, others), but they form a much smaller part of the judge pool. Some of these people _also_ happen to be BJCP judges and the point of the whole discussion as I understood it was whether their PPBT experience would be acknowledged for BJCP purposes. I honestly do not know whether someone whose sole qualification as a judge (not to diminish the judging ability, I use "sole" simply as a counting word) is through the BJCP would be considered. I imagine it's a case by case decision. Look at the application information (resume of your beer experience plus letters of recommendation from industry people), honestly assess whether you might qualify, and give it a shot. Keep in mind the time factor and when first-year judges are invited--applying now might put you in the pool of applicants not for this autumn but for _next_ year's GABF. Patience, and more patience. After I was a first-year judge at the World Beer Cup, I was on the waiting list for the GABF. I was content to wait for some other year. --Message_Part_SYNC604144B4B9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from web11601.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.172.53]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC603044B05D for judge`at`synchro.com; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 14:25:12 -0500 Message-ID: <20020319192509.84728.qmail`at`web11601.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [143.232.188.79] by web11601.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 11:25:09 PST Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 11:25:09 -0800 (PST) From: "J. Scott Watson" Reply-To: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" Errors-To: judge-owner`at`synchro.com Sender: judge`at`synchro.com Subject: Commerial Example of Southern English Brown in US? To: JudgeNet - the beer judge digest MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Does anyone know of a commerial example of the style "Southern English Brown" (BJCP 10C) brewed in the US? The style guidelines say "Oregon Nut Brown Ale". I recall seeing that beer sold here in California many years ago, but I haven't been able to find it lately. Is it still being brewed? Any other examples commonly available, that I might look for in my travels around the states? Cheers, John S. Watson __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage http://sports.yahoo.com/ --Message_Part_SYNC604144B4B9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Received: from mailrelay3.lanl.gov ([128.165.3.1]) by synchro.com with SMTP (Mailtraq/1.1.6.1176) id SYNC603244B0F7 for judge`at`synchro.com; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 16:02:36 -0500 Received: from galt.lanl.gov (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mailrelay3.lanl.gov (8.11.6/8.11.6/(ccn-5)) with SMTP id g2JL2Vv27008; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 14:02:31 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15511.42855.446463.139683`at`galt.lanl.gov> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 14:02:31 -0700 (MST) From: "Michael L. Hall" 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: Strength specification for Meads In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: VM 6.72 under 21.1 (patch 9) "Canyonlands" XEmacs Lucid X-Hops: 3 X-POST-MessageClass: 10; Mailing List Message Bob Grossman writes: > 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. I agree. Listing the modifiers should mainly help the judges sort out a flight's tasting order. IMO, minor errors like listing a mead as "medium" when the judge thinks that it is really "sweet" shouldn't be counted off much. > 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. I completely agree. I included a modifier of Strength in my "Treatise on Mead Judging" from some years back. Here's an excerpt of the modifier section: Modifiers: The category modifiers are to be provided in addition to the category and subcategory information. Judges should use this information to order meads within a flight and for insight into what the brewer intended. However, judges should not detract heavily from a mead's score because it does not fall distinctly within the range of the modifier specified by the brewer. Varietal modifier: The variety of honey that a mead is made from will often have a large effect on the flavor of the mead. The brewer should specify the varietal honey (for example, clover or orange blossom). The mead should have some character from the varietal honey, especially if it is a traditional mead. Strength (Hydromel / Standard / Sack) modifier: The strength of a mead is primarily based on the original gravity. Hydromels (watered mead) will have specific gravities roughly less than 1.080. Standard strength meads will be in the original gravity range from 1.080 to 1.120. Sack meads will generally be greater than 1.120. This modifier was designed so that well-made delicate hydromels will not be overlooked in favor of the more emphatic sack meads. Make sure to judge each strength of mead according to its own merits. Sweetness (Dry / Medium / Sweet) modifier: The perceived sweetness is largely a function of the final specific gravity, but other variables such as the acidity will also have an effect. Roughly, a dry mead will have a final gravity less than 1.010, a medium mead will fall in the range from 1.010 to 1.025, and a sweet mead will be greater than 1.025. Carbonation Level (Still / Sparkling) modifier: Still meads should have little or no carbonation. Some slight carbonation is acceptable. Sparkling meads should have a definite effervescence and tingly mouthfeel. Tiny bubbles are preferable to large bubbles. (see , currently the first entry, for the full article.) Cheers, -Mike ============================================================================ Michael L. Hall, Ph.D. President, Los Alamos Atom Mashers Member, AHA Board of Advisors ============================================================================ The problem with some people is that when they aren't drunk, they're sober. -- William Butler Yeats --Message_Part_SYNC604144B4B9-- --Next_Part_SYNC604144B4B9--