I pretty much agree with both of you. There certainly doesn't look like much "stuff" in the portion I vorlauf, and I suspect that it would have minimal, if any, impact if I didn't. OTOH, it's so fast and easy that I'll probably continue to do it "just in case".
That's how I feel about it too. For the small effort and very little time it takes, and certainly posing no risk to the beer, its nice to have clear wort and practically zero husk material going into the kettle.
I'm always open to try something new and not afraid of change, but this is one of those little things to which I'll probably always stubbornly cling.
Yeah, I'm with you on this, but you could say the same thing about shaking a lucky rabbit's foot over the kettle, i.e., it only requires a "small effort and very little time..., and certainly pos[es] no risk
to the beer". Just saying that I've never really seen any data quantifying the husk/tannin extraction problem on a homebrew level. So, I don't really have a reason
for the vorlauf, even though I employ it myself. So, at this point, for me
, the vorlauf is akin to the lucky rabbit's foot that has never been seriously tested (unless one wishes to consider my stirring the mash during the runoff as a test).
I wonder if this is not a little similar to the "trub in the fertmenter/autolysis" problem which seems to be slowly becoming no problem
as more people are becoming less concerned with trub in primary, even to the exclusion of employing secondary fermentation. This is just something I've noticed more and more on forums.