I was getting at the fact that in England, ESB only means Fuller’s. Gale’s used to make a strong bitter called HSB. They don’t have it trademarked in the US, so there are many ESB’s in the US - Bridgeport, Alaskan, Anderson Valley and so on. It will avoid confusion outside of the US if they do this.
Right on. No more IPA either?
I think a lot of the changes make great sense. Im just saying that a couple things make you wonder. At some point I picture “we are no longer the knights who say nee!”
Example Imperial is no longer allowed, when refering to the extra I in IIPA. Say double instead, though Tripel IPA would be a cool name for a belgian ipa, huh?
Its all good folks, im just being the peanut gallery guy. Maybe the changes will prompt a new JZ book “Brewing Modern Styles”
I hear ya, its all good. Kind of like Marzen/Oktoberfest? I think the old subcat title was Marzen/Oktoberfest, so it would stand to reason that is what you would write down when filling out your entry form. But I guess you should pick one. But I think the new subcat is fest beer.
As a fan of brewing CAPs, I always like it one takes category 2, like the Gold this year in the Nationals. Oh well, I will keep brewing those , what ever they are called.
Well… uhh. Everybody knows what … oh…
I started brewing the style twenty years ago after reading George Fix’s article in Brewing Techniques (morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/library/backissues/issue2.3/fix.html). I have always referred to the style as Pre-Prohibition Pilsner or Pre-Prohibition Lager. In my humble opinion, CAP is an ambiguous style name. A 1950s style American lager fits the description of a CAP.
I personally love the fact that the style has been moved out of category 2. Category 2 often gets grouped in with category 1 at the regional level. Many judges judge this beer based on what they know about Standard American Lager. Classic American Pilsner/Lager has as much in common with Standard American Lager as a mountain lion has with a house cat.
I think having a few styles that create a buzz is a good plan. (see what I did there?)
If everything was cut n dry we wouldn’t have anything to talk about.
Post: 2+2 is 4
Reply: Yup
A hearty discussion is good. And on a larger scale, stirring it up at BJCP is good for them.
I prefer Pre-prohibition only because there are a few commercial examples out there. Whether they are accurate is debatable I suppose, since you’d have to be pretty old and have a great taste memory to recall what beer from 90+ years ago tasted like. Unless pre prohibition is referring to the first prohibition in China 4,000 years ago
I’m interested to see how the style guidelines are changed. There are a few styles where the current description seems extremely flawed (e.g. saison) that I hope are retooled. I have mixed thoughts about all the IPA variants. I’m not thrilled with the idea that the BJCP is buying into the “everything is an IPA because it sells better that way” kind of labeling that has given us black IPA and session IPA. Maybe the distinctions will make sense.
Good golly, you’ve got that right.
However I did enjoy Gordon’s comments about blue Romulan IPA and clear Zima IPA. I’ve been saying for years that we need to develop a Purple IPA because, of course, changing the color of a beer makes it a new style. :
Barney IPA
Time for the White Stout movement to start up. :
So where will I enter my Imperial Session Ale? 8)
Stout originally meant strong, there were Pale Stouts in the early 19th century.
This also comes to mind, about 3:14 in.
Mild stout porter should be a subcat.
Gordon already beat us all to the punch with zima clear dub IPA
Reading Ron Pattinson’s latest book The Home Brewer’s Guide to Brewing Vintage Beer more than re-confirmed my long held belief that creating and categorizing beer styles is just plain silly.
But us humans love to categorize things.
And we all like hyperbole
Anyone know when the new guidelines are going to be posted?