Australian Amateur Brewing Championship

[dan@twtr_dan]

+ finally full results.... https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7-x6q2NS-7KSi1LSnEta0toZTA/view

Hmm IPA was judged but my cider not listed..

 

[barls]

i look forward to the score sheets as both my beers went from 40+ point beers down to high 20 and low 30.

 

[PaleRider]

i look forward to the score sheets as both my beers went from 40+ point beers down to high 20 and low 30.

yeah mine went down a few points.... but to be honest I was kind of expecting it given the distance travelled / handling etc....
When I saw this pic on the AABC facebook last week I was just hoping mine weren't in the grain sacks in the back of the trailer....

 

[dan@twtr_dan]

Geez..no wonder. They would be empty though? There is quite a bit of spread in the results across most categories. A worse case example here but if you look at APA 41 down to 19.. Given all our entries were top 3 in each state and would have scored high 30's/low 40's.. the low scores need some explaining??

 

[PaleRider]

Geez..no wonder. They would be empty though?

You'd hope so.

 

[NealK]

Really! I know that we are amateurs and it takes a lot of hard work from volunteers to put even a small competition together but this is the pinnacle of Australian home brewing. The fact that it has taken sooo long to get the results out was a touch annoying but when the organisers can't even be bothered to put them in place order speaks volumes. Passionate brewers that have worked hard to win a spot in their state championships deserve better communication than this. Again I understand the pressure involved in organising competitions but the results are what most brewers look for, and look back at for reference. If this set of results represents the best that can be done at a national level then I'm very disappointed.

edit - too harsh

 

[Codehopper]

When I saw this pic on the AABC facebook last week I was just hoping mine weren't in the grain sacks in the back of the trailer....

In the photo, the bottle visible upside down seems very empty to me, so I'm buying that other bottles are empty, too.

Another thing is that probably a good half of styles require rebrewing - anything xPA and wheat, at least. If those were not rebrewed, they might have lost points for being not fresh enough. If they were rebrewed, they might have turned out not as good as the original entries. Yes, I know, we all here are proud of consistency of our brew etc, but things may happen. I hope that scoresheets would be readable enough to explain things (my personal experience is that 60% of them are not).

Otherwise, I feel like giving a credit where credit is due, it was fairly well organised competition. On a scale from 0 to 10 (the latter being the last one in NSW - hat tip to Stuart Upton and ISB folks), this was a firm 8. The last year's comp in Adelaide was, probably, 5.5.

What still makes me shaking my head.. was it really difficult to sort the results by score in descending order?

 

[Parks]

You guys seem to think AABC is some professional organisation with directors and funding and business experience.

AABC doesn't really exist. It's a committee made up of the state delegates. Considering how amateurishly run some of the state competitions are you can't expect miracles. AABC could become a properly run business but there is no way to fund that. Every dollar goes to running the comp and going back to the entrants.

By all means offer constructive criticism, voice your expectations but don't think Bob that works full time and has to get his kids to bed is going to have a week of sleepless nights after the comp just to bust out scores of those who didn't place.

I know someone says it every year but if you want things to be done better - get involved. Make a difference.

 

[pcqypcqy]

Not complaining: But I did notice some entries that wouldn't have benefited from a re-brew got marked down heavily at AABC c.f. QABC. I'll be interested to see the score sheets, but in one example (stouts) I can't see how a 44.5 point beer only gets 29.5, and a 40.5 beer only gets 26.5. A few points reduction is fair enough if you've got better judges and better beers to compare against, and maybe freshness is an issue as well. But 15 points doesn't seem right.

 

[Parks]

The biggest change is scores can also be because different judges have different levels of perception to faults and also have different experience levels with the style of beer they are judging.

One judge might be bad at picking up oxidation and give you 40. The next might think it's heavily oxidised and give you 20.

One judge might have been to Belgium and drank all the best examples of Belgian beers, the next might be going purely off the vague ranges the BJCP uses to cover such beers.

It sucks, but it's reality.

 

[Hermies]

The biggest change is scores can also be because different judges have different levels of perception to faults and also have different experience levels with the style of beer they are judging.

One judge might be bad at picking up oxidation and give you 40. The next might think it's heavily oxidised and give you 20.

One judge might have been to Belgium and drank all the best examples of Belgian beers, the next might be going purely off the vague ranges the BJCP uses to cover such beers.

It sucks, but it's reality.

And that is why I don't enter comps any more is because of the inconsistencies . I had one beer judged by a reputable accredited BJCP he said it was a solid 40pts . Put it in a comp and it only received average 32pts .

 

[beachy]

By all means offer constructive criticism, voice your expectations but don't think Bob that works full time and has to get his kids to bed is going to have a week of sleepless nights after the comp just to bust out scores of those who didn't place.

I know someone says it every year but if you want things to be done better - get involved. Make a difference.

If the features of the software that all entries were registered through had been used correctly results would have been available within 24 hrs as they are in every ANHC year now.

 

[Parks]

If the features of the software that all entries were registered through had been used correctly results would have been available within 24 hrs as they are in every ANHC year now.

By all means tell me more about the software that everyone is using for the first time and let's just "click and hope for the best".

 

[user 37368]

in one example (stouts) I can't see how a 44.5 point beer only gets 29.5, and a 40.5 beer only gets 26.5. A few points reduction is fair enough if you've got better judges and better beers to compare against, and maybe freshness is an issue as well. But 15 points doesn't seem right.

The 44.5 point winning stout in QABC was about 3 months old and was effectively the same recipe as the best in show from gcabc which was about 5 months old when judged. Freshness isn't an issue there.

 

[beachy]

By all means tell me more about the software that everyone is using for the first time and let's just "click and hope for the best".

You want me to explain the process of data entry and scanning to you ?

If there are now 1100 unscanned score sheets to deal with I don't envy the person with that job.

 

[Parks]

No, I want people to understand just because software can do something doesn't mean you just set it up, click a button and let it go.

New software (to our comps), new people using it, checks and balances to have plus limited volunteer resources. You don't want to just release scores without sanity checking the results.

And as you say 1100 score sheets to scan (not sure the actual number).

 

[pcqypcqy]

The 44.5 point winning stout in QABC was about 3 months old and was effectively the same recipe as the best in show from gcabc which was about 5 months old when judged. Freshness isn't an issue there.

Agreed, that's my point. I can understand anything hoppy struggling with the limited re-brew times for the eastern states and the long trip over, as well as the potential for handling and storage to complicate things. But something like a stout should hold up very well to all of that.

 

[pcqypcqy]

No, I want people to understand just because software can do something doesn't mean you just set it up, click a button and let it go.

New software (to our comps), new people using it, checks and balances to have plus limited volunteer resources. You don't want to just release scores without sanity checking the results.

And as you say 1100 score sheets to scan (not sure the actual number).

Hey Parks, putting my hand up now to get involved for next year's QABC on the scoring/data side. Will there be a volunteer portal through the same website again?

 

[Parks]

Hey Parks, putting my hand up now to get involved for next year's QABC on the scoring/data side. Will there be a volunteer portal through the same website again?

There will be but I will contact Colin (registrar) and we will arrange that with you directly. The volunteer section is more for the game day lackeys where no real pre-planning or involvement is required on their part.

 

[Colbatt]

I know someone says it every year but if you want things to be done better - get involved. Make a difference.

I emailed an offer to help get the scoresheets out a week ago but haven't had a response. The offer still stands.

 

[user 37368]

I've heard some reports about aabc but it's second hand coming from me, maybe someone can answer these questions;

How many categories did each table judge and were the paired accordingly? I heard there was 10 tables.
Were the beers sorted and organised for each table to ensure there was no palette issues?
How many beers would the average table of judges have judged?

 

[kaiserben]

... but when the organisers can't even be bothered to put them in place order speaks volumes.

If beers are judged at multiple tables (which I assume most categories probably would at Nationals) then the scores don't really show a true order, so putting them in order isn't really appropriate.

The top few at each table subsequently get judged off against each other to determine the winner and place-getters.

That's why you'll sometimes see a lower score coming first and a higher score finishing outside the top 3. Different judges at different tables with harsher/easier scoring.

 

[beachy]

If beers are judged at multiple tables (which I assume most categories probably would at Nationals) then the scores don't really show a true order, so putting them in order isn't really appropriate.

The top few at each table subsequently get judged off against each other to determine the winner and place-getters.

That's why you'll sometimes see a lower score coming first and a higher score finishing outside the top 3. Different judges at different tables with harsher/easier scoring.

There is no reason to judge across multiple tables when there is a maximum of 21 entries per category.

 

[dan@twtr_dan]

So as I break Ocsober out of spite (this is going to cost me $25..) I write the following and apologies in advance to all. Maybe ANHC are watching this thread. I don't want to stoop to this level but I am going to. I don't frequent these forums very often so I'm sorry what I am going to put down. There are other thread topics regarding competitions and one in this forum asking 'have you have entered a home brew competition?', so I write this off topic a little.

Dummy spit.. ::NOW::

I had two entries an IPA and a Cider. The IPA as I taste it now deserved the rating it got. Moving on, but *...

The Cider is no result recorded, did the bottle get picked up with the IPA at the drop off point or what happened throughout to not get served? I don't know and frankly I am not going to waste my time anymore trying to find out. But not being notified that your submission wasn't received/judged is pretty hard one to swallow. It disrespects the process, State representation and those who may have been asking that placed in state comp 4th downward 'WTF, why were there only 10 cider submissions in all of Australia, I could have entered mine?, And before anyone says 'maybe my wife drank it..' it was brewed as a graf and fermented with saison and brettanomyces strains (only joking hunny).

* Back to the IPA and comment about XPA+ hop based / wheat beers needing rebrewing. Yep, especially traveling across the Nullabor Plain to WA where there is some fine weather. If you brewed it again or not, those three days in transit east to west will crush that flavour and aroma anyway in my view. Those are the breaks with an Australian competition and many others probably impacted.. There are approximatley 10 days after finding out if you placed in a State comp to AABC submission date (local state deadline collection) to submit your entries for collection. Lesson learned. I'm gunna have all the beer entry ingredients, all strains of yeast starters at the ready etc etc to make this happen - NOT. Especially in regional Victoria where all you can get is dried yeast, god knows how old the grain is and old oxidised hops with unknown AA%. Only way to do it is to source fresh again from the city, rebrew and then hand deliver it under temperature control. If anyone with a hop forward beer managed to rebrew between the state and country comp then kudos, you deserve all the respect I can give. But IF I did this and then my freshly brewed IPA doesn't make to the table like the cider, I am going to be not pissed but unconscious with this finding.

20+ point spread in results, maybe some granted but as previous mentioned not expected in sound beers. Even if with 21 entries, if split across two tables you would have a baseline beer to standardise the judge scoring between judges, and then the tables 1+2.

The variance to determine a fault e.g. oxidisation as mentioned, I can't see how that amongst all (3?) judges that were writing their comments in confidence prior, then discussing the results. A low score would be totally insulting to those that received it, especially if was a 40+ point prior. Five point spread or seven can't drag a beer that low? It is almost a mercy judge.

Not getting results released in a timely manner has various issues about it. But seriously...

In anticipation of someone shooting a reply - why not get involved? I do. Be it at the minor level to support the weekend at state level, and take the Monday off following as workplace has a zero tolerance of D&A and $10K fine and instant dismissal if positive tested..

Comment 'that's why I don't enter competitions'. This has really got me thinking that too, but if I don't I'm not going to improve as a brewer. Especially this as a sandpit to test recipes and get feedback to maybe one day aspire to be in the industry.

So that is it for me this year. Dummy going back in.

P.S. And as a final, if you would like to sponsor me for Ocsober (not that it makes sense anymore) you can google it and find me as FLYSOBER.

Over and out. Dan

 

[biggo]

I emailed an offer to help get the scoresheets out a week ago but haven't had a response. The offer still stands.

Who did you email I have not seen it?

 

[biggo]

yeah mine went down a few points.... but to be honest I was kind of expecting it given the distance travelled / handling etc....
When I saw this pic on the AABC facebook last week I was just hoping mine weren't in the grain sacks in the back of the trailer....

This was the clean up the next morning I guarantee this is not how the beers where transported.

 

[Colbatt]

Who did you email I have not seen it?

On the Comp website http://aabc.westcoastbrewers.com/contact I filled out the form which indicated an email would go to Sean

 

[biggo]

On the Comp website http://aabc.westcoastbrewers.com/contact I filled out the form which indicated an email would go to Sean[
PM me here seems the software didn't send anything... Yay!

 

[Colbatt]

I've emailed you at [email protected]

 

[dan@twtr_dan]

..
So that is it for me this year. Dummy going back in.
..

Well after calming down and sucking on my dummy, I remembered my old facebook account fired it up and PM'd AABC today. Bottle of cider was not received for the record but the IPA was.