In competitions one can brew to style and try and hit all of the numbers, or throw something in and see what happens. I am more of a brew to style and hit the numbers guy, at least for my lagers.
The last time I was in London, many Bitters were showcasing hops like Citra and other US hops, Galaxy (AU) and other new hops. They were darned tasty. One would not do well in a competition, I am sure. The guidelines say American hops can be used IIRC, but at the level these were used in the finish I think they would get dinged. I need to look at the proposed new guidelines and see if any changes have been made for that.
One thing that Jamil Z had said in one of his style shows on BN was that his British styles did better when they were old, as that was the flavor the judges were usually looking for, as that was what they knew.
I have judged many beers that I felt were too big for the style they were entered in and dinged them for it. It’s a risk to enter a beer that is bigger than the style allows.
I agree with a number of things you said. I can’t say that I have the experience others might have in consuming English/Scottish beers at the source. However, like you, they are some of my favorite styles, and one’s I have sought to replicate - as best I can. Ordinary Bitters, Scottish 70, Dark Mild are styles I brew (and enter in competitions) as much or more than any other style I pursue. I have NEVER had a commercial dark mild. I have never had a commercial Scottish 70. The closest thing I have probably had to an Ordinary Bitter is a can of Boddington’s Pub Ale… But, I attempt to interpret what I read as best I can. So, they are styles I am quite fond of as well. For a lot of us, experiencing the “true” thing is not an option… or is not an option at this point. We just do the best we can, with what we have available.
In my opinion, homebrewers often need to attempt to tweak their ingredients and processes in a way that replicates the perception of the beers they are trying to emulate. Most homebrewers are not able to employ all of the techniques and processes that a commercial brewery can. So, most homebrewers use more hops (for instance) in an attempt to replicate the “proprietary” hopping strategies of commercial brewers. Or, they add corn sugar to dry a beer out a bit to account for the better yeast/fermentation techniques a brewery may have. Or, they may use melanoiden to replicate a certain maltiness in german lagers… They may start with a higher gravity to shoot for the perceived maltiness that a guideline suggests… The goal is not to produce a beer with a bunch of numbers in isolation. The goal (for most) is to produce a beer that tastes great and seems to give the impression of the style they are shooting for.
There are other reasons why a brewer may enter a beer “out of style” too. I had a Dark Mild and Scottish 70 at NHC finals. I rebrewed both after regional. I had purchased a new MM2. The dark mild was the first beer I made using that mill. I got 90% efficiency … not something I expected. My mild ended up at 1.045. I guess I could have just not entered it at all. It scored fine, but I did get dinged for it being too roasty/too big. I figured I would, because i could taste it myself. My Scottish 70 was pretty much “to style” and did much better, making it to mini BOS. Entering something that tastes “out of style” is certainly a risk a brewer is taking - in my experience, especially in bigger competitions with experienced judges.
I guess the area where we completely part ways is on the “integrity/cheating/rules/guidelines” aspect.
There is NO rule that says you cannot enter a beer in a certain category. It is 100% within the “rules” to ENTER a beer in any category you want - even if it is outside the “guidelines.” It is absolutely “legal” to enter a pilsner as a stout.
The guidelines are for judging. Once entered, the beer will be judged against the style guidelines. If it is perceived to have missed those guidelines, it will be docked. If it not perceived to be out of those guidelines, it will not be docked. Simple as that. It is not “cheating” to enter a beer in a category where you feel it will be perceived best.
Does this help? Cut/paste from 2008 instructions
Notes to Judges:
4. “Seek to understand the intent of the style categories and to judge each beer in its entirety. Don’t overly focus on single elements. Look to the overall balance and character of the beer for your final opinion.”
So, beers aren’t judged on paper. Plus, I believe they use some pretty talented and experienced judges to decide which beer gets the gold. Here’s another thought… zymugy has never had a typo, right? Probably this one is accurate, but how funny would it be if that 5 points was a typo?
Kudos to Steve on his post. Point taken. If my defensiveness of BJCP and NHC offended anyone, my apologies.
…Having integrity means that one plays by the rules, even it if puts one at a disadvantage. Purposely entering a bigger beer in a smaller beer category is not playing by the rules.
It is not “cheating” to enter a beer in a category where you feel it will be perceived best.
[/quote]
What comes to mind is something that was done by a couple of repeat Ninkasi winners. I know because ive heard them say it in interviews. Blending.
So if being 5 pts to high in OG is a problem, imagine back when there were no limits, entering 60+ beers and many of those were blended to present the best contender. What would the recipe for that look like? Clearly, its all about what is in the judges glass.
First, let me note that I understand where S cerev is coming from; I’m an engineer by trade and personality (if you Google “anal personality” my picture comes up), so I also tend to focus on “the numbers”. But I see beer evaluation as an aesthetic process, not a scientific one; the important point is how the beer is perceived, not what it’s numbers are. The Guidelines are just that - guidelines that should be taken as a whole to describe a beer. I get to designate my beers’ styles as I see fit, even if the numbers aren’t exactly “right”. And I see that as an issue of judgment rather than integrity.
I have a Pale Ale that I’ve been brewing for years now. It’s a bit darker and higher in gravity than the guidelines say it “should” be. But it’s my beer, and I choose to call it a Pale Ale even if it’s closer to some other style. If I entered it in a competition as a PA, I’d expect it might be dinged for these excesses, but then again, maybe not. Maybe the judges would perceive it to be a solid PA, to their tastes. Just because the numbers say it’s gravity is too high doesn’t mean that it TASTES like it’s too high. Aesthetic judgment…
This is how I feel as well. I work in a detail intensive field as well and have a pretty OCD approach to my brewing. I respect styles and brewing to style, but I also know that any number of factors have an effect on how a beer is perceived, not just OG. Water chemistry alone can totally change the perception of the same recipe. On the occasion I enter a comp, I enter the beer in the category that it tastes most like, not by using a rigid OG test. And the vast majority of the time the beer falls within the OG range. But as said, there is also a risk in entering a beer too big for style, and it is the judges job to tell me if my beer is within style. Playing the integrity card is lame and ridiculous.
What comes to mind is something that was done by a couple of repeat Ninkasi winners. I know because ive heard them say it in interviews. Blending.
So if being 5 pts to high in OG is a problem, imagine back when there were no limits, entering 60+ beers and many of those were blended to present the best contender. What would the recipe for that look like? Clearly, its all about what is in the judges glass.
[/quote]
Please show me where blending or post adjustment is called out in the rules as being verboten. Gordon posted his recipe for a blended beer, the only thing ambiguous thing about it was “blend to taste”.
There are some beers that are best made by blending. Gueuze comes to mind. Commercial brewers do it all of the time, to reduce production variation, or to make a new beer. Dogfish Head blends beers to make Burton Baton. Bells blends Expedition and Double ream stout, sticks it into a barrel, and the result is Black Note. Hey barrels are post adjustment, aren’t they? A blend of your beer, residual booze you didn’t make left in the barrel, and wood falovors.
Recently there have been discussion here on adjusting the pH of the finished beer to enhance the taste. Is that adjustment forbidden? Show me where it is stated that you can’t do that before entering.
My $0.02 is at least specify what you did in the recipe. If it won, it won.
Hey, it is just beer, I will be picking some hops, enjoying the day, and going to a friends house to have some cask ale. Enjoy your Labor Day weekend everybody.
One final observation. The gold medal recipe OG/FG calculates out to 4.3% ABV, and the top of the scale in the guidelines is 4.6%. Not exactly what I would call much of a problem.
In this case, we are not looking at two completely different beer styles. Category 8C is basically a bigger version of 8B. Any beer that fits 8B basically fits 8C from a sensory point of view. The main differentiator between the subcategories is gravity; therefore, technically, the beer should have been entered as an ESB, not a Special Bitter.
“History: Strong bitters can be seen as a higher-gravity version of best bitters (although not necessarily “more premium” since best bitters are traditionally the brewer’s finest product). Since beer is sold by strength in the UK, these beers often have some alcohol flavor (perhaps to let the consumer know they are getting their due). In England today, “ESB” is a brand unique to Fullers; in America, the name has been co-opted to describe a malty, bitter, reddish, standard-strength (for the US) English-type ale. Hopping can be English or a combination of English and American.”
With that said, ESB is a difficult subcategory in which to win category 8. I think that the problem stems from a lack of quality calibration standards. I am lucky in that the Oliver Breweries/Pratt Street Ale House still brews traditional British ale. The brewery side of this brewpub was originally built by Alan Pugsley. The pub side of the brewpub was originally called the Wharf Rat. It’s one of the few places in America where one can order an authentic British mild that was brewed by a British brewmaster in a British-designed brewhouse. The best milds are brewed in May in support of CAMRA’s “Mild May” campaign. The brewmaster at Oliver Breweries is a British bloke named Steve Jones. If NHC ends up being held in Baltimore, the Pratt Street Ale House is within walking distance of the Baltimore Convention Center for those who like British-style ales and American-style ales with a British twist.
Here’s a time lapse video of a batch of Iron Man Pale Ale fermenting in modern Yorkshire-style open fermentation vessel (notice the Yorkshire-style shower head looking device that is used to fill the fermentation vessel): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGIThQ7w0ls&feature=youtu.be
By the way, that’s a Ringwood fermentation. Fermentation is complete in three days.
This whole discussion is predicated on the assumption that the beer brewed hit all of the parameters in the recipe. If you can say that every time you have brewed a beer it ended up in the bottle exactly like it was on paper, my hat is off to you. I certainly can’t say that.
I bet, as others have said, it was a mighty fine beer that tasted like an 8B. Congrats to the winner!
While I can absolutely understand the OP’s argument, and somewhat agree with it, I also believe that telling entrants “If your beer is X points out of the style’s range it will be penalized or disqualified” would just encourage people to be deceitful about it.
I’ve never felt the need to enter my beer in a competition so I really have no idea how the judges work this stuff out. Do they get out a hydrometer and check the gravity or just go by whatever the entrant puts on the entry form? Do they check the SRM against a color chart?
Category 8b goes up to 1.048 OG. 8c is above 1.048. There’s plenty of overlap on IBU and SRM so gravity is clearly what sets these categories apart.
Cheating or a lack of integrity would depend on the intent of the entrant. The only logical reason I can think of for entering a bigger beer would be a rebrew that ended up bigger, since this is for the second round. I like to assume people generally have good intentions (the first time, anyway- burn me once, shame on you, burn me twice, shame on me) so let’s go with that.
Either way, it tasted better than all other beers entered in 8a,b, and c so it won. Congrats to the winning brewer.
There is no gravity check (you couldn’t check OG anyway) and I have never seen any comp where you had to prpovide that info. If a judge checks color, it’s a personal check, not a requirement. And it isn’t the most stringent check.
Look, this is a hobby competition for amateurs. I just don’t see what the big deal is.
Here’s a challenge. Look up the stats for Special Bitter. Explain how a brewer could hit the high end of the ABV without going above the high end of OG or below the low end of FG.
