Subject: Digest for the period 3/29/2004 - 3/30/2004 Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 01:00:26 -0500 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. FW: Scott's comments (Tim Oborn) 2. Pints for Jay (Pete) 3. RE: Celis White (Ted Hausotter) 4. Style Nazis? (Bob Paolino) 5. Re: BJCP exam's the problem, not the path (BillPierce`at`aol.com) 6. Problems with the BJCP exam (Steve Casselman) 7. question availability / Exam Process (Alan Hord) 8. Recipe access while judging (Denis Barsalo) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Oborn Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 22:17:14 -0700 Subject: FW: Scott's comments Tim Oborn BSc., B.Ed., B.ottlewasher -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Cox [mailto:chuck`at`synchro.com] Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 7:59 PM To: Tim Oborn Subject: Re: Scott's comments Please send to judge`at`synchro.com. At 09:49 PM 3/28/2004, you wrote: >Sorry Chuck. Here it is. > >Tim Oborn >BSc., B.Ed., B.ottlewasher > >Scott, > >Regarding my comment: >"When did we forget that this is a beer judging exam and not the >entrance exam into the Hitler Youth?" > >I meant it lightly and did not mean to offend anyone, especially you >Scott. I obviously did and am deeply sorry for the flippant use but I >think it is very plain I am not calling you or anyone else a Nazi. > >As for the rest, I stand behind my opinion. Rather than rebut >immediately, which under the circumstances I feel uncomfortable doing, >I'd like others to give their input on their feeling and experiences >concerning the exam structure. > >The vein of most posts show that there are problems to the way things >are now, I am merely trying to give food for thought as to a solution. > >Tim Oborn >BSc., B.Ed., B.ottlewasher -- Chuck Cox SynchroSystems chuck`at`synchro.com, cccox at fas.harvard.edu, www.synchro.com Bush: less freedom & more spending. Kerry: more spending & less freedom. The choice is obvious. ********************************************************************** * 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: Pete Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 06:28:45 -0500 Subject: Pints for Jay Please find attached one pint each of "Amazing Grapefuit Pale Ale" and "Royal Ugly Dude Insidious Stout" (Ed note - the list does not support attachments, they were removed by the server) (They were also quite tasty) ********************************************************************** * 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: Ted Hausotter Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 06:26:12 -0800 Subject: RE: Celis White I have a question about the new Celis White made up North. Do you still consider it a classic example of the wit style? This is not a favorite style of mine. I first tried Celis about 8 years ago and since remember it different. I do not think it is as good as before, but my tasting of it is limited to every few years and have not tried the new against a panel of it's peers. Ted Hausotter Baker City, OR National Beer Judge _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 ********************************************************************** * 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: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 10:43:45 -0500 Subject: Style Nazis? Chuck Cox wrote on Sat, 27 Mar 2004 12:36:12 -0500: > At 01:04 AM 3/25/2004, Tim Oborn wrote: > > >When did we forget that this is a beer judging exam and not the entrance > >exam into the Hitler Youth? > > http://www.jargon.net/jargonfile/g/GodwinsLaw.html Gee, if observed, that would put some conversations to an end pretty quickly. We have some people in our homebrew club (including some who have taken the BJCP exam but have shown no great interest in actually judging) who will dismiss any suggestion that a beer diverges significantly from the stated style as being the words of the "style Nazis." Now go have a beer, Bob Paolino "Homer, why don't you get one of those hands-free phones? It's the next best thing to paying attention to the road." --Barney, The Simpsons ( ) ASCII ribbon campaign X against HTML e-mail: / \ Friends don't send friends HTML-bloated messages! A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? ********************************************************************** * 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: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 10:49:42 EST Subject: Re: BJCP exam's the problem, not the path I think Tim Oborn's comparison of the BJCP to the Hitler Youth was unfortunate. Apart from the horrors of the Holocaust, of course it brought Godwin's Law to my mind, including a corollary that I have heard (I believe it was mentioned at some point in an episode of "Seinfeld") as "Whoever mentions Hitler automatically loses the argument." However, I don't think we should be so quick to dismiss Tim's more constructive points about the exam or automatically cease discussion about the subject. I honestly believe a review of the exam structure and format might well be in order. I happen to agree with the claims that have been made on this forum that the correspondence between exam scores and judges' abilities is not very high. And yes, I suppose my own ax to grind is that the exam relies too heavily on rote memory of material that almost every judge has ready access to when judging. I would hope that the exam committee is considering constructive criticism of the exam in this and in other forums, and that some attempt will be made over time to address it. I don't necessarily expect my opinions to prevail, only that I would like some acknowledgment that review and self-criticism are a necessary and desirable part of the BJCP's mission and function. Brew on! -- Bill Pierce Cellar Door Homebrewery Burlington, Ontario ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Casselman Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 09:54:59 -0800 Subject: Problems with the BJCP exam I'm going to put this out again. The biggest problem I see with the exam is that it try's to test too much of a range of knowledge. It is as if we gave a test for physics that was to test everyone from someone who had never taken calculus to the hardest questions of quantum mechanics. The fact that a "master" takes the same test as a "novice" tells me that the test strategy is not very well thought out. Now I now why. The SAT is meant to test a group of people who are basically at the same level. They have all had the same classes. If the SAT wre like our test you would take one test and some people would not go to collage and some people would be given their PhD. I would like to point out another thing I think happens based on human nature. Suppose you are a grader. You get in a crop of tests and most are in the 60's then you come up to one that is a little better. You _might_ score this test higher then it should be because of the relative "goodness" of its answers. I think most of us have done this judging. You get a bunch of bad beers and one pretty decent one, most tend to score the good one a little higher than we would if it were in a flight of great beers. Last time I took the test I waited for 9 months to get the results and I was told "it was scored tough but fair." I got the same score I got 10 years ago. I'm a very worried about system that scores some tests "tougher" than others and it really makes me question the quality of the results. I am pretty sure this happened solely because of the graders work load and not because I have not learned anything in the last ten years. If we had two tests, which the test taker could choose from, we would have a better testing system One test for Novice to Certified and another test for National to Master. We would be able to have a better tests which would lighten the graders load and make for more accurate testing. Steve ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Alan Hord Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 13:40:18 -0800 Subject: question availability / Exam Process RE: Jay Hersh aka Dr. Beer(R) >> I don't know what corner of the world you are in Alan, but while the particular questions on any exam do change from exam to exam, the pool of questions (publicly available at http://www.bjcp.org/study.html#quest ) hasn't changed in the last 8 years. Also the format of the exam itself hasn't changed. It still consists of the "gimme" question 1 which is 50% on the BJCP and 50% on reasons for boiling. One recipe question. The remaining 8 questions are split between 4 questions on ingredients, brewing process and troubleshooting, and 4 questions on style identification, description and history. This hasn't changed in well over 8 years. << Why Dr. Beer, I am amused that you appear to know little of the Pacific Northwest :o) I therefore offer to resolve this discrepancy with a gesture of goodwill: Should you ever decide to visit our corner I would be delighted to act as your Beer Guide! Ref: http://www.bjcp.org/study.html#quest Regarding the 'BJCP Beer Judge Exam Study Guide' I am grateful that Jay has accurately pointed to the springboard of stylistic erudition, and I believe him ~ those questions have not changed in over eight years, but then they are not always the questions we get on exams either. If you missed my point ~ I apologize; it's difficult at times to convey in clear text what can be read in milliseconds of eye-to-eye contact. Generally speaking, we reference those posted questions as examples during study; it's a good resource and awesome starting point. Regarding the format of the exam in Jay's statement, I am illuminated by the breakdown as it has been applied to him. We too get the easy BJCP-centric question on every exam (natch). And though the boiling question may or may not manifest, we prepare for it diligently. However our last exam had two recipe questions, three stylistic compare-contrast questions and a couple of troubleshooting-related questions. I believe it is good we discuss openly the differences between the formats because it plays well into the argument that the Exam should be blind; we should be able to take the exam in Seattle one week, and not get the same exam in Denver the next (should one have the energy to ever afford such a daunting trial ;o) However I persist to revisit my main point: Exam Process It is a challenge to know what answers we gave on the Exam and how they relate to the critique of the Graders when we are not allowed to get our answers back, nor the questions associated with them ~ especially when it can take many weeks before the results are remitted. To say 'all of the questions are known in advance' as Scott Bickham intoned is like stating 'we all know the rules of the highway'; Yes - we should, given enough time, know and recognize the questions and the answers just as we should all know every obscure highway law since we are bound by them nonetheless. The 'statement' is simply misplaced and hugely over-steps the pot-hole of comprehension on the concourse of study. Plainly spoken: A 'Blue Book' format would allow better organization of thoughts, instill and preserve the institution of higher learning, and provide a formal mechanism of remittance; it would lend towards a positive record of learning rather than the current cryptic and mystifying reports (apologies to the graders: I recognize procedures do not allow you to tell us the questions and I do not imply fault upon you). In Closing: * Formalize the Exam process; use Blue Books * Give us our Answers back; Blue Books make this simple * Allow us to have the Questions associated with our Answers This completes the learning cycle by reinforcing improvement. Given this suggested change, the reason to review the process of advancement through the ranks would not be required because we would already comprehend what we need to learn to advance. Sincerely, Alan Hord, National near Seattle ********************************************************************** * 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: Denis Barsalo Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 16:48:40 -0500 Subject: Recipe access while judging I have organized several competitions and each year when we invite novices and new judges to participate, I often get the request that recipes be made available to judges so that they can better recommend improvements to the brewer's technique. I have in the past, given the highlights of a recipe that is entered in classes 21 through 24 so that the judges know what to expect but I have never handed them the recipe. Where does the BJCP stand on this or do they have an opinion? Obviously, all names or addresses etc would need to be removed from said recipe as to keep the anonymous aspect of judging and judges would have to be encouraged to use their palate first and the recipe second, as to avoid judging sessions becoming nothing more than recipe tweaking, but I can only see good coming out of this possible strategy. What do you think? Cheers, Denis Barsalo Subject: Digest for the period 3/29/2004 - 3/30/2004 Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 01:00:26 -0500 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. FW: Scott's comments (Tim Oborn) 2. Pints for Jay (Pete) 3. RE: Celis White (Ted Hausotter) 4. Style Nazis? (Bob Paolino) 5. Re: BJCP exam's the problem, not the path (BillPierce`at`aol.com) 6. Problems with the BJCP exam (Steve Casselman) 7. question availability / Exam Process (Alan Hord) 8. Recipe access while judging (Denis Barsalo) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Oborn Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 22:17:14 -0700 Subject: FW: Scott's comments Tim Oborn BSc., B.Ed., B.ottlewasher -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Cox [mailto:chuck`at`synchro.com] Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 7:59 PM To: Tim Oborn Subject: Re: Scott's comments Please send to judge`at`synchro.com. At 09:49 PM 3/28/2004, you wrote: >Sorry Chuck. Here it is. > >Tim Oborn >BSc., B.Ed., B.ottlewasher > >Scott, > >Regarding my comment: >"When did we forget that this is a beer judging exam and not the >entrance exam into the Hitler Youth?" > >I meant it lightly and did not mean to offend anyone, especially you >Scott. I obviously did and am deeply sorry for the flippant use but I >think it is very plain I am not calling you or anyone else a Nazi. > >As for the rest, I stand behind my opinion. Rather than rebut >immediately, which under the circumstances I feel uncomfortable doing, >I'd like others to give their input on their feeling and experiences >concerning the exam structure. > >The vein of most posts show that there are problems to the way things >are now, I am merely trying to give food for thought as to a solution. > >Tim Oborn >BSc., B.Ed., B.ottlewasher -- Chuck Cox SynchroSystems chuck`at`synchro.com, cccox at fas.harvard.edu, www.synchro.com Bush: less freedom & more spending. Kerry: more spending & less freedom. The choice is obvious. ********************************************************************** * 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: Pete Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 06:28:45 -0500 Subject: Pints for Jay Please find attached one pint each of "Amazing Grapefuit Pale Ale" and "Royal Ugly Dude Insidious Stout" (Ed note - the list does not support attachments, they were removed by the server) (They were also quite tasty) ********************************************************************** * 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: Ted Hausotter Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 06:26:12 -0800 Subject: RE: Celis White I have a question about the new Celis White made up North. Do you still consider it a classic example of the wit style? This is not a favorite style of mine. I first tried Celis about 8 years ago and since remember it different. I do not think it is as good as before, but my tasting of it is limited to every few years and have not tried the new against a panel of it's peers. Ted Hausotter Baker City, OR National Beer Judge _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 ********************************************************************** * 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: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 10:43:45 -0500 Subject: Style Nazis? Chuck Cox wrote on Sat, 27 Mar 2004 12:36:12 -0500: > At 01:04 AM 3/25/2004, Tim Oborn wrote: > > >When did we forget that this is a beer judging exam and not the entrance > >exam into the Hitler Youth? > > http://www.jargon.net/jargonfile/g/GodwinsLaw.html Gee, if observed, that would put some conversations to an end pretty quickly. We have some people in our homebrew club (including some who have taken the BJCP exam but have shown no great interest in actually judging) who will dismiss any suggestion that a beer diverges significantly from the stated style as being the words of the "style Nazis." Now go have a beer, Bob Paolino "Homer, why don't you get one of those hands-free phones? It's the next best thing to paying attention to the road." --Barney, The Simpsons ( ) ASCII ribbon campaign X against HTML e-mail: / \ Friends don't send friends HTML-bloated messages! A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? ********************************************************************** * 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: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 10:49:42 EST Subject: Re: BJCP exam's the problem, not the path I think Tim Oborn's comparison of the BJCP to the Hitler Youth was unfortunate. Apart from the horrors of the Holocaust, of course it brought Godwin's Law to my mind, including a corollary that I have heard (I believe it was mentioned at some point in an episode of "Seinfeld") as "Whoever mentions Hitler automatically loses the argument." However, I don't think we should be so quick to dismiss Tim's more constructive points about the exam or automatically cease discussion about the subject. I honestly believe a review of the exam structure and format might well be in order. I happen to agree with the claims that have been made on this forum that the correspondence between exam scores and judges' abilities is not very high. And yes, I suppose my own ax to grind is that the exam relies too heavily on rote memory of material that almost every judge has ready access to when judging. I would hope that the exam committee is considering constructive criticism of the exam in this and in other forums, and that some attempt will be made over time to address it. I don't necessarily expect my opinions to prevail, only that I would like some acknowledgment that review and self-criticism are a necessary and desirable part of the BJCP's mission and function. Brew on! -- Bill Pierce Cellar Door Homebrewery Burlington, Ontario ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Casselman Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 09:54:59 -0800 Subject: Problems with the BJCP exam I'm going to put this out again. The biggest problem I see with the exam is that it try's to test too much of a range of knowledge. It is as if we gave a test for physics that was to test everyone from someone who had never taken calculus to the hardest questions of quantum mechanics. The fact that a "master" takes the same test as a "novice" tells me that the test strategy is not very well thought out. Now I now why. The SAT is meant to test a group of people who are basically at the same level. They have all had the same classes. If the SAT wre like our test you would take one test and some people would not go to collage and some people would be given their PhD. I would like to point out another thing I think happens based on human nature. Suppose you are a grader. You get in a crop of tests and most are in the 60's then you come up to one that is a little better. You _might_ score this test higher then it should be because of the relative "goodness" of its answers. I think most of us have done this judging. You get a bunch of bad beers and one pretty decent one, most tend to score the good one a little higher than we would if it were in a flight of great beers. Last time I took the test I waited for 9 months to get the results and I was told "it was scored tough but fair." I got the same score I got 10 years ago. I'm a very worried about system that scores some tests "tougher" than others and it really makes me question the quality of the results. I am pretty sure this happened solely because of the graders work load and not because I have not learned anything in the last ten years. If we had two tests, which the test taker could choose from, we would have a better testing system One test for Novice to Certified and another test for National to Master. We would be able to have a better tests which would lighten the graders load and make for more accurate testing. Steve ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Alan Hord Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 13:40:18 -0800 Subject: question availability / Exam Process RE: Jay Hersh aka Dr. Beer(R) >> I don't know what corner of the world you are in Alan, but while the particular questions on any exam do change from exam to exam, the pool of questions (publicly available at http://www.bjcp.org/study.html#quest ) hasn't changed in the last 8 years. Also the format of the exam itself hasn't changed. It still consists of the "gimme" question 1 which is 50% on the BJCP and 50% on reasons for boiling. One recipe question. The remaining 8 questions are split between 4 questions on ingredients, brewing process and troubleshooting, and 4 questions on style identification, description and history. This hasn't changed in well over 8 years. << Why Dr. Beer, I am amused that you appear to know little of the Pacific Northwest :o) I therefore offer to resolve this discrepancy with a gesture of goodwill: Should you ever decide to visit our corner I would be delighted to act as your Beer Guide! Ref: http://www.bjcp.org/study.html#quest Regarding the 'BJCP Beer Judge Exam Study Guide' I am grateful that Jay has accurately pointed to the springboard of stylistic erudition, and I believe him ~ those questions have not changed in over eight years, but then they are not always the questions we get on exams either. If you missed my point ~ I apologize; it's difficult at times to convey in clear text what can be read in milliseconds of eye-to-eye contact. Generally speaking, we reference those posted questions as examples during study; it's a good resource and awesome starting point. Regarding the format of the exam in Jay's statement, I am illuminated by the breakdown as it has been applied to him. We too get the easy BJCP-centric question on every exam (natch). And though the boiling question may or may not manifest, we prepare for it diligently. However our last exam had two recipe questions, three stylistic compare-contrast questions and a couple of troubleshooting-related questions. I believe it is good we discuss openly the differences between the formats because it plays well into the argument that the Exam should be blind; we should be able to take the exam in Seattle one week, and not get the same exam in Denver the next (should one have the energy to ever afford such a daunting trial ;o) However I persist to revisit my main point: Exam Process It is a challenge to know what answers we gave on the Exam and how they relate to the critique of the Graders when we are not allowed to get our answers back, nor the questions associated with them ~ especially when it can take many weeks before the results are remitted. To say 'all of the questions are known in advance' as Scott Bickham intoned is like stating 'we all know the rules of the highway'; Yes - we should, given enough time, know and recognize the questions and the answers just as we should all know every obscure highway law since we are bound by them nonetheless. The 'statement' is simply misplaced and hugely over-steps the pot-hole of comprehension on the concourse of study. Plainly spoken: A 'Blue Book' format would allow better organization of thoughts, instill and preserve the institution of higher learning, and provide a formal mechanism of remittance; it would lend towards a positive record of learning rather than the current cryptic and mystifying reports (apologies to the graders: I recognize procedures do not allow you to tell us the questions and I do not imply fault upon you). In Closing: * Formalize the Exam process; use Blue Books * Give us our Answers back; Blue Books make this simple * Allow us to have the Questions associated with our Answers This completes the learning cycle by reinforcing improvement. Given this suggested change, the reason to review the process of advancement through the ranks would not be required because we would already comprehend what we need to learn to advance. Sincerely, Alan Hord, National near Seattle ********************************************************************** * 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: Denis Barsalo Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 16:48:40 -0500 Subject: Recipe access while judging I have organized several competitions and each year when we invite novices and new judges to participate, I often get the request that recipes be made available to judges so that they can better recommend improvements to the brewer's technique. I have in the past, given the highlights of a recipe that is entered in classes 21 through 24 so that the judges know what to expect but I have never handed them the recipe. Where does the BJCP stand on this or do they have an opinion? Obviously, all names or addresses etc would need to be removed from said recipe as to keep the anonymous aspect of judging and judges would have to be encouraged to use their palate first and the recipe second, as to avoid judging sessions becoming nothing more than recipe tweaking, but I can only see good coming out of this possible strategy. What do you think? Cheers, Denis Barsalo