I figured it goes with our history of silly names. Like the issue of Zymurgy dedicated to Homebrewers’ Favorite Beers that gets a much different name. :
Given the popularity and number of entries, that’s just not going to happen. The first round is a crapshoot these days. If you come to terms with that, you’ll be much happier in life 
The key would be in changing the selection process for first round sites from a volunteer model to a recruitment model. IOW, find the areas of the country with more active and higher ranking judges and recruit those areas. The current model is people ask to host a site. If they hosted previously, they’re given first crack at it next year, regardless of how well the site ran previously. I’m not sure if the AHA wants to take that on.
But yeah, I’ve come to terms with the crapshoot aspect. I’m probably more disappointed that I didn’t get to tease anyone I know about how they scored my beer than about not advancing.
Judge pool size is one issue.
Getting the organizers is another. We’ve had the same small handful of people pass those roles up here in Seattle for the last 7 or 8 years. These tend to be the same people who run the local comps. Frankly, those who have been doing it year after year get burnt out and need someone else to step up.
The problem is not with the 2015 BJCP guidelines. The problem is with how a competition uses those guidelines. Competitions are free to group styles into any award categories they want, and if they create some giant specialty category like NHC did this year, that is an issue the competition created, not the BJCP guidelines.
This was a learning experience for everyone since it was the first year NHC used the new guidelines, and I’m sure they’ll make some adjustments and improvements next year.
[quote]I’m probably more disappointed that I didn’t get to tease anyone I know about how they scored my beer than about not advancing.
[/quote]
Ha!
I’ve mostly come to terms with the crapshoot nature. Judging Denver did a lot for me there. I had one beer I vehemently defended more than I’ve ever done for an entry. Other minibos judges wanted it kicked first, but clearly neither understood the style. I pushed it to Finals.
Myself, got a nice scoresheet detailing how my Schwarz was “way too roasty” while the other judge said it was “very smooth but lacking any roast”
…whatev, I’ll take my 37 and try again next year.
I have read many of my scoresheets with this on there. One judge picks up astringency and the other says its creamy.
I heard more than a few problems with both judging and organization this year. Lots of grumbling about collapsing the styles back into something similar to 2008. I know there are always complaints but it seemed elevated this year.
I may have given impression I’m have a problem with current category entry numbers. I don’t.
No one seemed to be complaining when two years ago pilsner in SD had 5 entries while IPA had 87.
as Dennis said the problem isn’t the 2015 guidelines.
I support separate entry limit for mead and cider because entry numbers are tiny and we’ve got room for more without changing anything.
Add one category for American Wild, move fruit and spice to Fruit Beer, couple other tiny tweaks…and done.
Last year I entered a bourbon barrel aged english barleywine, one judged noted that the barrel completely overwhelmed the barleywine, the other said there was no barrel character :o
Apparently this is fairly common, but also very frustrating especially when you only have 2 judges for your beer and they say opposite things.
Had my CDA recently at a local comp (not NHC) and one judge said there was no hops and it tasted like a Porter and was good but not representative of the style, the other judge talked about massive piney hop aroma flavor and maybe even tone down on the hops. No hop judge scored it a 31, good hops judge scored a 37 and it took 2nd place CDA, so I’m really not going to complain too much but reading the feedback you’d think they weren’t even judging the same beer. They obviously didn’t talk to each other at all. They just looked and the scores were within 6 points and called it good.