Subject: Digest for the period 4/9/2004 - 4/10/2004 Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2004 01:04:48 -0400 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Re: TIME FACTOR (Tom & Dana Karnowski) 2. Re: Digest for the period 4/8/2004 - 4/9/2004 (Bev Blackwood II) 3. "Wining" about exams (Bill Gornicki) (gornicwm`at`earthlink.net) 4. Re: alternate to BJCP judges entering contests (Tom & Dana Karnowski) 5. Beer Colors (Steve Casselman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom & Dana Karnowski Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 14:35:13 -0400 Subject: Re: TIME FACTOR Timothy O says "Since we do not have these constraints, I vote we get rid of the time limit entirely" regarding the BJCP exam. However, in many cases the place where the exam is administered or the proctors and administer DO have a time limit. I"ve administered the exam twice and both times the host location has wanted to know how long it would take. At one place we could have stayed longer, but not at the other place. They were gracious enough to give us a place to have the exam and we thanked them by taking no more time than we said. I bet many exam administrators like spending 4 hours on an exam (including set up time) but would balk at spending 8 hours. Besides, who says 8 hours is enough either? Sorry! A "no time limit" idea is totally impractical. ********************************************************************** * 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, 9 Apr 2004 00:42:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Digest for the period 4/8/2004 - 4/9/2004 > Al Boyce says: > > Furthermore, those judges who are active brewers and who still ENTER > contests seem to write better scoresheets still. -BDB2 Speaking as one who is still actively entering and judging contests, I strive to give a response on scoresheets that is what I would expect to see on one returned to me. I can certainly speak to the 8 word scoresheets I see being returned from competitions nationwide by National level judges. If anyone wants examples, I can copy them. When I see that type of scoresheet coming back from that level of judge, I am inclined to send it directly to the BJCP and ask them to correct the problem! Bev D. Blackwood II Co-Competition Coordinator The Foam Rangers http://www.foamrangers.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: gornicwm`at`earthlink.net Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 08:46:13 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: "Wining" about exams (Bill Gornicki) <> Thanks for posting the article about wines. I think its important to note that, concerning exams, it could ALWAYS be worse. The BJCP is a journey and not a destination. I am certified, but I plan on taking the exam again (as partial retake(s)) in order to get to where I think I SHOULD rank. I can get to where I want to be...it just might take a couple more trys, that's all. I think that most exam takers wanted to take the one and done approach - I know that I did - the test was pretty wicked....but it could've been worse. Exam takers will always argue exam metrics, that's just the way of things. The next thing you know we'll hear of a lawsuit indicating that the BJCE is a culturally biased exam. Geez!!! Where does it end? I found more benefit in preparing for the exam than my exam score represented. I find that I brew better beer, I improved my beer vocabulary considerably, and I am unfortunately cursed with sniffing, chewing, and swishing almost everything that I eat. :-) <> I don't think that there would be a good way to police it. Some people just like to judge beer and that's fine by me, but do it right for cryin' out loud. Hmmmm...I would like to taste a Michael Jackson brew, though. At the very least, everyone should be using the "helpers" on the score sheet. For example, AROMA: Comment on malt, hops, esters, other attributes. JUDGE the beer!!! We are usually given 8-10 minutes to judge a beer and that's a lot of time to fill out a score sheet considering everyone that has taken the BJCE can write an entire page within those parameters. I have also seen judges that have not taken the BJCE fill out excellent scoresheets. I think every judge should score beer truly realizing that their name is on it and that they could possibly bump into the brewer and discuss the comments. I have judged several beers in competitions and found out afterward that they were brewed by members of my club. I was sincerely thanked for all of the comments and perceptions that I found with that beer, eventhough the beer didn't fair very well. I am not, by any stretch, indicating that I am the greatest judge, but I do the best that I can and I (foolishly) expect others to do the same. It boils down to having some pride in what you're doing. That's all. ...and Bill has stepped off the soap box ;-) Good Brewing Everyone!!! Bill Gornicki ********************************************************************** * 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: Tom & Dana Karnowski Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 10:05:15 -0400 Subject: Re: alternate to BJCP judges entering contests Al Boyce points out the correlation between scoresheet quality and judges entering contests. He also points out it would be an accounting nightmare to force judges to enter competitions. I agree. What is the source of bad scoresheets? Is it being rushed for time, or simply not having the will to fill the thing out completely? If its pure sloppiness and laziness, people probably would just quit judging. But if its something that can be prevented by having a watchful eye looking over your shoulder, a better idea would be to modify the scoresheet with a comment that says "If you don't like the quality of these comments please send a photocopy to XXX." Then the BJCP could review the complaints. This would only apply to sheets from BJCP judges, of course. I guess it would make a lot of extra work but maybe a few reps could be established solely for the purpose of first level-screenings. For example, a lot of people may send back a good scoresheet that has a low score on it. Those would fall into a black hole. The ones that are truly lacking from real BJCP judges could be passed on to a "Star Chamber" that could warn the errant judges. I'd be wiilling to screen dozens of scoresheets a week, I think, as I think it would be pretty easy to tell if the sheet quality is good or not. ********************************************************************** * 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: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 17:06:40 -0700 Subject: Beer Colors I wrote a little spread sheet that matches recipes against the current style guide and as I look at some of the color numbers I have some questions. For example Blonde Ale and American Wheat (3 A and B) have a high SRM as 8. This is almost copper color and seems dark to me. Also when I look at Pale Ale and Amber Ale (6 A and B) they both have the same SRM on the high end of 11 which seem too high for Pale Ale (by the way all the numbers are the same for those two styles). Also Russian Imperial Stout has a low end of 20 which according to pro mash is dark brown and also does not seem correct.. Steve Subject: Digest for the period 4/9/2004 - 4/10/2004 Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2004 01:04:48 -0400 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Re: TIME FACTOR (Tom & Dana Karnowski) 2. Re: Digest for the period 4/8/2004 - 4/9/2004 (Bev Blackwood II) 3. "Wining" about exams (Bill Gornicki) (gornicwm`at`earthlink.net) 4. Re: alternate to BJCP judges entering contests (Tom & Dana Karnowski) 5. Beer Colors (Steve Casselman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom & Dana Karnowski Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 14:35:13 -0400 Subject: Re: TIME FACTOR Timothy O says "Since we do not have these constraints, I vote we get rid of the time limit entirely" regarding the BJCP exam. However, in many cases the place where the exam is administered or the proctors and administer DO have a time limit. I"ve administered the exam twice and both times the host location has wanted to know how long it would take. At one place we could have stayed longer, but not at the other place. They were gracious enough to give us a place to have the exam and we thanked them by taking no more time than we said. I bet many exam administrators like spending 4 hours on an exam (including set up time) but would balk at spending 8 hours. Besides, who says 8 hours is enough either? Sorry! A "no time limit" idea is totally impractical. ********************************************************************** * 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, 9 Apr 2004 00:42:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Digest for the period 4/8/2004 - 4/9/2004 > Al Boyce says: > > Furthermore, those judges who are active brewers and who still ENTER > contests seem to write better scoresheets still. -BDB2 Speaking as one who is still actively entering and judging contests, I strive to give a response on scoresheets that is what I would expect to see on one returned to me. I can certainly speak to the 8 word scoresheets I see being returned from competitions nationwide by National level judges. If anyone wants examples, I can copy them. When I see that type of scoresheet coming back from that level of judge, I am inclined to send it directly to the BJCP and ask them to correct the problem! Bev D. Blackwood II Co-Competition Coordinator The Foam Rangers http://www.foamrangers.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: gornicwm`at`earthlink.net Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 08:46:13 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: "Wining" about exams (Bill Gornicki) <> Thanks for posting the article about wines. I think its important to note that, concerning exams, it could ALWAYS be worse. The BJCP is a journey and not a destination. I am certified, but I plan on taking the exam again (as partial retake(s)) in order to get to where I think I SHOULD rank. I can get to where I want to be...it just might take a couple more trys, that's all. I think that most exam takers wanted to take the one and done approach - I know that I did - the test was pretty wicked....but it could've been worse. Exam takers will always argue exam metrics, that's just the way of things. The next thing you know we'll hear of a lawsuit indicating that the BJCE is a culturally biased exam. Geez!!! Where does it end? I found more benefit in preparing for the exam than my exam score represented. I find that I brew better beer, I improved my beer vocabulary considerably, and I am unfortunately cursed with sniffing, chewing, and swishing almost everything that I eat. :-) <> I don't think that there would be a good way to police it. Some people just like to judge beer and that's fine by me, but do it right for cryin' out loud. Hmmmm...I would like to taste a Michael Jackson brew, though. At the very least, everyone should be using the "helpers" on the score sheet. For example, AROMA: Comment on malt, hops, esters, other attributes. JUDGE the beer!!! We are usually given 8-10 minutes to judge a beer and that's a lot of time to fill out a score sheet considering everyone that has taken the BJCE can write an entire page within those parameters. I have also seen judges that have not taken the BJCE fill out excellent scoresheets. I think every judge should score beer truly realizing that their name is on it and that they could possibly bump into the brewer and discuss the comments. I have judged several beers in competitions and found out afterward that they were brewed by members of my club. I was sincerely thanked for all of the comments and perceptions that I found with that beer, eventhough the beer didn't fair very well. I am not, by any stretch, indicating that I am the greatest judge, but I do the best that I can and I (foolishly) expect others to do the same. It boils down to having some pride in what you're doing. That's all. ...and Bill has stepped off the soap box ;-) Good Brewing Everyone!!! Bill Gornicki ********************************************************************** * 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: Tom & Dana Karnowski Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 10:05:15 -0400 Subject: Re: alternate to BJCP judges entering contests Al Boyce points out the correlation between scoresheet quality and judges entering contests. He also points out it would be an accounting nightmare to force judges to enter competitions. I agree. What is the source of bad scoresheets? Is it being rushed for time, or simply not having the will to fill the thing out completely? If its pure sloppiness and laziness, people probably would just quit judging. But if its something that can be prevented by having a watchful eye looking over your shoulder, a better idea would be to modify the scoresheet with a comment that says "If you don't like the quality of these comments please send a photocopy to XXX." Then the BJCP could review the complaints. This would only apply to sheets from BJCP judges, of course. I guess it would make a lot of extra work but maybe a few reps could be established solely for the purpose of first level-screenings. For example, a lot of people may send back a good scoresheet that has a low score on it. Those would fall into a black hole. The ones that are truly lacking from real BJCP judges could be passed on to a "Star Chamber" that could warn the errant judges. I'd be wiilling to screen dozens of scoresheets a week, I think, as I think it would be pretty easy to tell if the sheet quality is good or not. ********************************************************************** * 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: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 17:06:40 -0700 Subject: Beer Colors I wrote a little spread sheet that matches recipes against the current style guide and as I look at some of the color numbers I have some questions. For example Blonde Ale and American Wheat (3 A and B) have a high SRM as 8. This is almost copper color and seems dark to me. Also when I look at Pale Ale and Amber Ale (6 A and B) they both have the same SRM on the high end of 11 which seem too high for Pale Ale (by the way all the numbers are the same for those two styles). Also Russian Imperial Stout has a low end of 20 which according to pro mash is dark brown and also does not seem correct.. Steve