Subject: Digest for the period 1/30/2003 - 1/31/2003 Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 01:03:42 -0500 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. RE: Digest for the period 1/29/2003 - 1/30/2003 (Houseman, David L) 2. home fermentation v. homebrewing and competitions (Mike Dixon) 3. Re: fwd: home fermentation v. homebrewing and competitions (BillPierce`at`aol.com) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Houseman, David L Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 09:14:26 -0500 Subject: RE: Digest for the period 1/29/2003 - 1/30/2003 As a long time subscriber to JudgeNet I am occasionally surprised to receive the following message in JudgeNet in my mailbox along with a Text attachment of the original JudgeNet content: "This message uses a character set that is not supported by the Internet Service. To view the original message content, open the attached message. If the text doesn't display correctly, save the attachment to disk, and then open it using a viewer that can display the original character set." I don't see any differences in the character set today than yesterday, but perhaps there's something there not supported by our systems. Anyone have any clues? Dave Houseman ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Dixon Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 09:27:53 -0500 Subject: home fermentation v. homebrewing and competitions In regard to the full wort kits. We generally allow no boil kits from Coopers and Muntons. Add water, yeast, and ferment. I cannot see how this is much different than that. According to the post, you are not adding water. I checked what I think to be the website of the manufacturer http://www.thebrewhouse.com/main/res/handouts/mystic.htm, and you are indeed adding water so it sounds pretty much the same to me. The yeast listed as provided with the kit is Coopers or Windsor. Of course the brewer could change the yeast to a liquid form, but would that then not be brewing a new beer??? Wines from kits are allowed at most wine competitions, so I cannot see why beer from no boil kits whether add a little water, or add a lot, would not be as well. In reality, the people making these kits would most likely not enter competitions, and with only two yeast choices I wonder how close they would actually come to meeting the style guidelines. I think the bottom line rests with individual competitions. If they want to disallow a no boil beer, then the competition should set that in their rules, and the BJCP should not dictate what can and cannot be allowed. Cheers, Mike Dixon Wake Forest, NC ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BillPierce`at`aol.com Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:28:39 -0500 Subject: Re: fwd: home fermentation v. homebrewing and competitions Bob Paolino raises two interesting issues in his forwarded post. The first involves beers brewed from wort kits. These consist of aseptically packaged microbrewery wort to which the homebrewer pitches the yeast and ferments and bottles the beer. Otherwise there is no boiling or "brewing" required. My own belief is that such beers should not be allowed in sanctioned competitions. While the "brewer" has control over fermentation conditions and bottling, and may even select a different yeast strain than that included with the kit, there is little additional participation in the brewing process. I will say that I have had beer brewed from such a kit, and it was very good, which is not surprising given that the wort was professionally mashed, boiled and packaged. Bob also mentions brew on premise, or BOP, facilities. These are somewhat popular in Canada but less so in the US. It is my understanding that beers entered in competitions cannot be brewed at a professional facility, which includes BOPs. Last month I spent a Saturday "working" (I was paid in beer) at a successful Canadian BOP because I was interested in the concept. While this particular BOP had facilities for mashing and encouraged customers to participate in the process, 90 percent of them were content to choose an extract recipe from the store's catalog, let an employee do the brewing, and merely come in at the end to pitch the yeast and satisfy the technical requirements of the law. Two weeks later the customer returns to bottle the beer and take it home. It is entirely possible for the customer to choose his own recipe and ingredients and do all of the brewing using the BOP's facilities, but the reality is that this seldom happens. Given that reality, I tend to agree with the prohibition of beers brewed at professional facilities including BOPs, although I could allow an exception if the brewer certified he/she did all of the work him/herself. Brew on! Bill Pierce Cellar Door Homebrewery Highwood, IL BillPierce`at`aol.com ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** Subject: Digest for the period 1/30/2003 - 1/31/2003 Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 01:03:42 -0500 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. RE: Digest for the period 1/29/2003 - 1/30/2003 (Houseman, David L) 2. home fermentation v. homebrewing and competitions (Mike Dixon) 3. Re: fwd: home fermentation v. homebrewing and competitions (BillPierce`at`aol.com) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Houseman, David L Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 09:14:26 -0500 Subject: RE: Digest for the period 1/29/2003 - 1/30/2003 As a long time subscriber to JudgeNet I am occasionally surprised to receive the following message in JudgeNet in my mailbox along with a Text attachment of the original JudgeNet content: "This message uses a character set that is not supported by the Internet Service. To view the original message content, open the attached message. If the text doesn't display correctly, save the attachment to disk, and then open it using a viewer that can display the original character set." I don't see any differences in the character set today than yesterday, but perhaps there's something there not supported by our systems. Anyone have any clues? Dave Houseman ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Dixon Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 09:27:53 -0500 Subject: home fermentation v. homebrewing and competitions In regard to the full wort kits. We generally allow no boil kits from Coopers and Muntons. Add water, yeast, and ferment. I cannot see how this is much different than that. According to the post, you are not adding water. I checked what I think to be the website of the manufacturer http://www.thebrewhouse.com/main/res/handouts/mystic.htm, and you are indeed adding water so it sounds pretty much the same to me. The yeast listed as provided with the kit is Coopers or Windsor. Of course the brewer could change the yeast to a liquid form, but would that then not be brewing a new beer??? Wines from kits are allowed at most wine competitions, so I cannot see why beer from no boil kits whether add a little water, or add a lot, would not be as well. In reality, the people making these kits would most likely not enter competitions, and with only two yeast choices I wonder how close they would actually come to meeting the style guidelines. I think the bottom line rests with individual competitions. If they want to disallow a no boil beer, then the competition should set that in their rules, and the BJCP should not dictate what can and cannot be allowed. Cheers, Mike Dixon Wake Forest, NC ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BillPierce`at`aol.com Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:28:39 -0500 Subject: Re: fwd: home fermentation v. homebrewing and competitions Bob Paolino raises two interesting issues in his forwarded post. The first involves beers brewed from wort kits. These consist of aseptically packaged microbrewery wort to which the homebrewer pitches the yeast and ferments and bottles the beer. Otherwise there is no boiling or "brewing" required. My own belief is that such beers should not be allowed in sanctioned competitions. While the "brewer" has control over fermentation conditions and bottling, and may even select a different yeast strain than that included with the kit, there is little additional participation in the brewing process. I will say that I have had beer brewed from such a kit, and it was very good, which is not surprising given that the wort was professionally mashed, boiled and packaged. Bob also mentions brew on premise, or BOP, facilities. These are somewhat popular in Canada but less so in the US. It is my understanding that beers entered in competitions cannot be brewed at a professional facility, which includes BOPs. Last month I spent a Saturday "working" (I was paid in beer) at a successful Canadian BOP because I was interested in the concept. While this particular BOP had facilities for mashing and encouraged customers to participate in the process, 90 percent of them were content to choose an extract recipe from the store's catalog, let an employee do the brewing, and merely come in at the end to pitch the yeast and satisfy the technical requirements of the law. Two weeks later the customer returns to bottle the beer and take it home. It is entirely possible for the customer to choose his own recipe and ingredients and do all of the brewing using the BOP's facilities, but the reality is that this seldom happens. Given that reality, I tend to agree with the prohibition of beers brewed at professional facilities including BOPs, although I could allow an exception if the brewer certified he/she did all of the work him/herself. Brew on! Bill Pierce Cellar Door Homebrewery Highwood, IL BillPierce`at`aol.com ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * **********************************************************************