Category: Beer

This is so unique I’m not sure where to place it. Low carbonation, base ale is very basic, very pale ale malt-ish, and not much of it. Body is high side of light but the tart, the fruit, all make it seem more complex. The fruit dominates and I can taste all three. It’s neither dry nor sweet in the finish. No hops sensed in the nose: doesn’t need that.

It would be nice if we just had a hint more malt: hint Special B, Maris Otter… not much at all, just enough to hint at “beer.” Body might help too with a little a-amylase rest at 154-162. Try highest of those. And malto dextrin to add hint body, not taste.

Finishes sweet. As a fruit beer it can. There’s a lot of leeway here.
Head retention poor. Head color off white. Almost no head.

Carbonation is light: could use more. Medium body. You can almost feel the fruit sense on the palate. The slightest hint of high alpha hops might help: a pellet every 5 gallons maybe? Or hint more fermentation tabs and fermentables just to increase and NO MORE.

No clarity: very hazy. The quaff is orange in color. Almost no head: with all this fruit and acidity might be unavoidable. Surface tension may be an issue to, which again with all this may be unavoidable. I wouldn’t want to change pure liquid pleasure of this just for more head.

3.9BA
4 Untappd
3.4 RB

4.2

Welcome to the PGA beer rating system: one beer “Don’t bother.” Two: Eh, if someone gives it to you, drink. Three: very good, go ahead and seek it out, but be aware there is at least one problem. Four: seek it out. Five: pretty much “perfecto.”

_____________________________Beer HERE

___________________________________________________________________

Profiled by Ken Carman

Hint of chill haze, otherwise clarity good. Golden gold with yellow highlights. No head except rim of glass: small bubbles. Head fades fast: pure foam. Head fades fast, clings desperately to side of glass.

2.81 Untappd, 2.4 Rate Beer, 3.71 Beer Advocate.

This is called a Dortmunder. Not as grainy as the other, but hint more caramel. This is a little fruity: tad lemon and orange like. Finishes just a hint sweet. No hops sensed. Low side medium body.

Caramel in nose, less taste. Tad sweet, almost sugary: refined sugar. No hops in nose. Malt seems pils-like, mostly

High side low carbonation mouthfeel, tad slick… not much.

This is a Dortmunder but stay tuned for the next profile: they call that a Dortmunder too. By “they” I mean Beer Advocate. The brewery really doesn’t specify. I was expecting something unique to Poland, like a Gratzer However it is excellent and I would recommend it for those who love lagers. I would drink one and move on, but only because I’m an ale lover. I imagine a lager lover would love either of these polish brews. As I typed, “Stay tuned!”

4.0

Welcome to the PGA beer rating system: one beer “Don’t bother.” Two: Eh, if someone gives it to you, drink. Three: very good, go ahead and seek it out, but be aware there is at least one problem. Four: seek it out. Five: pretty much “perfecto.”

____________________________Beer HERE

___________________________________________________________________

 I don’t think of myself as some guru or know-it-all answer

guy. A lot of my experience comes from making mistakes and running into dead ends. And I have made a LOT of mistakes. And as this edition of A Beer Judge’s Diary will show I have been greeted by some dead ends.
 I must admit I agree with Andrew Luberto’s comment in his excellent youtube interview that those who score very well to begin with may be missing something. Trial, error and trying again can make better judges, just like it makes better songwriters, better actors, better on air personalities and better almost anything in life. Those additions to “beer judge” are mine, not his, but strike me as truth. Continue reading “A Beer Judge’s Diary: Return to Atlanta; Taste Test, Take 2B”

 The first edition will be an overview of that day, Take 2B gets to specifics that might help potential judges before they take the tasting test.

 If I were to pass on a warning to those who haven’t taken it yet it would be, “Use the few minutes you have per beer well, otherwise time will be your enemy.” 15 minutes per beer: try practicing to get it down to 10 or 12. That’s per completed sheet.
 Unlike my last column on this topic this is not going to be about my score at all, or how I did. Enough of that: whatever the score is it is. Besides, I don’t know the score yet and most likely won’t for up to six months, maybe more. That’s OK. As I told Phil Farrell it’s not about getting a better rank, and only a little about a better score. More than anything it’s about the fact every time I take the test I learn a lot through intense study, including how I know less than I think I do. Even the study involved is a humbling experience, not to mention the review after the test. Continue reading “A Beer Judge’s Diary: Return to Atlanta; Taste Test, Take 2”

Profiled by Ken Carman

Low side medium carbonation that approaches just medium. Low side medium body. No warmth. No creaminess. No astringency.

Aroma: grape like, concord to be specific. No hops noticed, debittered slightly darker malts-like sense way in background. Very fruity sense, again concord grape.

Visually about 31 srm almost no head dark red: almost burgundy. Deep orange almost red highlights under light. For this dark good clarity. Pours as a big head slight off white with slight purplish highlights. A lot of small to tiny bubbles. Fades very, very fast.

Finishes slightly dry with a concord grape-like aftertaste. Medium body, slight tart finish too. No hops noted except maybe slightest bitter that is also grape skin tannin-like. Yet there is also the slightest fruit sweet behind the dry.

Immensely enjoyable I would sip this night after night: buy a six and maybe one after that. Not all that sour: just a hint with the tart. The tart is supportive, not dominate. Concord grape sense dominates. Could use hint more malt sense. Describe more as “tart” because that works better than sour.

3.9 BA
3.6 untappd
89 RB/56 style

4.4

Welcome to the PGA beer rating system: one beer “Don’t bother.” Two: Eh, if someone gives it to you, drink. Three: very good, go ahead and seek it out, but be aware there is at least one problem. Four: seek it out. Five: pretty much “perfecto.”

_______________________________Beer HERE

 Millie and I love to stop by McGuire’s in both Pensacola and Destin, especially years ago when Steve Fried had his barleywine; known as I’ll Have what the Gentleman on the Floor is Having. Long but funny name. It actually had a low enough level of bittering to make it finish somewhat sweet, really no hop flavor and the SRM was at least mid to high 20s. Slight bitter: enough to balance.
 All of which would mean I’d be scoring it lower these days if someone entered something like that. Most likely it wouldn’t win in a barleywine only competition. In the 90s I remember a lot of barelywines were like this; the few brewpubs that served them and the few bottled examples on the shelf. Not all. However the profile has been shifted, from what I remember when I first started judging in the 90s, to reflect the higher hop usage/ibus trend.
 Are we so significantly changing profiles sometimes we eliminate older, still worthy, subcategories? Continue reading “A Beer Judge’s Diary: Should We Be Eliminating Styles?”