Author Topic: 2017 NHC Competition Chat  (Read 16059 times)

Offline harper.lane

  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #180 on: April 24, 2017, 11:13:01 PM »
Any insights from the Sacramento judging centre?  It seems like the results are coming out slower than the other competition sights - I wonder if they had a higher volume of beers to judge?

Someone posted a little earlier that they didn't finish up on time. They had several big competitions in the area so seemed to have issue getting everything done on time. It's definitely not a volume issue as all the regions had similar numbers of entries.

I emailed John Moorhead again to see why Sacramento results have not been verified yet.  I have not heard back... hopefully its not going to be another full week.

Offline Badgerhead

  • Cellarman
  • **
  • Posts: 26
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #181 on: April 25, 2017, 10:52:24 PM »
Looks like the last 3 Judging Centers just posted results.

Offline dannyjed

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1095
  • Toledo, OH
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #182 on: April 26, 2017, 12:09:24 AM »
Thanks, I sent him an email.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dan Chisholm

Offline ynotbrusum

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 3189
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #183 on: April 26, 2017, 03:10:31 AM »
Chicago winners are posted.  I advanced a German Lichtbier.  Not sure my samples will hold up well for Nationals, though.  Nice to be recognized for a Low O2 batch.
Hodge Garage Brewing: "Brew with a glad heart!"

Offline brewinhard

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 3272
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #184 on: April 26, 2017, 02:13:40 PM »
Chicago winners are posted.  I advanced a German Lichtbier.  Not sure my samples will hold up well for Nationals, though.  Nice to be recognized for a Low O2 batch.

Well done!  What did you think of your low O2 version?

Offline bayareabrewer

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 535
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #185 on: April 26, 2017, 03:31:45 PM »
Chicago winners are posted.  I advanced a German Lichtbier.  Not sure my samples will hold up well for Nationals, though.  Nice to be recognized for a Low O2 batch.

congratulations. What were your DO levels throughout the process?

Big Monk

  • Guest
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #186 on: April 26, 2017, 03:44:44 PM »
Chicago winners are posted.  I advanced a German Lichtbier.  Not sure my samples will hold up well for Nationals, though.  Nice to be recognized for a Low O2 batch.

Congrats! Glad it turned out well.

Offline ynotbrusum

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 3189
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #187 on: April 27, 2017, 02:04:15 AM »
Chicago winners are posted.  I advanced a German Lichtbier.  Not sure my samples will hold up well for Nationals, though.  Nice to be recognized for a Low O2 batch.

congratulations. What were your DO levels throughout the process?
Thank you.  As to O2 levels, I can't say, as I don't have a DO meter, but I guess I kept the sodium metabisulfite
somewhere  below a noticeable "eggy level", evidently.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2017, 02:25:36 AM by ynotbrusum »
Hodge Garage Brewing: "Brew with a glad heart!"

The Beerery

  • Guest
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #188 on: April 27, 2017, 11:20:02 AM »
Chicago winners are posted.  I advanced a German Lichtbier.  Not sure my samples will hold up well for Nationals, though.  Nice to be recognized for a Low O2 batch.

congratulations. What were your DO levels throughout the process?
Thank you.  As to O2 levels, I can't say, as I don't have a DO meter, but I guess I kept the sodium metabisulfite
somewhere  below a noticeable "eggy level", evidently.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline bayareabrewer

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 535
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #189 on: April 27, 2017, 03:15:42 PM »
kind of odd to call it low 02 if theres no validity to the claim....

Big Monk

  • Guest
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #190 on: April 27, 2017, 03:30:23 PM »
kind of odd to call it low 02 if theres no validity to the claim....

But the use of metabisulfite has been shown, empirically, to scavenge Oxygen by multiple sources. Some of whom you seem to scorn and others, like Brulosophy, whom I'm sure you respect.

You don't require evidence of combustion every time to know that putting gas in your car makes it go vroom vroom, do you?

Offline bayareabrewer

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 535
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #191 on: April 27, 2017, 03:54:55 PM »
kind of odd to call it low 02 if theres no validity to the claim....

But the use of metabisulfite has been shown, empirically, to scavenge Oxygen by multiple sources. Some of whom you seem to scorn and others, like Brulosophy, whom I'm sure you respect.

You don't require evidence of combustion every time to know that putting gas in your car makes it go vroom vroom, do you?

meta is an antioxidant, no argument from me about that. I just wish y'all would be as critical about claims of 02 success as you are with failures. If your only markers for o2 success are that the brewer likes it, then your method is a self fulfilling prophecy. You like it, you did it right, you don't, you did it wrong. Without verifying that DO was in fact low, why are you so quick to congratulate the successful brewer while questioning a naysayer?

Big Monk

  • Guest
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #192 on: April 27, 2017, 04:11:42 PM »
kind of odd to call it low 02 if theres no validity to the claim....

But the use of metabisulfite has been shown, empirically, to scavenge Oxygen by multiple sources. Some of whom you seem to scorn and others, like Brulosophy, whom I'm sure you respect.

You don't require evidence of combustion every time to know that putting gas in your car makes it go vroom vroom, do you?

meta is an antioxidant, no argument from me about that. I just wish y'all would be as critical about claims of 02 success as you are with failures. If your only markers for o2 success are that the brewer likes it, then your method is a self fulfilling prophecy. You like it, you did it right, you don't, you did it wrong. Without verifying that DO was in fact low, why are you so quick to congratulate the successful brewer while questioning a naysayer?

It's a valid point. We assume that people with good brewing practices that are making good beers, and who subsequently integrate antioxidants and mechanically limit ingress, and seem to enjoy the product, are experiencing low levels of DO. Without an actual measurement there is no way to truly know. All we can assume, knowing what we know about the scavenging power, is that if people have sound general practices, that they SHOULD have success.

We also see a lot of people choosing to brew a beer they know very well as their first Low Oxygen beer. This helps people to pick out any differences, subjectively. Ultimately, sulfite strips can give you a general idea of consumption. 

As far as failures, typically the ones reported don't have a fair amount of data associated. The Brulosophy experiment was an outlier and had a great write up so it was ripe for analysis and criticism. Natebrews has posted extensively on our site about his perceived lack of success and gave much data to try and elicit some troubleshooting.

Ultimately we encourage trial and error and troubleshooting. We don't assume anyone did anything explicitly wrong. Given the number of people who have, at least subjectively, shown great results, we assume that if the brewer was unhappy with the results given what he's read about the techniques, that there is room for improvement.

Failure is not a dirty word. You can fail to capture the desired results with a written procedure. You just have to troubleshoot and move on from there. We don't typically scrutinize people who are having success, because we assume that they are brewing a recipe they are comfortable with and really do feel like they are making a better beer.


Offline bayareabrewer

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 535
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #193 on: April 27, 2017, 04:30:10 PM »
but all your assumptions are self serving.

Someone does low DO brewing but stirs their mash, uses copper of doesn't use a mash cap or doesn't verify low DO but still claims to benefit, you congratulate them and pat yourselves on the back. When Denny experiments with antioxidants and sees no benefit, its because he didn't follow every rule. Your entire approach is going to lead you to a self serving conclusion.

Offline dsmitch19

  • Cellarman
  • **
  • Posts: 93
    • ASH
Re: 2017 NHC Competition Chat
« Reply #194 on: April 27, 2017, 04:48:09 PM »
I would like to report a thread hijacking in progress.  ;)
Cheers!
Dennis Mitchell
Grand Master Judge + Mead Judge
BJCP Communications Director
AHA Governing Committee