Subject: Digest for the period 5/14/2005 - 5/15/2005 Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 01:02:03 -0400 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MCAB VII (David Houseman) 2. GABF medals and then some (George de Piro) 3. Brewing and judging (Pete) 4. Re: Brew the Judger (Stephen Neilsen) (Jon Tobey) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Houseman Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 22:29:55 -0400 Subject: MCAB VII We have finally been able to lock down the time and place for The Masters Championship of Amateur Brewing for 2005. MCAB VII will take place on Saturday, September 17th, at the Iron Hill Brewery and Restaurant in North Wales, PA. The organizers of the Qualifying Events for this competition have submitted the names and contact information for most of the qualifiers. Some contact information is missing; get the word out about this competition. Individual emails will be sent to those for whom we have contact information soon. Remember that the competition will use the categories and guidelines in place during 2004, the 1999 set of guidelines. The MCAB web site, www.hbd.org/mcab, will be updated for this year's competition in June. Until then all qualifiers should crank up the kettles or get out those stowed bottles of beer and prepare to send in your entries. The entrance fee will be $5/entry this year to offset competition costs. Checks should be made out to David Houseman. Entries should be sent to arrive by September 12th to: Keystone Homebrew Attn: Alan Folsom 779 Bethlehem Pike Montgomeryville, PA 18936 David Houseman MCAB VII Competition Organizer ********************************************************************** * 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 * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: George de Piro Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 08:12:22 -0400 Subject: GABF medals and then some Hi all, Jon Tobey writes: >I gave a cream ale >a 38: it was perfect, skunky, DMS, all the things I hate in a beer but are part >of the style because some brewery bought a GABF medal. There are many things wrong with that short statement. First, the GABF is an honest competition, and is run much like a homebrew contest. I have judged at it and competed at it, and won a couple of medals. We cannot afford to buy GABF medals, I assure you. Next, beers with technical flaws seldom get by a GABF panel. Of course, some judges are worse than others, but overall there are enough good ones that defective beers get the axe early on. If you have a flawed beer that has won a GABF award, question the brewery's QC or the miserable state of beer distribution in the US. Skunk character is always a flaw in a beer, by both the BJCP and GABF guidelines. DMS is more complicated; if you remove all DMS from a beer, it would taste insipid. Light-colored beers will tend to have more DMS than darker ones because the light malts have a lot of DMS precursor. The definition of "too much DMS" is up to the brewer, judge and customer. Last, if you really thought the beer you were evaluating was perfect, why did you only score it a 38? He goes on to say: >PS, the idea of judging commercial beers to BJCP guidelines is so ludicrous >that even in my pleasantly modified state, I couldn't imagine entertaining it. You need to learn more about commercial competitions. The GABF guidelines are very much like the BJCP descriptions. If a commercial brewer wants to have a chance at winning, they must enter their beer into the correct category, just like a homebrewer. For more information about how several commercial competitions are run, read my article at http://www.EvansAle.com/what-is-that-medal-worth.html You'll also find a bunch of other articles about beer styles and technical brewing issues. Some may find them useful. Have fun! George de Piro Brewmaster, 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 * * Manage your subscription online: http://synchro.com/judge * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Pete Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 12:35:00 -0400 Subject: Brewing and judging Dammit, forgot to sign it the first time... Jon Tobey Writes: I personally do not know a single judge I respect who also does not brew. <> Offhand, I can't think of any either. There are, whoever, some brewers, even commercial ones, who I don't especially respect as judges, so it's neither strictly necessary nor sufficient. (note - I may well respect these folks as BREWERS, but... ) Of course this is based on an assumption: Competitions are not just about picking the best beer; they also are about helping people make better beer. If the second part of this is incorrect, then of course, anybody can judge providing they can read the guidelines. <> even if the 2nd *is* correct, "anybody" can judge, provided they can a) read and comprehend the guidelines b) identify flavors / aromas in the beer c) identify if they are un/desireable, or neutral d) know the 'usual suspects' for these flavors, and what to do to increase/reduce them e) be able to relay this info to the entrant. Brewing experience MAY help in b) - d) but the first and last are also critical. IMAO He goes on: because I believe all personal prejudices are evened out if instead of thinking you know anything about beer, you actually read the guidelines each and every time you judge. >snip< especially now that we have "new" guidelines. So really, it shouldn't make a difference if you like a style, hate a style, or even never had a style, if you actually take the time to read the guidelines, you should be able to evaluate that beer to the style. Really, that to me would be the basis of evaluating judging abilities - the ability to objectively rate any beer. <> I agree completely. My earlier point was just that it's easier for me, personally, to achieve that lofty objectivity when I'm not stumbling over my own prejudices. I was at a competition last year where the newly indoctrinated judges were saying things like "I really like this beer" or "I really hate this beer. These are things we should never say. <> Hm. wondering at your reasoning for this - is it the sentiment you object to, or the method / words chosen to express it? Is there not a place called 'overall impression' where we are encouraged to do just exactly that? Have you ever given a 'not to style' beer that you Really Liked 8+ points there? I gave a cream ale a 38: it was perfect, <> Um, mebbee it's just me, but "perfect" beers are usually worth 45+? at least 40?!?! If there was something wrong w/ it, is it "perfect"? If there's nothing wrong w/ it, shouldn't it score higher? And yes, freely admit that I'm picking nits, but underscoring good beer is as wrong as over scoring bad beer. He concludes: the idea of judging commercial beers to BJCP guidelines is so ludicrous >snip< I couldn't imagine entertaining it. Absolute hubris. The guidelines are just a specific lens we use to help people (homebrewers) understand how the process affects the product. They have nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with whether a beer is "good" or not. Thinking we can apply these styles to commercial beers after the fact (i.e. the beer were not brewed to style as we assume competition beers are) is, as my Japanese friend says "rudicrous" and shows a complete lack of understaning of the purpose and scope of styles. Go ahead, tell a commercial brewer his barley wine does not fit the BJCP style guideline. Or better yet a Belgian brewer! Go ahead, tell Mr. Hale that if only he added all little light-struck flavor to his beer it would be better. <> True, there ARE other ways to measure a commercial beer, either craft- or macro- brewed. Is it popular? does it sell at a profit? Does it ship well? These, certainly, are important questions, probably (in the long run) more important than how many points it scores on some arbitrary scale. But that does NOT mean we can't use that scale to measure and compare them. You see the guides as a lens, to examine how process affects the product, I see them as a measuring stick to help evaluate the final product. Certainly, we can apply these styles after the fact. It might be as silly as racing a minivan, or using a Ferrari to make a grocery run, but it absolutely CAN be done. And often is. Where the Guidelines come in handy is comparing minivans to minivans, and freight trains to freight trains. Consider my PT Cruiser - it's not a "sedan" because it has a hatch. It's not a "station wagon" because the storage area (with the seats in) is too small. It's not an "SUV" because it doesn't have enough ground clearance. Changing these 'flaws' would make it more 'to style' for a particular type of vehicle, but would have a detrimental effect on the vehicle as a whole, InMyArogantOpinion Likewise, telling a brewer that his porter is too big, his cream ale is too hoppy, whatever "For The Style" may well NOT make it a "better" (more popular / profitable / drinkable) beer. I HAVE told pro brewers that "his barley wine does not fit the BJCP style guideline." Or, more recently, that the IPA lacked the expected hop aroma, (probably a packaging/service issue - sent in growlers, poured by stewards is not the best procedure for maintaining aromatics. All I can do is evaluate the sample I'm given.) I MIGHT suggest to Mr. Hale that we would expect to find DMS in his cream ale, but would not dock him for it if not found - " A sweet, corn-like aroma and low levels of DMS are commonly found" indicates an 'optional' component, if I'm not mistaken. Adding some DMS "might" improve his score, but you are correct, it would not necessarily improve his beer. I would NEVER suggest to ANY brewer that their beer suffered from a lack of 'light-struck' or 'skunky' character. I can not find ANY style that suggests it's appropriate, therefore it's always a flaw, to be avoided. I can appreciate that adding a beverage or six enhances your enjoyment of the list, and posting is more fun too. However, you should also be aware of it's affect on the coherance of your argument. Just saying. Pete Bussa National in Detroit ********************************************************************** * 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 * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jon Tobey Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 13:49:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Brew the Judger (Stephen Neilsen) I was having a bit of fun, but I think you missed my point. Anybody who can read can evaluate beer to style. My mom can do it. (Read my previous reference for the anecdote.) She just couldn't help you make better beer. Again, I'm not sure that whether the point of competition is: 1) To pick the best beer OR 2) To pick the best beer AND help the brewers make better beer. So in 1, we can pick people right off the street, just like the mega brewers do in commercials ("more taste!" "less filling"). For 2, I really think it helps to have brewers. In fact I'd rather have brewers who are not BJCP trained but read the guidelines, than Judges who are trained and do not brew or do not read the guidelines (or worse, cannot separate their personal preferences form their judging resposibilities, which is where this all started). Jon Tobey Ideastream 360-793-8831 "Civilization advances by extending the number of important operations which we can perform without thinking about them." - Alfred Whitehead ********************************************************************** * 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 * **********************************************************************