I'll be down there all weekend for a soccer tournament. Thanks for the tips on places to checkout.
Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I bug them every chance I get to make 2487 a year round strain.3864 is an awesome strain. I wish they'd make it a year round ( along with some others like 2487, 3726, etc). I've emailed Dawson @ Wyeast about these and others. The more of us that email them, the more likely it is.Michael Dawson likely wouldn't answer you since he now works with Jake Keeler at BSG as of January. He does say the 2487 is the best lager strain EVA!!! I'd like to try it...
Edited for crappy grammar.
Hadn't heard that. He used to respond to emails about strains personally when he was at Wyeast. Anyway, enough email votes really make a difference. As much as 833 is used by lager brewers, I really don't get them not wanting to get 2487 out there year round to compete.
If the lottery results in some people having more opportunities to enter beers then that has a big impact on who can win ninkasi. I have to imagine few people really enter with the expectation of competing for the ninkasi but if you were one with that goal it would really suck to pull a low number in the lottery.
Why not treat the NHC as sort of the playoffs of homebrewing competitions? Rather than make it an open competition, set a requirement that beers can only be entered if they have scored a minimum score in one or more AHA-sanctioned competitions. It shouldn't be that hard to coordinate a database of results from sanctioned local competitions. The cutoffs could be set to allow the maximum number of beers the AHA can support appearing at the NHC. In the alternative you could require a beer to pick up a designated number of points to qualify where points are earned based on scores at sanctioned competitions. If necessary, the local clubs could be required to pay back a flat amount or portion of entry fees in exchange for becoming a qualifying event.
It's win-win. It focuses entries towards local competitions where brewers are more likely to get detailed notes. It also cuts out low scoring beers from the NHC infrastructure, which opens more spots for quality beers. Honestly, there is no reason for beers below 35 points being judged at the NHC.
how many entries (1-82) you would like to enter.
i still have a problem with huge number of entries per competitor, though i know that there are probably only a few who do that. decide which type of dark lager you brewed and enter it once, it doesn't need to be in all three categories
The pre-qualification argument to reduce entries is not a good one.
It isn't a good argument, or you disagree? There's a difference. The way I see it, the AHA has to implement at least one of three options:
- An entry fee high enough to discourage entries;
- An entry cap so low it reduces the number of entries;
- A qualification requirement that reduces the number of entries.
We can certainly disagree about which option (or which combination of options) is best. Personally, I feel #1 is inherently unfair and that we're already past the point where #2 could help. Since the average number of entries is 4.5 (in 2012), even with a cap of one per brewer the first round would likely fill up. On the other hand, beers that score less than 30 in the first round are ineligible to advance anyway. From the competitions I've judged/stewarded (relatively few, I admit) that's roughly the over-under for all entries. So right off the bat you can eliminate on the order of half the entries without having to reduce the "openness" of the competition. It would *still* probably fill up, but at least we could get back to the registration window being open long enough that most people have a chance.
As a model, I think the GC should look to other fringe sports that have to deal with this same issue (namely, a lot of amateur interest in the sport relative to the governing body's resources). Look at golf, or chess, or poker, or billiards. All have gone through these kind of growing pains, and they've all implemented some sort of qualification requirement for their open national championships. (To be fair, the WSOP also has a high entry fee.) If they didn't, the US Open would last six months and bankrupt the USGA.
Don't bump the price. That would make the amount you can throw at this a big part of your chances to win.
+1 Turning it into a rich man's game defeats the purpose IMHO.
I don't think so at all. What it will defeat is....I have 15 beers ready to enter. 10 average ones, 4 very good ones, and 1 outstanding beer but.....WTF....I will enter ALL of them! If you really, truly believe your beer is that good and could medal you will spend 30-50 dollars on a single entry. Let's emphasize quality and NOT quantity. If you are just looking for feedback on your beers....well there are a lot of other BJCP comps that will give you that and guess what??.....Many, many times it is the same judges as the NHC. As it stands now are the winners at this years NHC really the "best" or are they the "luckiest" for being able to get their entries in.