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 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 67
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: NHC 2014
« on: April 03, 2014, 06:23:31 AM »
34 is a good result for anyone and very good for someone without a lot of competition experience.

I advanced one in 2nd at 36 this year and was cobrewer on another that advanced in 3rd at 36.  won a couple categories with 38 and 39.

I don't know the score of the 1st place entry in Cat 18, but my coworker had the 2nd place Dubbel that scored 37.'re not far off at all.  Nice job!

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: HB Competitions
« on: April 03, 2014, 06:13:05 AM »
I will say what I said last year:

Janis was IN THE ROOM last year when they announced the results in KC. 

...Does it get more legitimate than that?

They announced the results in Tulsa last year too.  You have to be there, or know someone who heard your name, or wait for the scoresheets to be mailed if you are not there (I grabbed most of the Wichita scoresheets and handed them out Monday).

anyone who was at a regional where they refused to announce the winners was volunteering at a region where they did not know the rules.  I suspect Janis will show up again to confirm that they are supposed to announce.  It is posting online that they are not supposed to do.

tDS - yes, both my ciders advanced.


P.S. - a few top 3 placings were missed on the cover sheet even in KC last year.  I had a couple stewards annoyed at me because I was doing it myself this year, so for the final flight I let them handle everything.  When it came time to sort the scoresheets, guess which flight the steward had neglected to put the top 3 on?   ::)

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: HB Competitions
« on: April 02, 2014, 12:28:25 PM »
So, 30 is a solid score?  Honestly asking, as I have no idea.

Entered my first comp about a month ago so my frame of reference is limited.

I know 13 is B.A.D. but 30 sounds like it's more middle of the road than outstanding.
Minimum to advance is 30.

A solid score, to me at least, is 38 and above. 40s is real solid.

Edit -

I'd go a bit lower for Solid and Real Solid when evaluating how entries did.  probably 33 for Solid. 
35 for Good.  38 often wins a category.  I'd like to see people judge a little higher, but I know I've done it too.

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: HB Competitions
« on: April 02, 2014, 11:59:07 AM »
Either way you'll get scoresheets by mail. The top 3 beers in each category from each region go to the final round in June. If you are one of those winners you get instructions to submit the next set of bottles.

Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk

top 3, and have to score minimum of 30.

to the OP, you could actually volunteer in Denver and at the end hear whether you advanced or not.  Some regions are faster than others, but generally they don't take too long to be mailed.  KC mailed yesterday or today.

Other Fermentables / Re: cider with wlp 070 bourbon
« on: April 02, 2014, 09:55:43 AM »
I also would expect it to have little trouble going past 1.025 if treated well.  I've gotten exasperated with some of these high alcohol tolerances, and have started making smaller beverages and back-sweetening later.  it takes a while to taste the same, but I'm in no hurry, and I much prefer drinking things in the 10-12% range and occasionally even lower over the 16%+ range.

if you really want the high alcohol that this strain supposedly has tolerance for I'd go above 1.120 here.  however I do not pretend to know its nutrient requirements.

good luck--

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Consensus while judging?
« on: April 01, 2014, 10:13:11 AM »
At the NHC in Orlando I was alerted to a pair of score sheets that gave a beer a score of 12 (I think) with very few comments on the sheet other than "some oxidized notes."  The two judges were nationally known and respected.  As competition organizer I asked one of them if there was anything else about it that made it score so low.  When the answer was "no" I got another BJCP National and we rejudged the beer so we wouldn't have to explain the bad score sheets to the entrant.  I think we gave it a 33.  Good beer with a minor flaw.
I don't mind seeing low scores, but there had better be a lot of writing to explain it.

Now that's a good competition organizer. 
"I'm in charge, this isn't right, and I'm not putting my name on something where an entrant is treated like this"

The Pub / Re: Pet Peeves
« on: April 01, 2014, 09:56:47 AM »
I should add, 99% of the homebrewers I meet are super cool and very appreciative of my beer. I get homebrewers coming in to bring me a new homebrew to try about once a week. Some of my best friends are homebrewers. But every now and then there's one guy who is going to criticize everything because "he could do it better" or "this isn't to style" or whatever. come on - you guys all have that guy in your homebrew club, right?

I have a few who think, or rather thought, that I was that guy.  Because they see me saying that at a competition, all the time.  They were surprised to see me say otherwise when tasting commercial beer and visiting commercial breweries.  C'mon guys, this isn't a competition.  They're trying to make delicious beer that people want to buy at a price that lets them make a living, and have succeeded.  Arguing about whether or not it hits the robust porter guidelines as a measure of the quality of the brewery is pointless.

update from yesterday on the Kansas bill (which passed the House in February and 40-0 in the Senate last month, but with amendments.)

"Earlier today, the House met and just before noon here's what happened to our bill: Sub for HB 2223 - Alcoholic beverages; relating to homemade fermented beverages. The House Nonconcurred; Conference Committee requested; the House appointed Brunk, Couture-Lovelady and Ruiz. No meeting announced yet (Senate has to appoint conferees).

The plan is for the House to concur tomorrow before a conference committee meets."


OK, so I know we've got some legal experts, so I've just got to ask:  What am I not getting?
As I understand it the Committee is a safety measure, but if the plan is to concur before they ever meet, what is the point?  Wouldn't it be easier to, you know, concur the first time?!?

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.


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?

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

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.


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.


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.

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.

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.

Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 67