Judging...

[Martin the fish]

I'd love someone with some knowledge to try some of my beer. I doubt i get any chlorine problems as i use rain water. But as it's rainwater it's quite soft and PH neutral so there's bound to be some improvements i can make there. I can imagine loads of other things people with knowledge would correct me on but without anyone trying my brews it's just down to me and i'm still a rank novice.
I will be taking some of my brews to the next annual beerfest thingy over here and trying to get some people to try them. I'm happy enough with my brews-probably cos i haven't had a decent commercial/craftbrewed real ale for over 3 years now.

How can i improve my beers without knowing what to improve on? By brewing as much as i can and trying out new things/sticking with things i'm happy with. I'm trying all of that as much as i can.

[Barley Water]

I agree with Mr. Flack, I think getting your work critically evaluated by disinterested parties is very useful. The old saying "a skunk never smells his own odor" applies to brewing, at least for me. I enter three competitions every year, a couple of them are very large regional events that draw in excess of 1,000 entries each year. Although it is gratifying to win a metal, what I am really looking for are suggestions for improvement (along with a T-shirt of course). Those beers which make it to the second round get tasted by the most experienced judges in Texas and those are the score sheets I most want.

I make a few beers that I know will have a chance to metal because the formulation has been tested in competition before. For these beers, I am looking for that little tweek that will make the beer great. Often, I will send in beers which I know probably won't win anything and for those, I am looking to have somebody tell me what I am missing because frankly, sometimes I just don't get it when it comes to a particular style.

After I get the score sheets back, I try to sit down and sample the beer again while reviewing the comments. Often, I find that I just did not taste something that the judge found and with luck I can also figure out what is causing the issue so I can correct it next time. Of course nothing is perfect, sometimes the judges don't understand the style (a friend of mine got a comment back once that said "this double bock is just too malty") and sometimes the comments are just not useful. I keep a big notebook with notes on each batch I brew and I adjust things if I think that the comments are valid.

My big issue with guidelines in general is that I think they tend to take the creativity out of the process. The current BJCP guidelines are so specific that at times I think they almost dictate ingredients and processes. Overall though, nothing is perfect and I think on balance, at least for me, some involvement in the competition side of things has really improved the quality of the beers I brew (and after all, the ultimate goal is producing the "perfect pint", right?).

[Whorst]

Interesting comments. I wonder if the judge who will be judging my beers has ever been to the UK? Is he going to have to review guidelines as to how the beer is supposed to taste. Nothing beats hands on experience. The judging is on the 28th of June. As soon as I get info, I will post here.

[Barley Water]

It is interesting to read different people's opinion concerning the way beer competitions are conducted. I personally would not want to enter a contest where the "standard" was so tightly defined that the only variation would be the brewers process in producing the beer. I want enough latitude to be able to modify the formulation (and process) to be able to produce a somewhat different product while still adhearing to the style guidelines. Put another way, somebody who can make an exact clone of a particular beer is a technician in my opinion while somebody who produces a unique product gets close to being an artist. There is certainly nothing wrong with being a technician, but to me, the creative aspect of the hobby is the real draw.

In this country, homebrewers over the last 30 years or so have altered the general conception of what beer can be. We shamlessly stole ideas from your country as well as Germany and Belgium, plus others. Not only did we steal ideas, but we then started screwing around with them and came up with some pretty neat beers that are different enough to be called styles in their own right. I think beer contests should strive to encourage homebrewers to always "push the envelope" so to speak so we all can enjoy more diversity.

Having said that, I am going to do a clone Mild, straight out of a book this weekend (being the technician that I am). I am fighting the really big temptation to screw around with what I am sure is a tried and true formula which will produce a nice beer. Because I have never made a Mild before, I figure I should try to get close before going off on a tangent that may or may not work out. I plan to enter it into a contest in mid July so it will be interesting to see what happens. By the way Daab, the book I am using is written by a couple of English guys so I have some confidence that they know what they are talking about.

[anomalous_result]

Interesting comments. I wonder if the judge who will be judging my beers has ever been to the UK? Is he going to have to review guidelines as to how the beer is supposed to taste. Nothing beats hands on experience.

It would be a kick in the nuts if you placed poorly with a beer that might well be considered a winning beer in a UK competition but then any brewing competition is going to be subjective to a point.

I'm not sure how they score it , and whilst it may be true to say that judging is subjective to a point I do think the guidelines go a long way to providing an objective standard by which the beer is to be measured. Also I think judges here and judges across the pond would be largely in agreement over the faults in a beer, which is the most useful part of the process imo, for a homebrewer at least. It's just like judging bulls though, there's a standard and that's what the judges are looking to mark the beer against, doesn't mean it makes the best eating... or drinking... you get the idea.

[steve_flack]

There's a (blank) BJCP score sheet here

http://www.bjcp.org/SCP_BeerScoreSheet.pdf

Although the marking does include flaws and how well the beer fits the style, it also includes how good the beer is.

[Whorst]

I'm hoping they serve it at the right temperature. If it's served between 50-55F, then it's going to do well. I just finished the last half gallon with my father and it tastes amazing. This will no doubt be an interesting thread when I get the results back. Remember, I entered my Belgian Dubbel as well.

[lockwood1956]

In the UK there is a formalised proceedure for becoming a judge and becoming accepted as a member of the Guild of wine and beer judges....

Admission to the Guild is by examination.

Candidates for membership as wine judges must have at least four years of practical experience in wine making and must have acted as steward to a member of the Guild at an approved wine competition.

Candidates for membership as beer judges must have at least four years of practical experience in beer making and must have acted as steward to a member of the Guild at an approved beer competition.

All candidates must meet at least one of the following requirements:

have won two or more awards at approved shows where members of the National Guild of Wine and Beer Judges judged the appropriate classes.
In the smaller approved shows the awards must be First, Second or Third. In the larger Federation Shows and the National Show, Highly Commended is acceptable in classes of over 30 entries.
have acted as a judge at recognised Federation shows for at least two years.
Candidates must agree to accept the decision of the Examining Board.

Candidates, where possible, should be sponsored by a member of the Guild and ideally should have undergone a training course tutored by a Guild member who would agree to act as sponsor.

EXAMINATION PROCEDURE
Candidates should apply to the Hon. Secretary for the appropriate prospectus and application form (wine or beer). A list of approved shows will also be supplied on request.

There are two Chief Examiners, one for wine, the other for beer. Completed application forms should be sent with the first payment to the appropriate Chief Examiner, who will confirm acceptance or rejection of the application.

The examination consists of two parts.

The Part I Examination

Part I is organised regionally throughout the year and consists of examinations on the relevant parts of the Guild Handbook and on the Theory and Practice of wine making or beer making.
A fee is payable by each candidate applying to take Part I with a further fee payable when accepted for Part II.
Candidates must pass Part I before taking Part II of the examination. Candidates who fail Part I are sent a report giving reasons for failure and an indication when they may retake the examination.

The Part II Examination
Each Chief Examiner prepares a selection of wines or beers representative of the range of quality found in the major amateur shows.
This selection is judged by a panel of at least three examining judges prior to the examination, and master judging sheets are prepared against which to assess each candidate's performance.
The candidates are invited to judge the wines or beers according to the procedures laid down in this handbook. Candidates may also be required to undergo olfactory tests.
Each candidate's examination paper is assessed by the adjudicating panel, where necessary rechecking the wines or beers to clarify anomalies.
Candidates who fail Part II are sent a report giving reasons for failure and an indication when they may retake the examination.
Any unsuccessful candidate may apply for re-examination. After two re-examinations in either Part I or Part II, a candidate may continue only at the discretion of the appropriate Chief Examiner.
After each Part II examination the respective Chief Examiner (Wine or Beer) will send the names of the successful candidates to the Hon. Secretary who will then invite them to become members of the Guild.

[johnh]

It is interesting to read different people's opinion concerning the way beer competitions are conducted. I personally would not want to enter a contest where the "standard" was so tightly defined that the only variation would be the brewers process in producing the beer. I want enough latitude to be able to modify the formulation (and process) to be able to produce a somewhat different product while still adhearing to the style guidelines. Put another way, somebody who can make an exact clone of a particular beer is a technician in my opinion while somebody who produces a unique product gets close to being an artist. There is certainly nothing wrong with being a technician, but to me, the creative aspect of the hobby is the real draw.

I see what you're saying BW but I fundamentally disagree. True 'art' cannot be entered into competition. I remember the case where some researchers convinced the 'art' establishment to display work by an unknown artist. The work received critical acclaim until it turned out that the artist was actually a monkey. Contrast that with the first suspension bridge designers (technicians, if you will) who produced beautiful structures by combining insight with artistry.

To me that's the key, insight. Lack of skill or knowlegde (or worse still luck) can be confused with creativity. That's not to say that great beers cannot be created that way (the beauty of homebrewing is that the brewer can brew the beer they want) but it's not testing the skill of the brewer.

To be clear, I wasn't suggesting a clone. I was suggesting that a knowledgable person dreams up a specific, non-existant beer - maybe a perfect beer for them. I imagine that very few of us could even get close!

Although the marking does include flaws and how well the beer fits the style, it also includes how good the beer is.

I don't think it does, in fact I don't think it can. How can 'Flavor' objectively be given a mark out of 20 in the Belgian Speciality ale section, for example. Without an idea of what the brewer intended it's pure subjectivity.

[steve_flack]

I don't think it does, in fact I don't think it can. How can 'Flavor' objectively be given a mark out of 20 in the Belgian Speciality ale section, for example. Without an idea of what the brewer intended it's pure subjectivity.

In the BJCP guidelines it says that the brewer should say what style they were aiming for. The Belgian Speciality Ale category covers a wide range.

Comments: This is a catch-all category for any Belgian-style beer not fitting any other Belgian style category. The category can be used for clones of specific beers (e.g., Orval, La Chouffe); to produce a beer fitting a broader style that doesn’t have its own category; or to create an artisanal or experimental beer of the brewer’s own choosing (e.g., strong Belgian golden ale with spices, something unique). Creativity is the only limit in brewing but the entrants must identify what is special about their entry. This category may be used as an “incubator” for recognized styles for which there is not yet a formal BJCP category. Some styles falling into this classification include:

* Blond Trappist table beer
* Artisanal Blond
* Artisanal Amber
* Artisanal Brown
* Belgian-style Barleywines
* Trappist Quadrupels
* Belgian Spiced Christmas Beers
* Belgian Stout
* Belgian IPA
* Strong and/or Dark Saison
* Fruit-based Flanders Red/Brown

The judges must understand the brewer’s intent in order to properly judge an entry in this category. THE BREWER MUST SPECIFY EITHER THE BEER BEING CLONED, THE NEW STYLE BEING PRODUCED OR THE SPECIAL INGREDIENTS OR PROCESSES USED. Additional background information on the style and/or beer may be provided to judges to assist in the judging, including style parameters or detailed descriptions of the beer. Beers fitting other Belgian categories should not be entered in this category.

[johnh]

I initially thought that I had chosen a poor example but it could also prove my point. It must be accepted that because of the width of the category the brewer must state their intentions for judging to be valid at all. They presumably do this after they have tasted it . If the requirement was stated for a specific Belgian-style Ale then none of these extra regulations would be needed.

[ADDLED]

I remember the case where some researchers convinced the 'art' establishment to display work by an unknown artist. The work received critical acclaim until it turned out that the artist was actually a monkey.

The monkeys doing quite well for himself, has a permanent installation at Tate Modern, got a house in Knightsbridge, drives a Ferrari and is rumoured to be dating Kate Moss...

[johnh]

I remember the case where some researchers convinced the 'art' establishment to display work by an unknown artist. The work received critical acclaim until it turned out that the artist was actually a monkey.

The monkeys doing quite well for himself, has a permanent installation at Tate Modern, got a house in Knightsbridge, drives a Ferrari and is rumoured to be dating Kate Moss...

Ironically the monkey I was thinking about was called Peter! ... but he lived in a zoo in Sweden.

[johnh]

But more than a passing resemblance I fear....

[ADDLED]

He was definitely apeing his style.