Subject: Digest for the period 8/9/2007 - 8/10/2007 Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 01:00:25 -0400 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. RE: Missing Reports and Real Beer (Mike Winnie) 2. Re: Real beer appreciation (Ed Westemeier) 3. "Real" beer (Francisco Jones) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Winnie Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 08:03:15 -0400 Subject: RE: Missing Reports and Real Beer RE: Missing Organizer Reports 9/18/2004 Dearborn Oktoberfest Homebrewing Competition, Dearborn, MI, Scott Smith David, I judged that competition. I've repeatedly tried to communicate with Scott through email and his brother to no avail. I think that one is a lost cause. RE: Real Beer Beer judges (myself included) tend to scrutinize every little thing, and in this case the literal meaning of a single word. We tend to very analytical and focus on details. That's what makes us good judges and/or brewers. Step back for a minute and consider the reason for that part of the purpose of the BJCP. "promote beer literacy and the appreciation of real beer" At the time this was created, most beer available to the public was category 1 Light Lager. Bud, Miller, Coors, etc... did not need anyone else promoting the appreciation of their beer, they did a great job by themselves. It was our job to promote the 22 other styles (+ substyles) that few people in the USA ever heard of. If you don't use an adjective like "real" then you don't differentiate the product you are promoting. We all know what is referred to when we say "real" beer, beer with flavor and aroma. I've seen lots of products marketed with the word "real". One example is cheese, another is deep dish pizza. It's marketing shorthand for "our stuff is better than the rest". Some might call it snobbish or elitist, but so what. Those that drink category 1 beer outnumber the rest of us by such a huge number, that we must be the elite. Perhaps some day, many years from now, we will not be the minority and we can drop that entire portion of our purpose. I raise a glass to that proposal! Cheers! Mike Winnie ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ed Westemeier Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 09:05:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Real beer appreciation The BJCP "purpose" statement that has always been on the exam reads as follows: "The purpose of the Beer Judge Certification Program is to promote beer literacy and the appreciation of real beer, and to recognize beer tasting and evaluation skills." The current debate is over the second of the three parts, "appreciation of real beer." My personal take on this is that I've always thought of it as "real beer appreciation" with the "real" modifying "appreciation" and not the beer. Many people "appreciate" their Bud Light to the point of drinking way too much of it, but that's not the kind of appreciation we're talking about. We try to educate folks to "really" appreciate beer (and mead and cider, of course) in a much more sophisticated way. Could the statement be updated and improved? Certainly. High priority? Not especially. In fact, I'd like to take this opportunity to make a small suggestion. There are many little, low priority items like this that could usefully be addressed by the BJCP, but haven't been. After the end of this year, there will be an opportunity to replace four of the seven members of the BJCP Board of Directors, and it might be nice to get some new blood involved with more enthusiasm. The South, Midwest, Mid-Atlantic, and West regions are all due for elections in early 2008. If you, or someone you know, might be interested in helping set BJCP policy and direction, please start thinking about running for representative from your region. You just need five nominations from fellow judges in your region in order to run. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Francisco Jones Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 14:34:26 -0500 Subject: "Real" beer I agree with Tom S. and John Peed (and others) wholeheartedly. The"real" should be dropped because it is indeed full of snobbish implications, and yet has no "real", defined meaning. It clearly does not even have a consensus definition. That alone should be grounds for removal. Do we even have any idea what the original drafters intended? I support the change to "all beer", because that is what we are about. We appreciate, evaluate, and educate _all_ beers. Even swillsners have qualities worth appreciating (and judging and scoring and distinguishing, etc.) in their own right. And if we were to teach a few college kids how to appreciate and enjoy those particular qualities of their mass-market, low flavor beers, maybe they wouldn't be so keen to chug. I thought "quality beer" would also be a good choice, but that seems to exclude folks who are having a problem with their homebrews, and are knowingly sending bad beer in for professional help. We appreciate, evaluate, and educate those beers (brewers) too. That's why "all beer" works so well. It may be slightly redundant, but I think it's valuable to underscore the fact that the BJCP is _not_ exclusionary on the basis of hop loading, flavor intensity, snobbery in general. We evaluate/appreciate all beers, regardless of origin, quality, production values, brett., flavor intensity, etc. How can we say there is some distinction that needs to be drawn when we can't even come close to agreement on what it might be? And yet while we are arguing the point we brew, evaluate, educate, and appreciate all beers, good and bad, weak and intense, new and ancient, mega and nano. On a gut-only level I guess I sort of have a feel for what the original connotation might have been. But I think it's outdated, and grossly imprecise. So how do we change things in this organizations? Do we need an online petition, to be forwarded to our elected reps. for a vote? On a completely different matter: Did anyone else look at the delinquent organizer report recently? To my eye, it looks pretty bad when the AHA Nationals and the Long Shot competitions appear on that list. Francisco Jones Kankakee, IL BJCP Certified ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** Important Subscriber Information ***** To post a message to JudgeNet, send it to judge`at`synchro.com. Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments. Make sure you use a meaningful subject. Quote only as much material as is needed for context. To manage your subscription, go to http://synchro.com/judge/subscriptions.html or send an email to judge-request`at`synchro.com with the subject: help judge. JudgeNet is also available as an NNTP newsgroup, go to news://news.synchro.com/synchro.judge