Show Posts

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.


Messages - udubdawg

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 52
271
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Consensus while judging?
« on: March 31, 2014, 04:16:51 PM »

The beer was basically a science experiment that was entered as a specialty beer.   With no claimed "like" beer and no category guidelines to use in judging the beer, I judged the beer based on the ingredients, process, and bugs claimed on the entry form.  The beer had a really harsh middle of the tongue flavor that made it darn near undrinkable for me, which is why I contemplated giving it a 13 (my first score was actually in the low twenties).  I brought my score up because I wanted to reach a consensus. 

As I brew mainly to study the behavior of brewing cultures (I have maintained a culture collection for most of the time that I have brewed), I am familiar with the flavors produced by the bugs claimed in the fermentation.  The harsh off-flavor was not a flavor that is produced by the any of the bugs claimed under normal circumstances.   The flavor was definitely produced by wild non-brewing microflora pickup, which is a flaw that would prevent any beer from scoring in the forties.

Ah, fricking category 23...
it's making more sense now.   Yeah you ended up in the most subjective cat.  Science experiments indeed.
I do believe competitions should have very experienced judges in that category, more than just about anywhere else, but perhaps they did.

I don't avoid 23 anymore, but I don't relish it.  I'm hoping the new guidelines will reduce some of the variety; American Wild and Specialty IPA and whatever. 
I am capable of telling why I am/am not impressed with a certain beer's blend of base and specialty information, and from what we've seen I expect you are too.  Curious why the other judge loved it so much, but I guess you really did encounter a fairly rare event early on.  I've never encountered even half of the score differential you indicate.  I actually think you did well with a 29, provided it also included feedback on why it didn't work for you.

cheers--
--Michael
 

272
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Consensus while judging?
« on: March 31, 2014, 11:23:32 AM »
Here's the situation.  The delta between the scores was almost twenty points.  It was one of those beers that people either loved or hated (50% of the non-flight judges who tasted the beer loved it whereas the other fifty percent thought that it should be dumped).  I was going to give the beer a courtesy score of 13 before I saw the other judge's score sheet.  Our comments were so different that it made me believe that we must have tasted different beers.  I bumped my score up to 29, but there was no way that I was going to give a seriously flawed beer a forty.  The other judge would not budge.  The head judge was clearly uncomfortable judging the category.  He did not have an opinion one way or the other, so he adjusted his score up to move the beer on.   I finally reached the point were I told the head judge to throw out my score because there was no way that I was going to give the beer a score anywhere near forty.

I'm seeing a lot of "loved it" and not "thought it fit the style really well"
I would like to believe that is not a problem BJCP judges have, but I'd settle for finding out it is rare.

perhaps you could give us a bit more on the style in question and what was so poor about it that made you consider a 13, and eventually 29?




273
Homebrew Competitions / Re: NHC
« on: March 31, 2014, 09:02:15 AM »
is 7757 the actual number?

I thought there were 12 First Round regions, so 9000 spots.

*edit* nevermind, I can't read.  I'll leave it there so you can all make fun of me.   ;D

274
Homebrew Competitions / Re: NHC
« on: March 31, 2014, 08:30:59 AM »
Hi guys,

The way it was set up this year was during the application phase for entrants to submit how many entries up to 6 they wanted to enter.  In the interest of getting a true count of the desired entries, we said that if you asked for 6 you would be held responsible to pay for 6 entries or the maximum entry limit to be determined.  This was done in the interest of fairness.  Those who applied but did not pay their entry fees (didn't follow through after the application phase), are the ones who have risked being banned in the 2015 competition.

If you asked for 4 you had to pay for 4.  If you asked for 4 and only have 2 beers bottled, you still had to pay for 4, but you could just send 2 or, if you wanted you could choose to not send any.  Sadly, it appears more than a few people took this route.

Cheers,
Janis

I know one club member who waited too long - basically until he learned he had entry spots - before brewing.  He sent some, but not all of his paid entries as at least one wasn't ready in time.  His own fault, and hopefully next year people will be more prepared.  I suspect 1) knowing that if you volunteered you've got guaranteed spots, and 2) knowing the limit won't be very high - will both help.

The system isn't what I'd prefer, but since we've been told it's what the majority indicated they wanted on the survey, who am I to argue.

cheers--
--Michael

275
Homebrew Competitions / Re: NHC
« on: March 30, 2014, 04:42:00 AM »
well, for the record the pull sheets still had some extra specialty information on there, but by including directions to ignore it in the judge instructions it wasn't really a problem.  As usual people putting things in the wrong category was a fairly common error.

*edit* - really disappointed that we only had something like 570 entries in KC.  A lot of people didn't ship, or didn't use all the entries they paid for.  I'd like to see some sort of contingency plan to get these spots to people who will use them, but it is what is.

276
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Consensus while judging?
« on: March 30, 2014, 04:38:01 AM »
disagree on which should win a gold medal to the point that a third judge has to come in?  sure.

waaay apart on score and neither can convince the other to budge?  this is where I'd expect myself and the other know-it-alls to come in and do some educatin'....but I've never seen it happen.  Sometimes it has happened when a new judge didn't understand/didn't like the style but always they admitted their score was too low or high.


277
Homebrew Competitions / Re: NHC
« on: March 27, 2014, 10:24:18 AM »
During check-in in KC a couple weeks ago, I saw beers with specialty information on the label for styles that have no specialty information.  Cat 13, for instance.  I'm betting those people switched from a "specialty" style to a non-specialty style, and didn't notice the additional info because it doesn't show up.
Unfortunately, there are plenty of people who will enter a specialty style in a standard category because they don't know any better.
I think he means an issue with the software specifically.  I was going to enter a mead.  I created it and typed in the specialty ingredients and honey varietal, etc... Then I changed my mind and entered a beer instead... On the label it still had all that info for the mead on the beer category.  I did change it back to a mead and put an 'x' in the specialty ingredients section and then switched it back to a beer... so on the label it just has an extra line with my 'x' on it...

both happened. 
also saw some beers entered with names that suggested they were in the wrong style, but whatever.  No system is perfect, and it sounds like the AHA has done what they can.

278
Homebrew Competitions / Re: NHC
« on: March 26, 2014, 01:29:07 PM »
great, thanks Janis.

279
Homebrew Competitions / Re: NHC
« on: March 26, 2014, 01:22:32 PM »
I really hope the competition software fixes the "specialty" issue snafu at some point.

if anyone judged Cat 27 in the Finals last year, I had the entry that said "hydromel."
at one point in the registration process I had entered a mead, before switching to Cat 27A.  Once you check the appropriate "hydromel/standard/sack" box it was impossible to un-check.  you could only switch to one of the other two.

During check-in in KC a couple weeks ago, I saw beers with specialty information on the label for styles that have no specialty information.  Cat 13, for instance.  I'm betting those people switched from a "specialty" style to a non-specialty style, and didn't notice the additional info because it doesn't show up.

...at this point I would assume that we are to just ignore any specialty information in places it should not be?

cheers--
--Michael


280
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Homebrew Competition Rules
« on: March 26, 2014, 06:38:11 AM »
I kinda thought that might a deterrent for the judges.  What about a tiered system for competitions?  Where the entrants have their brews judged in a separate class.  Non-judges, judges, etc.
Since entrant classes are usually based on ability (like amateur vs pro), I think this would create the impression that judges are by definition better brewers than non-judges. This isn't necessarily true.
 

and if it WERE true I would find it silly that the the non-trained judges would be judging the best beers while the actual BJCP judges would be judging the inferior beers.



281
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: PicoBrew Zymatic?
« on: March 24, 2014, 10:41:00 AM »
http://www.digitaltrends.com/features/picobrews-zymatic-brews-beer-mouse-click-purists-pissed/#!Basel

New article about the picobrew. It notes that Annie Johnson has been hired on.

"...and purists are pissed!"

guess I'm not a purist.  I thought I was, but my reaction was "That's nice" so I guess not.   ::)

282
We just posted an Action Alert regarding a Florida bill that if passed would be very bad for Florida's craft breweries: http://www.craftbeer.com/action-alerts/attention-florida-beer-activists-support-your-states-small-brewers.  If you live in Florida, please contact your state Senator.

“anything not specifically authorized . . . is prohibited unless otherwise authorized under the Beverage Law.”

I am Michael's complete lack of surprise.  *sigh*
This entire bill is full of terrible ideas.  Good Luck, Florida...


283
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Drinking Only Homebrews
« on: March 21, 2014, 07:39:27 AM »
>90% homebrew for me.
making 4-5x as much as I drink is ridiculous enough.  if I bought much more commercial beer I might as well stop brewing.
 
side note:  picked up some Tocobago on Dec 26th that had been canned Dec 24th.  Great, great hoppy amber!

284
bunch of amendments with nothing to do with homebrewing added onto our bill in Senate Committee today.  Also so glad they clarified what a "guest" is.   ::)

progress, I guess.

285
Homebrew Competitions / Re: question for comp organizers/staff
« on: March 20, 2014, 08:12:44 AM »
On a somewhat related topic, does anybody else feel that it should not be against the rules to have the style number written on the caps?  I leave it on in spite of the rules for two reasons: 1) it verifies that the cellar people don't mix up the entries I send in and 2) in every competition in this state, a label immediately goes onto the cap.

I have stickers with style number on all my caps at home.  sometimes I remove them, sometimes I leave them on.  They are easily removable.  At KCBM AmandaK and co just put their sticker right over the top of mine - no harm done.

so, I agree with you.  it is one more way to make sure beers are in the correct category too.

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 52