Subject: Digest for the period 5/1/2003 - 5/2/2003 Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 01:04:26 -0400 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Stewards pouring beer (George de Piro) 2. Mead exam update (Gordon Strong) 3. Re: Hefeweizen (David Lamotte) 4. Re: Hefeweizen (Bob Sheck) 5. Re: mead exam (Steve Casselman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: George de Piro Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 11:03:32 -0400 Subject: Stewards pouring beer Hi all, Ed Westemeirer writes: > As a side note, this is now standard practice at the Great American > Beer Festival. Beers judged there are poured in another room by the > stewards, then brought in cups to the judges. Stewards are given this > information, and take care of this detail before pouring. To which I reply: One of the things I really don't like about the judging at the GABF is that the stewards pour the beers well before the evaluation. Volatile aroma components can dissipate with rapidity; the beer needs to be sniffed immediately upon pouring to get an accurate impression. Even at a bar, the customer will usually get the beer within 5 seconds of it being poured, not 5 minutes. Have fun! George de Piro Head Brewer, C.H. Evans Brewing Company at the Albany Pump Station 19 Quackenbush Square Albany, NY, USA 12207 (518)447-9000 www.EvansAle.com Brewers of Kick-Ass Brown: Twice declared the Best American Brown Ale in the USA at the Great American Beer Festival (2000 & 2002)! ********************************************************************** * 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: Gordon Strong Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 23:18:47 -0400 Subject: Mead exam update I have an update on the mead exam topic now that messages seem to have died down. I'd also like to address some specific points some folks have raised during the discussion. Including private responses, I can characterize the voting as follows: 1. Yes to the idea as presented: 14 2. Yes, but either make mead an option/add-on to the current test and maintain a separate tracking of the status: 5 3. Yes to the general idea, but also include cider: 1 4. No to the whole idea: 1 5. No, but instead improve the mead guidelines: 1 6. No, but include mead and cider on the current beer exam: 2 Thanks to all who responsed both in the digest and in personal responses to me. On the alternate proposals (numbered above), I have a couple quick comments: (Choice 2) Probably won't happen because of extra work in changing the database, judge levels, advancement criteria, and competition reporting procedures. In a perfect world, maybe a better choice (as would being able to identify style competencies). However, enough people complain about taking the current exam once or twice, so adding more exams probably wouldn't make many people happy. (Choice 3) My concept didn't preclude doing a separate cider-specific exam. Probably a good idea if the mead idea works out. I'm not sure about combining them since there isn't a lot of overlap between the styles. If I go forward with the idea, I'd be interested in hearing from people who support the concept as to whether including cider on the same test would be a good or bad thing. (Choice 5) Not sure this would fix the problem I was trying to address, but is certainly a good idea in general (as is revising the beer guidelines). (Choice 6) I'd have to check with those from the early days to see why mead and cider were omitted from the current exam. Probably to make the test easier to pass and/or make sure we have a broader range of judges. Making the exam more comprehensive would also make it harder to pass; I'm not sure this is what we want either. I'd like to respond to some of the direct comments and/or questions expressed in previous digests: 1. Lyle Brown asks why mead is being singled out to the exclusion of cider and sake. The simple answer is that mead is a place to start, and doesn't mean that the others can't also be done. I was concerned that if the proposal was too broad-ranging, it would be easier for some to reject as being too difficult to implement. I'd rather accomplish part of something good than nothing of something great. Another issue is that sake isn't recognized as part of the BJCP style guidelines, and was dropped from the AHA guidelines and competitions a few years ago (along with malt liquor, probably due to a lack of interest). I personally enjoy sake (lightly chilled, please) and wouldn't mind seeing it addressed at some point. But that's a different discussion, I think. 2. Rob Paolino has concerns about letting mead-certified judges advancing in the beer program and getting BJCP titles. I guess my point was that I was trying to allow for additional breadth in the current program without trying to introduce a whole additional system (which I'm hoping all would agree is not desirable). As for tracking mead points for judging meads and beer points for judging beers, that would be very hard to track for both competition organizers and the BJCP program administrator. As for someone who passes a mead exam being able to judge beers or not, I'd point to the current situation. The current beer exam doesn't measure ability to judge meads, yet beer judges judge mead. Why would this be OK, but the reverse not? And I do believe it is the responsibility of both individual judges and competition organizers to get competent judges to judge specific styles (it's like a professional code of conduct). But you also have to allow that some judges will be untrained in certain styles and hope to use competitions as a learning experience by being paired with experienced judges. Absent a professional training program, on-the-job training is the best we can hope for. 3. Mark Wilson compares meads to lambics on the current exam. This isn't the case. Lambics are in the beer style guidelines and are covered on the exam. I can think of at least three questions that commonly appear on exams that would result in an examinee having to fully define and describe the lambic style (e.g. the beer style associated with the Senne Valley, describe and differentiate three different Belgian styles, describe and differentiate four distinct styles using wheat as a major ingredient). There might be more. Knowledge of the lambic style also would result in a better score for such questions as troubleshooting sourness in a beer, and identifying if it ever is appropriate. Also in diagnosing poor head retention and some other troubleshooting questions. Meads are not covered on any question on the current exam and would never be offered as one of the exam beers. I realize this has gotten long, so I'll sign off now. Thanks to all who took the time to read this and to participate in the debate. Gordon strongg`at`earthlink.net ********************************************************************** * 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: David Lamotte Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 18:41:05 +1000 Subject: Re: Hefeweizen Hi All, Dave was speaking of Hefeweizen ... > While maybe not ideal, or absolutely true to the style, the current > process is practical for the purposes for which it is intended. I > don't see changing the guidelines with some extensive field > trials... I have been pondering this issue over the last few days, and I can see good arguments on both sides. But, to me the fundemental point is how does the presentation of the beer relate to the style guidelines ? If the guidelines specify a cloudy beer, then it should be presented in the appropriate manner. Down under, bottles are always opened away from the Stewards and Judges - the stewards just deliver a jug to the judging table. The beers are removed from the usually frigid commercial fridges a set number of minutes before opening (to allow them to warm to serving temp), so it would be easy to include the pre-opening rolling into the procedure. But it also got me thinking, should we also be doing the same for the English Ales - should I send my entries in with a Pocket Beer Engine (ie a Styringe) attached to allow them to be served in an appropriate fashion ? All the best, David ********************************************************************** * 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: Bob Sheck Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 09:19:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Hefeweizen If this makes a noticeable difference in the characteristics of the beer under scrutiny, then by all means should it be evaluated in this manner. Tulip glasses for Belgians? Pilsner glasses, etc. I'd much rather drink from glass than plastic. Stewards could wash the glasses between entries, although I would prefer to handle my own glass-care. Should I show up at the next comp with a suitcase full of appropriate glassware? I can see where this is headed. . . but if we are to 'do things right' it should be done. Bob Sheck // DEA - Down East Alers - Greenville, NC bobsheck`at`earthlink.net >From: David Houseman Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 07:23:24 -0400 > >For those of you that have been to Munich and bought a [Hefe]weizen, you >know the process: Bottles are rolled to mix up the yeast sediment. Then >opened, layed on their side as they pour into the very tall, and >characteristic, Weizen glasses. ********************************************************************** * 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: Steve Casselman Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 09:28:12 -0700 Subject: Re: mead exam Mead is listed in the Style Guide (as are cider) and that is what people should be tested on. Both the written and evaluation portions should include Meads and Ciders. Any Judge should be able to sit down at any table and have some kind of proficiency at what they have to judge. I have talk about having extended ceritifications which could be grouped. For example meads, ciders, specialty, fruit and spice beers could all go together in a class ceritification. You might have Belgians (classes 18, 19, and 20) a ceritification or other such extended ceritification. Steve Casselman > Jeff Gladish said > On the other hand it makes me wonder why meads are not included in the BJCP > exam to begin with. From: Ted Hausotter Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:33:12 -0700 > Subject: Re: Mead Exam, Judge turn out > > Ted Hausotter said > > Mead and Cider should either be part of the study guide and test for the > BJCP or dropped. ********************************************************************** * 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 5/1/2003 - 5/2/2003 Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 01:04:26 -0400 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Stewards pouring beer (George de Piro) 2. Mead exam update (Gordon Strong) 3. Re: Hefeweizen (David Lamotte) 4. Re: Hefeweizen (Bob Sheck) 5. Re: mead exam (Steve Casselman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: George de Piro Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 11:03:32 -0400 Subject: Stewards pouring beer Hi all, Ed Westemeirer writes: > As a side note, this is now standard practice at the Great American > Beer Festival. Beers judged there are poured in another room by the > stewards, then brought in cups to the judges. Stewards are given this > information, and take care of this detail before pouring. To which I reply: One of the things I really don't like about the judging at the GABF is that the stewards pour the beers well before the evaluation. Volatile aroma components can dissipate with rapidity; the beer needs to be sniffed immediately upon pouring to get an accurate impression. Even at a bar, the customer will usually get the beer within 5 seconds of it being poured, not 5 minutes. Have fun! George de Piro Head Brewer, C.H. Evans Brewing Company at the Albany Pump Station 19 Quackenbush Square Albany, NY, USA 12207 (518)447-9000 www.EvansAle.com Brewers of Kick-Ass Brown: Twice declared the Best American Brown Ale in the USA at the Great American Beer Festival (2000 & 2002)! ********************************************************************** * 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: Gordon Strong Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 23:18:47 -0400 Subject: Mead exam update I have an update on the mead exam topic now that messages seem to have died down. I'd also like to address some specific points some folks have raised during the discussion. Including private responses, I can characterize the voting as follows: 1. Yes to the idea as presented: 14 2. Yes, but either make mead an option/add-on to the current test and maintain a separate tracking of the status: 5 3. Yes to the general idea, but also include cider: 1 4. No to the whole idea: 1 5. No, but instead improve the mead guidelines: 1 6. No, but include mead and cider on the current beer exam: 2 Thanks to all who responsed both in the digest and in personal responses to me. On the alternate proposals (numbered above), I have a couple quick comments: (Choice 2) Probably won't happen because of extra work in changing the database, judge levels, advancement criteria, and competition reporting procedures. In a perfect world, maybe a better choice (as would being able to identify style competencies). However, enough people complain about taking the current exam once or twice, so adding more exams probably wouldn't make many people happy. (Choice 3) My concept didn't preclude doing a separate cider-specific exam. Probably a good idea if the mead idea works out. I'm not sure about combining them since there isn't a lot of overlap between the styles. If I go forward with the idea, I'd be interested in hearing from people who support the concept as to whether including cider on the same test would be a good or bad thing. (Choice 5) Not sure this would fix the problem I was trying to address, but is certainly a good idea in general (as is revising the beer guidelines). (Choice 6) I'd have to check with those from the early days to see why mead and cider were omitted from the current exam. Probably to make the test easier to pass and/or make sure we have a broader range of judges. Making the exam more comprehensive would also make it harder to pass; I'm not sure this is what we want either. I'd like to respond to some of the direct comments and/or questions expressed in previous digests: 1. Lyle Brown asks why mead is being singled out to the exclusion of cider and sake. The simple answer is that mead is a place to start, and doesn't mean that the others can't also be done. I was concerned that if the proposal was too broad-ranging, it would be easier for some to reject as being too difficult to implement. I'd rather accomplish part of something good than nothing of something great. Another issue is that sake isn't recognized as part of the BJCP style guidelines, and was dropped from the AHA guidelines and competitions a few years ago (along with malt liquor, probably due to a lack of interest). I personally enjoy sake (lightly chilled, please) and wouldn't mind seeing it addressed at some point. But that's a different discussion, I think. 2. Rob Paolino has concerns about letting mead-certified judges advancing in the beer program and getting BJCP titles. I guess my point was that I was trying to allow for additional breadth in the current program without trying to introduce a whole additional system (which I'm hoping all would agree is not desirable). As for tracking mead points for judging meads and beer points for judging beers, that would be very hard to track for both competition organizers and the BJCP program administrator. As for someone who passes a mead exam being able to judge beers or not, I'd point to the current situation. The current beer exam doesn't measure ability to judge meads, yet beer judges judge mead. Why would this be OK, but the reverse not? And I do believe it is the responsibility of both individual judges and competition organizers to get competent judges to judge specific styles (it's like a professional code of conduct). But you also have to allow that some judges will be untrained in certain styles and hope to use competitions as a learning experience by being paired with experienced judges. Absent a professional training program, on-the-job training is the best we can hope for. 3. Mark Wilson compares meads to lambics on the current exam. This isn't the case. Lambics are in the beer style guidelines and are covered on the exam. I can think of at least three questions that commonly appear on exams that would result in an examinee having to fully define and describe the lambic style (e.g. the beer style associated with the Senne Valley, describe and differentiate three different Belgian styles, describe and differentiate four distinct styles using wheat as a major ingredient). There might be more. Knowledge of the lambic style also would result in a better score for such questions as troubleshooting sourness in a beer, and identifying if it ever is appropriate. Also in diagnosing poor head retention and some other troubleshooting questions. Meads are not covered on any question on the current exam and would never be offered as one of the exam beers. I realize this has gotten long, so I'll sign off now. Thanks to all who took the time to read this and to participate in the debate. Gordon strongg`at`earthlink.net ********************************************************************** * 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: David Lamotte Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 18:41:05 +1000 Subject: Re: Hefeweizen Hi All, Dave was speaking of Hefeweizen ... > While maybe not ideal, or absolutely true to the style, the current > process is practical for the purposes for which it is intended. I > don't see changing the guidelines with some extensive field > trials... I have been pondering this issue over the last few days, and I can see good arguments on both sides. But, to me the fundemental point is how does the presentation of the beer relate to the style guidelines ? If the guidelines specify a cloudy beer, then it should be presented in the appropriate manner. Down under, bottles are always opened away from the Stewards and Judges - the stewards just deliver a jug to the judging table. The beers are removed from the usually frigid commercial fridges a set number of minutes before opening (to allow them to warm to serving temp), so it would be easy to include the pre-opening rolling into the procedure. But it also got me thinking, should we also be doing the same for the English Ales - should I send my entries in with a Pocket Beer Engine (ie a Styringe) attached to allow them to be served in an appropriate fashion ? All the best, David ********************************************************************** * 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: Bob Sheck Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 09:19:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Hefeweizen If this makes a noticeable difference in the characteristics of the beer under scrutiny, then by all means should it be evaluated in this manner. Tulip glasses for Belgians? Pilsner glasses, etc. I'd much rather drink from glass than plastic. Stewards could wash the glasses between entries, although I would prefer to handle my own glass-care. Should I show up at the next comp with a suitcase full of appropriate glassware? I can see where this is headed. . . but if we are to 'do things right' it should be done. Bob Sheck // DEA - Down East Alers - Greenville, NC bobsheck`at`earthlink.net >From: David Houseman Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 07:23:24 -0400 > >For those of you that have been to Munich and bought a [Hefe]weizen, you >know the process: Bottles are rolled to mix up the yeast sediment. Then >opened, layed on their side as they pour into the very tall, and >characteristic, Weizen glasses. ********************************************************************** * 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: Steve Casselman Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 09:28:12 -0700 Subject: Re: mead exam Mead is listed in the Style Guide (as are cider) and that is what people should be tested on. Both the written and evaluation portions should include Meads and Ciders. Any Judge should be able to sit down at any table and have some kind of proficiency at what they have to judge. I have talk about having extended ceritifications which could be grouped. For example meads, ciders, specialty, fruit and spice beers could all go together in a class ceritification. You might have Belgians (classes 18, 19, and 20) a ceritification or other such extended ceritification. Steve Casselman > Jeff Gladish said > On the other hand it makes me wonder why meads are not included in the BJCP > exam to begin with. From: Ted Hausotter Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:33:12 -0700 > Subject: Re: Mead Exam, Judge turn out > > Ted Hausotter said > > Mead and Cider should either be part of the study guide and test for the > BJCP or dropped. ********************************************************************** * 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 * **********************************************************************