75 replies to this topic

[Jimvy]

Also, here's an important safety tip if you want to re-take the written. If you're not doing the tasting part, they only give you 2.5 hours instead of 3. They neglected to tell him that so he hadn't finished yet when they came to pick up his exam. He pointed out that they hadn't told him that up front and so he had budgeted his time for 3 hours rather than 2.5. So they gave him an extra 10 minutes to finish up but he had to rush.

That's crappy. I had wondered how they'd manage this. From everything I've seen, it looks like they don't adjust the time, but I guess they do....sucky.

[Thirsty]

Hey on a side note, I got my sheets back from the NHC, and they used a differsnt format scoresheet. Does anyone know if this is just for this particular round, or are they phasing these new sheets in?

[Sidney Porter]

Hey on a side note, I got my sheets back from the NHC, and they used a differsnt format scoresheet. Does anyone know if this is just for this particular round, or are they phasing these new sheets in?

They have been using them for several yrs for the 2nd round of national, started in Denver (i think). I think the theory is that the the beers have already been given scoresheets in the 1st round, but they still want to provide feed back for the 2nd round. Prior to Denver, the 2nd round would take 2 days. (the judges were paying to go to the conference but were spending the first 2 days judging).

[Zulu]

Apprentice here, have judged 4 comps and done the study group but was not confident in my ability to write the exam yet so did not sit it in April. Wrote a dummy exam with our group and this is what determined I would not sit.However, Chief judges often dont help the beginner, I asked not to do Belgians and ended up first session doing Strong Belgians - well I was so pickled come lunch the second session was worth NOTHING . I was however put with a Senior Judge and he did discuss each beer after a writing session first , which meant I did learn a whole bunch on strong Belgians (which IMHO should have been put in the last session of the day).I find the best Judging has been if we have at least 3 or 4 judges on a flight, and some discussion takes place, this helps me learn more about flavors and aromas I have difficulty with. I know it is not a good beer but cannot define why - having a better judge help me define it is tremendous value.Part of the issue IMHO is the culture, some have this superior attitude , not many, but .... I judged with one guy like this and when asking questions was told.... just put what you think .... I learned nothing that day and told the head judge that as well.I think a peer review should be part of every single judging experience, everyone would learn from that. A simple written closed poll after a session on each person at the table....

[Sidney Porter]

That's crappy. I had wondered how they'd manage this. From everything I've seen, it looks like they don't adjust the time, but I guess they do....sucky.

My uderstanding is that it itis up to the the descretion of the exam admin. (i don't think it should be up to him it should be a set rule)I re-took the tasting and probable spent 20 minutes on each beer. There is no way I would have spent that amount of time if I was taking the entire exam

[MtnBrewer]

Well, I have my first judging session under my belt. It was very interesting to see how the process works and to be part of it. I judged 10 stouts this morning and 8 Belgian strongs this afternoon. I think I did pretty well. I was paired with John both sessions and it was a huge help to have someone with his experience. One thing I did notice is that I was fairly fatigued by the end of both flights.

[3rd party JKor]

The 12oz. curls got to you?

[MtnBrewer]

The 12oz. curls got to you?

More like 2 oz. curls. No, it wasn't that. It was just hard to find something to say about the beer.

[3rd party JKor]

More like 2 oz. curls. No, it wasn't that. It was just hard to find something to say about the beer.

Scorecard 17: mmmmmmmm....Scorecard 18: blech!

[Stout_fan]

The hardest part is when the beer soured, and you HATE to drink it but you have to evaluate other items like malt/ hop balance, and any flavor that is under all that sourness. You just can't say, "It went bad. You're screwed. NEXT!"

[Thirsty]

The hardest part is when the beer soured, and you HATE to drink it but you have to evaluate other items like malt/ hop balance, and any flavor that is under all that sourness. You just can't say, "It went bad. You're screwed. NEXT!"

I was judging specialty 23 at the longshot and someone entered a molasses for fermentable only beer. It poured out of the bottle in chunks, seperated, and looked like a glop of mud in the glass with water floating on top. We of course needed to leave the feedback for all the sections including flavor, I was the youngest judge so I got to taste and describe to the rest of the table. Basically we had a tough time how to get it to add to 17 (comp minimum)

[MtnBrewer]

The hardest part is when the beer soured, and you HATE to drink it but you have to evaluate other items like malt/ hop balance, and any flavor that is under all that sourness. You just can't say, "It went bad. You're screwed. NEXT!"

There was one or two like that. I think the lowest score I gave was 20. But yeah, trying to find something positive and constructive to say is difficult in that situation.

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

There was one or two like that. I think the lowest score I gave was 20. But yeah, trying to find something positive and constructive to say is difficult in that situation.

Why would someone even submit a beer like this???

[MtnBrewer]

Why would someone even submit a beer like this???

Some people will submit a beer that they know is flawed just to find out what is flawed and what to do about it. I wouldn't do that myself but they pays their money so they gets their answer.

[Sidney Porter]

Why would someone even submit a beer like this???

1) They know something is wrong with it, but they don't have anyone local to taste it and tell them the problem.2) They only drink their own beer, and they have grown use to the flavor and they don't know it is there.3) They are throwing it up against the wall to see if it sticks. In most comps this doesn't work a bad beer isn't going to place.4) I blame kegs... I think that there are a lot of brewers that keg everything and have small infections, but their beer goes from the fermenter to the keg and is then kept at 40 degrees. For comps the beer may spend a few days to a week at room temp, during that time the infection is allowed to start to grow. By the time it is judge it is not the same beer that the brewer has on tap.

[Thirsty]

Why would someone even submit a beer like this???

The SA longshot was a free comp as well. I think some people just grabbed 4 bottles of every batch they made recently and entered. Many have the mindset that SA is looking for a new and unusual recipe/process to promote, and that even a shitty beer may capture their attention and open intrigue. Nope, its a normal BJCP comp and the only thing that catches their attn are the 5 BOS winners. Because of this there were a lot of "so so" entries, everyone trying to get a free entry to dazzle Jim Koch, there were a lot of bad scores. Lots of good beers too, the BOS winners were amazing.