Subject: Digest for the period 5/2/2003 - 5/3/2003 Date: Sat, 03 May 2003 01:00:31 -0400 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Mead and Cider Evalutaion (Mike Dixon) 2. Two old topics and a new one... (Bev Blackwood II) 3. mead judging points (Nathaniel P. Lansing) 4. Meads, ciders, etc. (Richard Stueven) 5. points, meads, and (yes) B E E R (Bob Paolino) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Dixon Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 06:50:17 -0400 Subject: Mead and Cider Evalutaion Personally, I do not see the need for a new mead/cider exam. I do see the need for a "Study Guide" primer on meads, how they are should be made, and where off flavors orginate from. Things like pH, water chemistry, boil/no boil, etc. Of course we all have some idea, but something similar to the 98 Guide (last sections) would be an excellent tool. I judged meads awhile back with an experienced mead judge. I actually felt I did a good job. I took the guidelines and evaluated the meads according to the guidelines. When the ribbons for that flight were awarded, the meadmakers who won the vast majority of mead awards at all the other competitions in our state were the winners. I assume that meant I did a decent job. Anyway, I would like to see that addition to the exam preparation materials. I am sure there are at least a few judges out there that can put their heads together and come up with the appropriate text. 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: Bev Blackwood II Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 07:29:29 -0500 Subject: Two old topics and a new one... > Re: 1. Stewards pouring beer (George de Piro) I couldn't agree more with George. Beers can change character dramatically in the time they are walked from the pouring area to the judging area. Maybe they should have a "steward booth" adjacent to the judging table? I can see the problem for the GABF people, because the bottles are often "stock" bottles that anyone could recognize instantly as opposed to homebrew contests where all labels and identifying marks (or almost all, anyway) are removed. However, I would draw the line at the other assertion, that there be a "pouring guideline" (or a glass guideline, etc.) for a particular style. I think that if a judge wants to have the yeast in his sample, then it's his responsibility to instruct the steward accordingly. I have instructed stewards many times as to both the desired pouring technique and handling of bottles at the table. Good stewards will accept the instruction and do exactly as the judges request, so speak up! > Re: 2. Mead exam update (Gordon Strong) Thanks for the update Gordon. I need some clarification regarding what the difference between the "idea as presented" and option 2 is. As I read your original post, I see the two as being almost identical... The new thing: At our last monthly meeting, I had the privilege to pour a 1993 Thomas Hardy for a group of folks who had never tried one before. It highlighted to me a big deficiency in the Old Ale category. Thomas Hardy is cited as a style, but hardly any younger judges have ever had one as an example. I annually brew this style and lay bottles down to condition. Having tasted the two side by side, (my 2000 & 2002 editions against the Thomas Hardy) I know I'm well within the style and at older ages, extremely close to the real thing. Reading my scoresheets from this beer at many MCAB contests it's immediately evident a lot of judges haven't got a clue about that side of the style, preferring to cite the readily available Old Peculier as "the example" in their notes. When I get a judge who knows the beer I'm targeting, I do very well. How does one educate people about a beer that's very difficult to find a good commercial example of? -BDB2 Bev D. Blackwood II Brewsletter Editor The Foam Rangers http://www.foamrangers.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 * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Nathaniel P. Lansing Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 09:42:09 -0400 Subject: mead judging points There was some resistance to the idea that a "mead judge" advances in rank only judging meads. There is a slight failure in that view; many point are awarded for stewarding, organizing, assisting the organizer. Does that mean that these "non judging" points do not count toward "Grand Master" award? Also what about judges that, through preference or deferance to ability, never judge lambics, or milds? They haven't judged the full range of beer styles so their points shouldn't count toward Grand Master award right? My feeling, correct me if I'm wrong, is that points are awarded for performing a service that advances the mission of the BJCP and the homebrewing community as a whole. Judging points are judging points, period. Meads and their judging have always been a tough nut to crack. A "mead endorsement" on ones BJCP rank may not be a bad idea. Competitions that be came to be known as having a good range of "mead endorsed" judges would draw the majority of entrants, minimizing the stress on less capable competitions and giving the entrants better feedback. Let me see what I can find out about mead judging from some of the wine judges locally, they have a system in place. It may be useful in our cause to sort this out. "If you get all your information from local TV news, you end up knowing less than you would if you just sat on the couch in your underwear and drank gin from the bottle." --Garrison Keillor NPL ********************************************************************** * 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: Richard Stueven Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 09:53:43 -0500 Subject: Meads, ciders, etc. > Mead is listed in the Style Guide (as are cider) and that is what people > should be tested on. Maybe this is the problem. Mead is not beer. Cider is not beer. I don't have any interest in judging either of them; does that make me less of a beer judge? My $0.02: if it's not beer, it doesn't belong in the Style Guide nor on the exam. Otherwise, the BJCP becomes an orphanage for beverages that nobody else wants to bother with. If that's the case, why not add categories for "premium malt beverages" like Smirnoff Ice and Zima? In Hawaii, they hollow out pineapples, fill them with water, and let them ferment in the fields; maybe we should add a category for "Hawaiian Swipe"? have fun RDS -- Richard Stueven Oshkosh, Wisconsin rstueven`at`beerme.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 * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bob Paolino Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 11:14:46 -0400 Subject: points, meads, and (yes) B E E R > 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 I didn't advocate tracking mead and beer experience points separately; I said people could continue to earn points as they do in the current program. But you would still have the exam score capping the advance in (beer) ranks, while affording the opportunity for a well-qualified mead judge to have it documented through an exam. 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 It is okay (or at least we can accept it) because 95+% of what we are doing at a competition is BEER. (Okay, don't take my number as gospel, but you get the idea. Actually, let's ask someone. Jeff "I love mead" Sparrow: I assume that the AHA first round in Chicago had about 600+ entries. Did you get more than 30 (5%) meads entered? :-) ) In a room full of judges at a competition, with meads entered, you might be able to find a couple of them who know meads and can be convinced to judge them that day. If they're beer judges and have the opportunity of a mead certification as an add-on, the entrant can have that additional assurance (aside from the quality of the written comments) his/her entry was competently judged. If the beer judge doesn't have that optional certification, s/he may still judge the mead competently, but the entrant is probably aware that mead judging in beer competitions is hit or miss and, while probably not happy, will not be surprised if it is not judged to expert standards. (If the meadmaker is serious about it, s/he will probably seek out competitions like the Mazer Cup and others in which mead is the focus, or beer competitions that have developed a reputation for attracting good mead judges.) But what about a mead judge in a room full of beers? Should the entrant know that his beer was judged by someone who passed only the mead exam? What does it do to the reputation of the BJCP (not to mention the judge or the competition) if a Master "Beer" (mead) Judge falls short of that standard when judging beer? You can talk about individual responsibility in deciding whether to take a category, but while the vast majority of beer judges will not be placed in the position of judging meads if they didn't ask for them, a mead judge at a beer competition will almost certainly be assigned a beer category when there aren't any more meads to judge. This isn't to say that the judge in such a position won't make a diligent effort, but the person may just not be a "master" judge when it comes to beer. --- Gordon expressed concern that people don't want to take multiple exams, and the way I phrased it meant that the aspiring BJCP mead judge would have to take two--the beer judge exam as the requirement everyone is expected to meet, and the mead exam for those who desire the optional credential. How is the following as a hybrid/compromise: The mead judge would be required to take only the mead exam and would become a BJCP judge. The rank for mead purposes would be based on the exam score and the experience points earned for (all) judging. Passing the mead exam would ALSO grant the judge an honourary Recognised Beer Judge rank that could be noted on scoresheets when judging beer catgories. Judge melomel in the morning, and you check off certified, national, master, whatever. But when you get pale ale or bock or Belgian Strong in the afternoon flights, you check off recognised. If the judge wants to advance ranks in the beer side of the Beer Judge Certification program (to take advantage of the accumulated experience points) s/he can do it the very same way it's done now, retake the exam (in beer, of course) to upgrade your beer rank. [Yes, at this point it means an additional field in a database program (one rank for beer and one for mead), but does not require distinguishing between what beverage was judged in tracking experience points.] But I suspect the person who would want the mead exam option is not as concerned about the beer rank, and wouldn't be taking and retaking both exams. Now go have a beer, Bob Paolino >From the Department of Military Intelligence and Jumbo Shrimp: Sign seen on a recently poisoned lawn on Johnson: TruGreen/ChemLawn ( ) ASCII ribbon campaign X against HTML e-mail: / \ Friends don't send friends HTML-bloated messages! ********************************************************************** * 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 5/2/2003 - 5/3/2003 Date: Sat, 03 May 2003 01:00:31 -0400 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Mead and Cider Evalutaion (Mike Dixon) 2. Two old topics and a new one... (Bev Blackwood II) 3. mead judging points (Nathaniel P. Lansing) 4. Meads, ciders, etc. (Richard Stueven) 5. points, meads, and (yes) B E E R (Bob Paolino) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Dixon Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 06:50:17 -0400 Subject: Mead and Cider Evalutaion Personally, I do not see the need for a new mead/cider exam. I do see the need for a "Study Guide" primer on meads, how they are should be made, and where off flavors orginate from. Things like pH, water chemistry, boil/no boil, etc. Of course we all have some idea, but something similar to the 98 Guide (last sections) would be an excellent tool. I judged meads awhile back with an experienced mead judge. I actually felt I did a good job. I took the guidelines and evaluated the meads according to the guidelines. When the ribbons for that flight were awarded, the meadmakers who won the vast majority of mead awards at all the other competitions in our state were the winners. I assume that meant I did a decent job. Anyway, I would like to see that addition to the exam preparation materials. I am sure there are at least a few judges out there that can put their heads together and come up with the appropriate text. 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: Bev Blackwood II Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 07:29:29 -0500 Subject: Two old topics and a new one... > Re: 1. Stewards pouring beer (George de Piro) I couldn't agree more with George. Beers can change character dramatically in the time they are walked from the pouring area to the judging area. Maybe they should have a "steward booth" adjacent to the judging table? I can see the problem for the GABF people, because the bottles are often "stock" bottles that anyone could recognize instantly as opposed to homebrew contests where all labels and identifying marks (or almost all, anyway) are removed. However, I would draw the line at the other assertion, that there be a "pouring guideline" (or a glass guideline, etc.) for a particular style. I think that if a judge wants to have the yeast in his sample, then it's his responsibility to instruct the steward accordingly. I have instructed stewards many times as to both the desired pouring technique and handling of bottles at the table. Good stewards will accept the instruction and do exactly as the judges request, so speak up! > Re: 2. Mead exam update (Gordon Strong) Thanks for the update Gordon. I need some clarification regarding what the difference between the "idea as presented" and option 2 is. As I read your original post, I see the two as being almost identical... The new thing: At our last monthly meeting, I had the privilege to pour a 1993 Thomas Hardy for a group of folks who had never tried one before. It highlighted to me a big deficiency in the Old Ale category. Thomas Hardy is cited as a style, but hardly any younger judges have ever had one as an example. I annually brew this style and lay bottles down to condition. Having tasted the two side by side, (my 2000 & 2002 editions against the Thomas Hardy) I know I'm well within the style and at older ages, extremely close to the real thing. Reading my scoresheets from this beer at many MCAB contests it's immediately evident a lot of judges haven't got a clue about that side of the style, preferring to cite the readily available Old Peculier as "the example" in their notes. When I get a judge who knows the beer I'm targeting, I do very well. How does one educate people about a beer that's very difficult to find a good commercial example of? -BDB2 Bev D. Blackwood II Brewsletter Editor The Foam Rangers http://www.foamrangers.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 * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Nathaniel P. Lansing Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 09:42:09 -0400 Subject: mead judging points There was some resistance to the idea that a "mead judge" advances in rank only judging meads. There is a slight failure in that view; many point are awarded for stewarding, organizing, assisting the organizer. Does that mean that these "non judging" points do not count toward "Grand Master" award? Also what about judges that, through preference or deferance to ability, never judge lambics, or milds? They haven't judged the full range of beer styles so their points shouldn't count toward Grand Master award right? My feeling, correct me if I'm wrong, is that points are awarded for performing a service that advances the mission of the BJCP and the homebrewing community as a whole. Judging points are judging points, period. Meads and their judging have always been a tough nut to crack. A "mead endorsement" on ones BJCP rank may not be a bad idea. Competitions that be came to be known as having a good range of "mead endorsed" judges would draw the majority of entrants, minimizing the stress on less capable competitions and giving the entrants better feedback. Let me see what I can find out about mead judging from some of the wine judges locally, they have a system in place. It may be useful in our cause to sort this out. "If you get all your information from local TV news, you end up knowing less than you would if you just sat on the couch in your underwear and drank gin from the bottle." --Garrison Keillor NPL ********************************************************************** * 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: Richard Stueven Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 09:53:43 -0500 Subject: Meads, ciders, etc. > Mead is listed in the Style Guide (as are cider) and that is what people > should be tested on. Maybe this is the problem. Mead is not beer. Cider is not beer. I don't have any interest in judging either of them; does that make me less of a beer judge? My $0.02: if it's not beer, it doesn't belong in the Style Guide nor on the exam. Otherwise, the BJCP becomes an orphanage for beverages that nobody else wants to bother with. If that's the case, why not add categories for "premium malt beverages" like Smirnoff Ice and Zima? In Hawaii, they hollow out pineapples, fill them with water, and let them ferment in the fields; maybe we should add a category for "Hawaiian Swipe"? have fun RDS -- Richard Stueven Oshkosh, Wisconsin rstueven`at`beerme.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 * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bob Paolino Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 11:14:46 -0400 Subject: points, meads, and (yes) B E E R > 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 I didn't advocate tracking mead and beer experience points separately; I said people could continue to earn points as they do in the current program. But you would still have the exam score capping the advance in (beer) ranks, while affording the opportunity for a well-qualified mead judge to have it documented through an exam. 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 It is okay (or at least we can accept it) because 95+% of what we are doing at a competition is BEER. (Okay, don't take my number as gospel, but you get the idea. Actually, let's ask someone. Jeff "I love mead" Sparrow: I assume that the AHA first round in Chicago had about 600+ entries. Did you get more than 30 (5%) meads entered? :-) ) In a room full of judges at a competition, with meads entered, you might be able to find a couple of them who know meads and can be convinced to judge them that day. If they're beer judges and have the opportunity of a mead certification as an add-on, the entrant can have that additional assurance (aside from the quality of the written comments) his/her entry was competently judged. If the beer judge doesn't have that optional certification, s/he may still judge the mead competently, but the entrant is probably aware that mead judging in beer competitions is hit or miss and, while probably not happy, will not be surprised if it is not judged to expert standards. (If the meadmaker is serious about it, s/he will probably seek out competitions like the Mazer Cup and others in which mead is the focus, or beer competitions that have developed a reputation for attracting good mead judges.) But what about a mead judge in a room full of beers? Should the entrant know that his beer was judged by someone who passed only the mead exam? What does it do to the reputation of the BJCP (not to mention the judge or the competition) if a Master "Beer" (mead) Judge falls short of that standard when judging beer? You can talk about individual responsibility in deciding whether to take a category, but while the vast majority of beer judges will not be placed in the position of judging meads if they didn't ask for them, a mead judge at a beer competition will almost certainly be assigned a beer category when there aren't any more meads to judge. This isn't to say that the judge in such a position won't make a diligent effort, but the person may just not be a "master" judge when it comes to beer. --- Gordon expressed concern that people don't want to take multiple exams, and the way I phrased it meant that the aspiring BJCP mead judge would have to take two--the beer judge exam as the requirement everyone is expected to meet, and the mead exam for those who desire the optional credential. How is the following as a hybrid/compromise: The mead judge would be required to take only the mead exam and would become a BJCP judge. The rank for mead purposes would be based on the exam score and the experience points earned for (all) judging. Passing the mead exam would ALSO grant the judge an honourary Recognised Beer Judge rank that could be noted on scoresheets when judging beer catgories. Judge melomel in the morning, and you check off certified, national, master, whatever. But when you get pale ale or bock or Belgian Strong in the afternoon flights, you check off recognised. If the judge wants to advance ranks in the beer side of the Beer Judge Certification program (to take advantage of the accumulated experience points) s/he can do it the very same way it's done now, retake the exam (in beer, of course) to upgrade your beer rank. [Yes, at this point it means an additional field in a database program (one rank for beer and one for mead), but does not require distinguishing between what beverage was judged in tracking experience points.] But I suspect the person who would want the mead exam option is not as concerned about the beer rank, and wouldn't be taking and retaking both exams. Now go have a beer, Bob Paolino >From the Department of Military Intelligence and Jumbo Shrimp: Sign seen on a recently poisoned lawn on Johnson: TruGreen/ChemLawn ( ) ASCII ribbon campaign X against HTML e-mail: / \ Friends don't send friends HTML-bloated messages! ********************************************************************** * 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 * **********************************************************************