Dean-that was bizzare.
As far as all beers fitting in a catagory, thanks to cat 23, they do. I’ve judged a few comps, entered a lot more. Competitions are getting harder to win, better beers are being brewed. That said, its still one of the best places to get honest feedback. A good beer may have a little DMS, I’m not one of those who pick that up easily, but whether we like the beer or not, if it has DMS in it, and it should not, then I want to know so I can do something to fix the problem. My goal is not to make beer that is good enough for me and my friends, but to make the best beer in the world. (A lofty goal, but if you don’t try for the summit, you’ll never reach it)
Have you taken this yet? http://www.homebrewersassociation.org/forum/index.php?topic=7555.0
You might even get a higher score than I did. ;D ;D
Btw… thanks, it was meant to be bizzare.
+1
I think by and large one will find that a well brewed beer will be reflected in the results of the score sheets. There will be subjectivity to some degree, and that is the nature of the system as there will be some palate differential from judge to judge but on average there is consensus within the judging IMO. I think the subtle differences from beer to beer within a style can be picked up by experienced judges most of the time. The variations witnessed by the OP could be due to subjectivity in the judging, but I think it’s more the exception than the rule in the BJCP.
Like most things in life, you only hear about the bad. If there were nothing but the problems you describe, then comps would have died out a long time ago. In fact, participation in comps is on the increase. If you’re satisfied with your beer, fine. I like to get other opinions to see what I can do to improve. I don’t always agree with those opinions, but I find that it’s valuable to me to at least consider what they say.
But they also judge on flaws in the beer that can come from process. That’s the part I find valuable.
I read the feedback and look for those things that were identified. Often I can detect something if I’m looking specifically for it. When its there I can then think of ways to improve the beer. Sometimes I won’t find what the feedback indicates as a problem, in that case I discount the comment.
I wouldn’t doubt that teh quality of the beers going to competition is improving as the number of entries is going up. Even if the quality isn’t becoming elevated as a percentage, the increased number of entries will mean there are relatively more good beers in a given category.
I became a judge because of multiple scoresheets with fewer than 50 words and unpredictable scores. In every case (back then 4 years ago) one was a pro brewer and the other was new to judging beer. Bad combination, especially for Cat 23 at NHC… So, I took time off from entering beers, judged for a bit and learned what competitions were improving the judge pool and investing in treating judges well so the comments would be useful.
Compare beer judging to wine judging and you’ll even appreciate the poor feedback. As I understand it, if your wine has a flaw it doesn’t score and you don’t get feedback.
I enter beers into competitions for feed back. Feed back is given by humans and therefore the quality can vary. I also like to try and enter the beers I think a really good into a couple of competitions. This allows me to get more of an average on the feedback notes. It also helps me to start recognizing when that particular beer is getting past its prime. If you brew a beer that you can taste mild flaws in I wouldn’t bother with entering it. I only enter beers I believe to be dialed, and hope to get some feedback that can make them even better. This year for first round one of my entries was a German Pils. I felt that it missed the mark a little on hop presence so I decided, last minute, to enter it as a Dortmunder as well. It took first place in the light lager but scored poorly in the pils category. So, once you’ve decided its good and there’s not detectable flaws then you have to pick the appropriate category or all is for not.
I have only entered a few comps over the years - mainly due to laziness on my part. I have received both good and bad feedback - meaning some feedback was valuable the other was obscure and not helpful at all. I always keep 2 bottles of every beer I enter in the comp to taste and read the comments by the judges. This helps me understand their perspective. Sometimes I get it, other times I do not.
I have learned from most of the feedback I received thankfully. I am not a big comp person, but I do enter them from time to time to benchmark my technique and beer.
How does one deal with failure or rejection in general? Don’t take it personally, try to keep a positive outlook and decide what you’ll differently if you try again. Keep trying until you succeed or give up.
Based on your scores, I’d say that you were doing something right. One of your beers got a 35, which is a good score. On a good day, it’s good enough for a win. Your beers that scored in the mid-20s might have been entered in the wrong style category or otherwise gotten dinged for not hitting style definitions, even though they were perfectly good.
Brewing for competition is different from brewing for yourself; you have to look at the guidelines first and figure how well your beer hits the style description before you enter it. Otherwise, bound to be disappointed.
If you’re wanting feedback on becoming a better brewer, which I think you are, describe the beers you entered in competition and the sort of feedback you got from the judges, especially Overall Impression. There are a lot of very experienced judges on these forums who will be able to explain what the judges were writing about, and perhaps why they gave you the scores they did.
I’d also suggest that you read Gordon Strong’s new book, since it gives a lot tips for entering beer in competition, and brewing better beer in general.
That’s only sometimes true. For categories like Belgian Specialty (16E) and Specialty (23A), the judges can, or should, judge “hedonically” if no set base style is mentioned.
It would have to be a bad bottle of Dogfish Head 60 minute, given as that’s one of the BJCP commercial examples for AIPA.
As a rule of thumb, a well-made beer which is entered in the right category, which has no technical flaws, should score in the mid-30s. It’s the intangible qualities - recipe, ingredients, freshness/proper aging - that lift beers in to the high 30s to 40s.
Strong brown ale might mean it’s a competitive Old Ale (19A) or possibly even a Baltic Porter (12C). Taste it while reading the guidelines for those styles and see how it stacks up.
I throw rocks at baby bunnies.
I just looked over those and it’s not carbonated enough to be a Baltic Porter but it might work as an Old Ale. Thanks!
As a judge myself, I can honestly tell you: The whole trouble with competitions is that they are judged by humans. And as such, there can be any number of things to screw up a human’s judgment.
- They might not be trained or certified in the BJCP program.
- They might have eaten onions or garlic the night before, or just smoked a cigarette, or didn’t bother to brush their teeth.
- They might have a head cold.
- Their palates might be fatigued from already having consumed dozens of beer samples.
- Their mom/spouse/children might not love them.
- They might have a really weak personality and believe that if the National judge sitting next to them detects the slightest hint of DMS or diacetyl, then by golly he must be right and it’s a terrible beer, even if they don’t detect the same thing.
- They might have time pressure to get that scoresheet out in less than 5 minutes.
It is for these reasons that I always recommend that if you want really good feedback from competitions, you NEED to enter each beer in not just one, not even just two, but THREE competitions. Then you’ll have at least 6-8 scoresheets, and can look at all of them at one time, and throw away the ones where the judges obviously did something stupid or didn’t know what the hell they were talking about. After throwing out half of the scoresheets, you’re left with maybe ~3 good scoresheets and can make improvements in the future based off those.
Seriously, this is exactly the process I’ve used to get the most out of competitions, and I think I’m making better beers because of it.
Having never entered a competition, can you enter the same beer (different bottles) in multiple categories? Seems like one that wouldn’t do well in one could do well in another. I would expect that marginal beers wouldn’t do well in either since they may not be clearly adhering to the style guidelines but can it be done?
Try this. Go to the BJCP website and look up the 2008 style guidelines, find the specifications for the beer you entered into the competition and look at the end where they give you the commercial examples. Go to your local beer store and see if you can find a few fresh examples that have been stored properly and compare it to your beer. When you do this make sure the’re all at the correct serving temp, sit in a quiet room with no distractions, and concentrate on what your experiencing. In addition while your on the BJCP site download a few copies of their score sheets and try to fill them out as you do your tasting. Then let us know how you rated your beer against the benchmark commercial samples. As was previously suggested read Gordon Strong’s new book Brewing Better Beer it will help you immensely.
Yeah, that’s almost always allowed.
+1, that’s just about the exact process I use to get the most out of competition feedback.
Yes. There’s nothing to keep you from entering the same beer in different categories. It’s sort of a waste of money, though. Better to sample your beer with the guidelines in front of you, figure out which category it best fits into, and enter it in the right category in the first place.