Subject: Digest for the period 4/28/2005 - 4/29/2005
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 01:03:22 -0400

Table of contents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
  1. RE: The Purpose of the BJCP and Guinness 


----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tom Schmidlin  Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 01:26:31 -0700
Subject: RE: The Purpose of the BJCP and Guinness 


Excellent, some answers!

Al Boyce asks "what would YOU like to see the BJCP do to "promote the
appreciation of Real Beer", and what will you do to help?".  Don't get me
wrong, I have a pretty good understanding of what the BJCP is and does - I'm
a National judge, help teach a BJCP study group, and administer and grade
exams (ok, I've only graded one small set, but I'll grade more soon Steve, I
promise).  I have had the same experience as you through studying for the
exam - I appreciate certain beers a lot more than I used to, even if I don't
necessarily like them.  In fact, I am less of a beer snob than I used to be,
because I can appreciate a beer for what it is.

As Ed Westemeier pointed out, this may just be a matter of semantics.  I
don't mind the "appreciate beer" part, I think my biggest objection is to
the use of the word "real" as applied (by the BJCP) to beer.  By using the
word "real" we imply that there is beer that is not "real beer" - so what's
not real beer?  It is still unclear to me if this is the CAMRA sense of the
word, or is a dis against mass-produced swill.  Anyone care to tackle why it
is there?  I'm not suggesting we remove the word, I only seek to understand.


Now let me switch gears for a minute.  Al brought up something interesting -
"I learned Guiness tasted different in England and Ireland than the stuff
they imported and sold here."

Has anyone else had this experience?  I've 'appreciated' many a Guinness in
the US, and took a trip to the Emerald Isle in the fall of 2003.  My
brother, who had been there in 1992, told me that the Guinness was
different, and I've heard it many times from others, so I was really looking
forward to this.  To my surprise, in 2003, I didn't think it was
significantly different at all.  So, assuming that I have half decent taste
buds (and as a National judge, that should be safe, right?) where is the
disconnect here?  Has the Guinness in Ireland changed?  Or has the Guinness
in the US changed?

I almost never had Guinness on tap in the US before 1997, but had it
regularly at my local pub trivia night for several years after that.  The
taste is pretty well ingrained in my mind.  Actively looking for a
difference, I found it to be remarkably similar over there.  Actually, the
biggest surprise was the taste of the Budweiser there, which was smooth,
creamy, and pleasant (although that was after appreciating many pints of
Guinness, so . . .)  And while the pubs there were serving "Guinness Extra
Cold", that wasn't much different either - once it warmed up.  I actually
talked to several old Irish guys about this, and you know they've been
drinking it since before I was born.  They swear it hasn't changed.

So is there anyone out there who has had Guinness on a regular basis in the
US for the last 15 years or so who noticed a change in the Guinness served
here?  It can't just be that I was drunk the entire time I was in Ireland,
because I was at least sober for that first pint.

Thanks,

Tom Schmidlin


**********************************************************************
* JudgeNet - the beer judge digest                                   *
* Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments   *
* Manage your subscription online: http://synchro.com/judge          *
* Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com  *
**********************************************************************