Australian Amateur Brewing Championship

[Pennywise]

So if i'm selected, will it be shipped to the other side of the globe

tom

No

 

[brendo]

What I posted on another forum after reading my judging sheets, I too feel your pain!!!

I didn't judge those specific categories, so can't really comment on your actual beers.

It is disappointing when the beers are judged poles apart like that. All I can say on the matter is:

different comp, different judges, different level of subjectivity and personal bias (just the way the coookie crumbles)

your beer travelled from SA - not really sure on the logistics of how this was achieved and under what conditions, but in my opinion beer is a fragile beast and doesn't travel that well, so some degredation is common.

Don't know what to tell you otherwise.

Agree with a lot of the other comments - there are definitely some issues with the process, but that said no process is perfect. I also agree fully with Father Jack - one way to lift the bar is to get involved, do the study, sit the exam and judge beers the way you would like to see yours judged.

 

[Fourstar]

The appearance scoring needs attention. there is a lot of inconsistency with judges.

A perfectly haze free black beer should not be described as opaque, it is either clear or bright.
I also understand that a clear & bright beer should be both full scoring as it gives advantage to brewers with filtration systems & creates an uneven playing field.

Err, thats not completely correct mate.

opaque
   /oʊˈpeɪk/ Spelled [oh-peyk] IPA adjective, noun, verb, opaqued, opaquing.
–adjective
1.
not transparent or translucent; impenetrable to light; not allowing light to pass through.

If i get a jet black beer that is not 'cloudy with yeast, protein or starch' but is nothing but black, it is opaque. if it is black but has easily percievable highlights and i can see my fingers clearly through ssaid highlights, its bright. if its opaque and cloudy with haze/matter, its cloudy.

nonetheless, these beers (porter and stout categories) are acceptable to be opaque or bright/clear anyway according to the guidelines. Either way, if one judge percieves* opaque and the other bright, that part of the appearance scoring would both achieve points.

* judging is all about your perception of the beer palced infront of you, not of the judges sitting beside you. Of course, you will learn all about this in the BJCP course.

 

[mckenry]

Err, thats not completely correct mate.

opaque
   /oʊˈpeɪk/ Spelled [oh-peyk] IPA adjective, noun, verb, opaqued, opaquing.
adjective
1.
not transparent or translucent; impenetrable to light; not allowing light to pass through.

If i get a jet black beer that is not 'cloudy with yeast, protein or starch' but is nothing but black, it is opaque. if it is black but has easily percievable highlights and i can see my fingers clearly through ssaid highlights, its bright. if its opaque and cloudy with haze/matter, its cloudy.

nonetheless, these beers (porter and stout categories) are acceptable to be opaque or bright/clear anyway according to the guidelines. Either way, if one judge percieves* opaque and the other bright, that part of the appearance scoring would both achieve points.

* judging is all about your perception of the beer palced infront of you, not of the judges sitting beside you. Of course, you will learn all about this in the BJCP course.

so many people think opaque is what translucent is. WHY?

 

[geoffd]

McHenry I dont believe opaque & translucent are remotely the same.

Fourstar, perhaps we have different understandings & perhaps I will learn to view it differently from the BJCP course.

I consider any stout no matter how dark or impenetrable to light if it is a clean haze free colour, then it could be described as clear (or bright if that is actually discernable).
Opaque (to my mind) would be if it has severe hop haze, protein haze or stirred up yeast sludge to the point that it cannot be seen through. in the case of a very dark stout it would appear murky.

I understand your arguement that it can be marked as opaque & given full points.
I've seen stouts too often score 3/5 for appearance, perhaps only for not having a big enough head (hard in a lowly carbonated beer) are they giving 0/2 for head just because it isnt big enough regardless of texture or lace? Unfortunately the scoresheets lack specifity (to use a kevin rudd term) in that each dimention of the appearance should have a range of 0-2pts in 1/2 point incremens for circling, that way we would better understand what is being marked down.

i.e.
Colour...adjetives for circling .....scores for circling 0, 0.5, 1
Clarity...adjetives for circling .....scores for circling 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2
Head.....adjetives for circling .....scores for circling 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 & Total over 5

Particular perceptions of a stylistically accurate colour can still be diffrensiated in overall impression section... I.e if a brown ale had particularly attractive ruby highlights.

Anyway it's always good to debate these things, no offence taken if you disagree, my god dont get me started on the BJCP style guidelines for stout, i'll be cussing' & a swearin' & a wavin' me fist

 

[Stuster]

I'm with Fourstar on the opaque issue (and that's how my comments in the strong stouts should be taken if any are interested). A quick search of the BJCP site came up with this info from a live calibration scoring of some beers by some of the top BJCP judges which seems to back up this interpretation of the use of the word. Link.

It's a shame people are not happy with the feedback. I think the judging was a bit rushed and it's certainly something the organisers of the next nationals should think about. In terms of the beers getting different scores, I think there a number of possibles. 1 is that different judges just have different criteria, despite training and so on. 2 is the order of the judging can affect the scoring - if you are after a good/bad example this can change the perception, later in the flight more subtle examples can get judged more harshly than they should be. 3 is that beers can be affected by travel and/or there can be individual variation between bottles despite the best sanitation procedures. In case swaps of the past, I've had feedback from others that the beer was off in some way, while others were happy with it. Nothing I can pinpoint to explain it.

I agree with you on the stout guidelines, BJCP or AABC. The Foreign export category is really two styles in one. Could be balanced to dry or sweet,... :lol:

 

[AndrewQLD]

Something like this Father Jack?



I think one of the problems is the badly laid out and designed judging sheet that is being used in our comps.
That's page 1 of 2, certainly is a lot more descriptive and would help the judges whose hand writing is appalling.

Andrew

 

[geoffd]

I'm with Fourstar on the opaque issue (and that's how my comments in the strong stouts should be taken if any are interested). A quick search of the BJCP site came up with this info from a live calibration scoring of some beers by some of the top BJCP judges which seems to back up this interpretation of the use of the word. Link.

Lol... Stuster; 3 wrongs dont make a right

 

[Pennywise]

Something like this Father Jack?

View attachment 42195

I think one of the problems is the badly laid out and designed judging sheet that is being used in our comps.
That's page 1 of 2, certainly is a lot more descriptive and would help the judges whose hand writing is appalling.

Andrew

^ I really like this

 

[bigfridge]

Something like this Father Jack?

View attachment 42195

I think one of the problems is the badly laid out and designed judging sheet that is being used in our comps.
That's page 1 of 2, certainly is a lot more descriptive and would help the judges whose hand writing is appalling.

Andrew

What a hoot ...... you realise that this was designed by Mr 'Chineese' Hop himself ! I haven't seen it used in years and never outside of Queensland - with good reason.

Let NOT those without judge training throw the first stone ...

Dave

 

[AndrewQLD]

What a hoot ...... you realise that this was designed by Mr 'Chineese' Hop himself ! I haven't seen it used in years and never outside of Queensland - with good reason.

Let NOT those without judge training throw the first stone ...

Dave

Thought someone would get a laugh, although it has it's merits some of the descriptors could use a work up.
I am pretty sure I downloaded this file from some obscure American site about 10 years ago. However I could be wrong.

Andrew

Edit: On second thoughts you could be right Dave, I see I downloaded this in 2007.

 

[sama]

Cant seem to find anywhere the cut off date for entrys for AABC 2011,does anyone have this info.Thankyou.

 

[np1962]

Cant seem to find anywhere the cut off date for entrys for AABC 2011,does anyone have this info.Thankyou.

There is some info at SABSOSA
Mainly directed at SA brewers, might pay to contact them or your State comp organisers to see if any arrangements have been made to transport entries from your state.
Cheers
Nige

 

[MattC]

Entry forms and drop off points/ postage addresses dont appear to be finalised yet, when they are, you should find them HERE.

Cheers

 

[THE DRUNK ARAB]

Follow Nige's link to SABSOSA and you will
see the cut-off date for entries is the 8th of October.

Cheers
Mark

 

[sama]

link to order form,closing date etc

AABC ENTRY FORM<DATES etc

 

[Bribie G]

I thought the Nats were early November - according to the QABC site the Nats are " normally early November".

Many brewers in the State comps would have been under the impression that, depending on their results at State level, they could re-brew some styles such as Mild or Dry Stout that benefit from being entered fresh and young, but as the State results won't be available till only a couple of weeks before the Nats deadline this won't be possible.

Could we please have some definite dates announced a year ahead? Many brewers put in a lot of time and effort planning and brewing for the comp "circuit" - club, State then Nats and, as the standard of home brewing progresses from year to year, it would be nice if the competition schedules would enable brewers to be able to plan a little more accurately.

Edit:
As it is, I have indeed brewed a number of "shadow brews" in case I am fortunate enough to win a place in the State comp but it would be good if we didn't have to second-guess the system every year.

 

[np1962]

Bribie,
The dates have been on the AABC website since March at least, possibly earlier.
I do agree that it would be ideal if there was a six week gap between State comp results and Nationals, I see NSW will have longer than this, but the date of AABC has been known for quite some time.
Nige

 

[Bribie G]

Point taken. I shouldn't have relied on the QABC site I suppose ( I do realise that there just isn't the "manpower" available to keep it constantly up to date)
Have to keep my ear to the ground more carefully next year.

:icon_cheers:

 

[Wolfy]

Point taken. I shouldn't have relied on the QABC site I suppose ( I do realise that there just isn't the "manpower" available to keep it constantly up to date)
Have to keep my ear to the ground more carefully next year.

Or even better, keep your eye on the official AABC website: http://www.aabc.org.au/