The guidelines are not available. But… the most important thing to do is describe the beer in front of you. If you can do that and have some understanding of what the style should be, I say you’ll pass with a Recognized or Certified grade. You sound like you’re probably familiar with many beer styles all ready. Try to find as many examples of styles you’re not familiar with and taste them while reading the guidelines.
I’m currently in a taste exam study group and this thread has morphed into one providing some very useful information. Keep it coming. That little back and forth on the proper descriptors for the grape flavor was perfect. The link to the judging guide and acetaldehyde also invaluable.
Thanks!
As someone who is just about to enter his first competition, this discussion is providing a real good perspective.
I’d also like to note that on just about any other forum a thread like this would erupt in an all-out flame war. Instead, we get some thought-provoking discussion, and arrive at “how can we make this better for everyone?” as our conclusion. That’s yet another reason why it’s so great here.
As one that enters comps and looks forward to the score sheets I will tell you that in most cases the scientific jargon means nothing to me.
If you read through the style guidelines you will see that in most cases the jargon is not there either
It’s not that I don’t understand them all, it’s just that they really don’t provide help like the general descriptors do in improving my beers in an easily understandable way
just remember: KISS…it works:)
You know, I was about to snarkily suggest that the thread belonged on one of those other forums. Then it turned around.
duboman - I’d agree. The most important use a scoresheet could have is for the entrant to read it while drinking their beer. So the descriptors need to be clear and uncomplicated. Chemical names might not help, except for common ones (DMS, diacetyl, etc.
For Alewyfe and anyone else interested. These are some prep resources that have really changed how I approach writing a scoresheet.
http://unyha.com/index.php/competitions/bjcp-judge-training/217-bjcp-exam-resources.html
Especially the first two. I wish I’d read them before taking the exam. They point out common errors that have nothing to do with tasting, just the mechanics of writing a scoresheet and covering all the bases.
Great Stuff! Thanks a million Jimmy.
Concur!
Read the score sheet with that beer. You will agree, with most comments. Sometimes you won’t agree.
+1 to reading the score sheet while drinking the beer. The comments are much more helpful that way.
For information you plan to memorize by rote, I highly recommend preparing flashcards and memorizing them in at most the last three weeks prior to the exam (I believe rote memorization work farther out than that is a poor use of time) using the Leitner system: Leitner system - Wikipedia
I think for the tasting exam you are looking at 95% understanding vs 5% memorization. For the essay exam it might be more like 80/20 (some people might put more focus on memorization, but I believe they are unlikely to do very well).
Generally, I try to bottle 4 bottles of each beer when I send to competitions. I send 2 in. I drink one and take some mental notes, or even try to record some thoughts on paper on the weekend of the competition - that way I am tasting the same beer, filled the same way, at the same time it is being judged. I save the 4th for when I get my score sheets and I can taste it again and refer back to the sheets. This is particularly good if the comp. is efficiently run and you are getting your sheets back within a week or two of the comps. Seems that more and more, competitions are turning this information around very quickly, which is great.
I think that a good judge provides useful feedback. It’s true that a flavor might be ethyl hexanoate, and not acetaldehyde, and we know the difference- but it’s not at all helpful to not tell someone that, unless you also tell them what THAT means, and how to fix the beer that is flawed. Big words do not a great judge make.
One thing that I"ve discovered over the years is that I don’t really like wheats, sours, or Belgians all that much. But I am a great judge of the styles I don’t love. Part of that is simply because it’s easier to deconstruct a beer that I don’t love- does that make me biased? No, I don’t think bias comes into it. Bias would be if I know my best friend brewed a certain beer, and I chose to pick that one over another beer that is better or equally good.
More threads like this and I might just go for BJCP status. I think my palte is not up to speed, but I am getting better. I really have trouble with not wanting to make a mistake and not detecting the proper causes to an effect, but it sounds like you don’t have to have a remedy, just because the beer has a detectable flaw?
In my opinion, the value of a good judge sheet is feedback from an outsider who knows at least a little bit about beer. I don’t think teaching how to brew is necessary. Especially with the volume of great info available. For example, it should be a given how to avoid oxidation… so, “faint cardboard flavor, slight oxidation” is good enough. I can figure out where it’s coming from.
Not all homebrewers are so educated on off-flavors and how to avoid/mitigate them. Your example of oxidization is a great one. Some homebrewers may not realize that this is even an off-flavor. There is a whole lot of ugly baby syndrome out there when it comes to homebrewers. Some homebrewers may not realize that could be the result of their process - such as not carefully bottling from the keg because they’re not detecting it in what they’re drinking at home (This happened to me once). Oxidation in varying degrees of severity is probably the most common off-flavor in entries to competitions.
well, you do need to be able to provide feedback to address faults if you want a good score, and (forgetting the whole exam thing for the moment) if you want to be helpful to the brewer.
for everyone, remember Feedback includes not just fixing “off” characters, but what style it might better fit into, and how it differs from the style it is entered into.
“This style has a richer, heavily-balanced-to-malt profile than is present in your beer, or is covered by the high level of sharp, astringent hop characters and what appears to be a wild yeast infection.” - that offers some explanation. “DMS - uncover your boil” - doesn’t really help anyone.
That’s because you’re on this forum ;D
No, really.
Ray Daniels calls the ugly baby syndrome as cellar blindness, as in that beer was excellent in my basement and I entered it. I have been guilty of that, and now get a second opinion from my wife, who has a better palete.
Agree on excellent beer being degraded in the bottling process. One of my issues was creating diacetyl in a Pilsner through rushed bottling. Diacetyl was in the control bottle I had when reading the score sheet. Had a sample from the keg, and it was clean.
Ok. Just had a BJCP judged Helles - it was Horst Dornbusch’s Edel Hell - 3.9% ABV. Got totally dinged by a judge for being too high in alcohol for the style. Because of that it got a 25…
Screw this BS!
Hmm, isn’t 3.9 too low for 1D? I wonder if they meant hot alcohol, solventy? Is a fault marked on the left hand column?