Australian Amateur Brewing Championship

[ausdb]

WA was AABC not BJCP

Sorry Kook got confused seeing all the BJCP judging sheets, so WA was the same as the Nationals maybe thats why we did so well

 

[kook]

Sorry Kook got confused seeing all the BJCP judging sheets, so WA was the same as the Nationals maybe thats why we did so well

I can see how - we used a lot of BJCP material on the day such as BJCP judging guides, BJCP judge feedback forms etc.

The style guidelines used (and referenced on the website and entry pack) were AABC (2009 revision). These were also available to the judges printed on the day.

The score sheets were BJCP sheets. I personally think that this is a better laid out score sheet with more room for the judge to provide feedback. The ones we used 2007/2008 are good, but don't have quite as much room on them for notes, nor as complex descriptors.

 

[Stagger]

Just a quick update,
After a very successful 2009 AABC I have had to do some real work to catch-up. I will be sending the remainder of the trophies out hopefully next week, so hang tight.

I would like to send a warm thank you to all that attended the event in Canberra and hope you all had a great time (especially to the WA crew who made a extra effort).

See you all in Melbourne next year.

Cheers & Beers

Craig

 

[Brauhaus007]

Well done to everyone involved from the state & nationals. I entered the SABSOSA in 2007 with some kits & bits scored a second with a FES. Then got more into brewing broke the budget and bought a Mash Pilot System from Beerbelly. Did`nt enter any comps in 2008, enterd 6beers in 2009 SABSOSA for 2 first & 2second places. Entered those in the AABC scored 2 firsts a 4th & a 6th place. So I am as happy as a pig in s**t. I khow there are always some annomolies whith judgung but the feedback really helps. So thanks again to everyone involved :beer:


Now drinking
BelgianStrong Ale 7.5%
A.P.A 5.2%
I.P.A 7.2%
E.S.B 5.7%
Old Strong Ale 6.8%
F.E.S 6.0%

 

[megs80]

Hey all,

Great works to the guys in Canberra and to the winning brewers.

Can anyone tell me when I should expect my score sheets in the mail. There was 44.5 points difference in my state score and nationals score. I need to know what went wrong.

Cheers

 

[dj1984]

still waiting for mine too.

 

[dr K]

megs80, and other who quite rightly express concerns at score variations.
chances are nothing went wrong, the overall standard of judging in australia is far higher now than it was say 6 years ago, and the standard of judges at the recent AABC was possibly the highest ever assembled in Australia.
Judges are not gods, nor brewers prodigies.
Let us take take the case of the perfect machine, the electronic judge that has no fatigue and an equally perfect pallete and nose.
Our machine scores a beer at 35, the two other judges are equal at 30, all within range and a score of 95.
Equally the other two may have hit 40, again within range but the score is now 115.
Now at the Nationals the same beer is being judged, but without our machine, I will however intoduce the rider that the national judges were able to be within 5 points of the perfect machines score, they are, like the beers entered, pre-qualfied.
Regardless, we now have a range of 30 points, and that is without even considering bottle variations, serving variations or a rouge judge.
To have got to the Nats at all is a huge thing, and something to be justisfiably proud about, is a runner in the Melbourne Cup to be diminished by it's failure to win,or even place, perhaps, but it ran, and at the starters call had an equal chance.

k

 

[browndog]

megs80, and other who quite rightly express concerns at score variations.
chances are nothing went wrong, the overall standard of judging in australia is far higher now than it was say 6 years ago, and the standard of judges at the recent AABC was possibly the highest ever assembled in Australia.
Judges are not gods, nor brewers prodigies.
Let us take take the case of the perfect machine, the electronic judge that has no fatigue and an equally perfect pallete and nose.
Our machine scores a beer at 35, the two other judges are equal at 30, all within range and a score of 95.
Equally the other two may have hit 40, again within range but the score is now 115.
Now at the Nationals the same beer is being judged, but without our machine, I will however intoduce the rider that the national judges were able to be within 5 points of the perfect machines score, they are, like the beers entered, pre-qualfied.
Regardless, we now have a range of 30 points, and that is without even considering bottle variations, serving variations or a rouge judge.
To have got to the Nats at all is a huge thing, and something to be justisfiably proud about, is a runner in the Melbourne Cup to be diminished by it's failure to win,or even place, perhaps, but it ran, and at the starters call had an equal chance.

k

Nice analogy there Dr K, I was happy to be a runner.

cheers

Browndog

 

[Bribie G]

Yes great to be in the middle of the field with one of my brews and fifth 'place' with another. We won't even mention the third beer h34r: You don't expect to win the London Marathon at your first attempt unless you are a total dreamer :icon_cheers:

 

[jayse]

44.5 points is quite large that likely would be there was a cockroach in that perticular bottle :unsure:
Pulling cockroach legs out of your teeth is never good when judging <_<

 

[kabooby]

44.5 points is quite large that likely would be there was a cockroach in that perticular bottle :unsure:
Pulling cockroach legs out of your teeth is never good when judging <_<

Unless that beer was in the specialty cat as a cockroach beer :icon_vomit:

Kabooby :icon_cheers:

 

[megs80]

megs80, and other who quite rightly express concerns at score variations.
chances are nothing went wrong, the overall standard of judging in australia is far higher now than it was say 6 years ago, and the standard of judges at the recent AABC was possibly the highest ever assembled in Australia.
Judges are not gods, nor brewers prodigies.
Let us take take the case of the perfect machine, the electronic judge that has no fatigue and an equally perfect pallete and nose.
Our machine scores a beer at 35, the two other judges are equal at 30, all within range and a score of 95.
Equally the other two may have hit 40, again within range but the score is now 115.
Now at the Nationals the same beer is being judged, but without our machine, I will however intoduce the rider that the national judges were able to be within 5 points of the perfect machines score, they are, like the beers entered, pre-qualfied.
Regardless, we now have a range of 30 points, and that is without even considering bottle variations, serving variations or a rouge judge.
To have got to the Nats at all is a huge thing, and something to be justisfiably proud about, is a runner in the Melbourne Cup to be diminished by it's failure to win,or even place, perhaps, but it ran, and at the starters call had an equal chance.

k

I dont think that there was anything wrong with the comp. From what I hear it was pretty well done. Im just interested to get my sheets back. A score in the low 20s suggests a possible infection.

Cheers

 

[Andyd]

Megs,

I'm not sure what you entered, but we had a couple of beers that had minor infections, and one that was astoundingly infected. Unfortunately that can happen to the best brewers from time to time (i.e. a single bottle in a batch becoming infected and being the one that's presented to competition).

To overcome this I know guys who will send in two stubbies instead of a long neck, so that if one is no good the other can be called in by the judges...

Regards,

Andy

 

[Ross]

Back to the earlier question...

Is there an anticipated mailing date for the score sheets? No rush, would just like to know when to expect


Cheers Ross

 

[megs80]

Megs,

I'm not sure what you entered, but we had a couple of beers that had minor infections, and one that was astoundingly infected. Unfortunately that can happen to the best brewers from time to time (i.e. a single bottle in a batch becoming infected and being the one that's presented to competition).

To overcome this I know guys who will send in two stubbies instead of a long neck, so that if one is no good the other can be called in by the judges...

Regards,

Andy

Hey Andy,

I entered a bock. Thats good advice on the two bottles. As it turned out I had to send two as I bottle in 500ml bottles

Cheers

 

[Andyd]

Hey Andy,

I entered a bock. Thats good advice on the two bottles. As it turned out I had to send two as I bottle in 500ml bottles

Cheers

In that case the judges would have called in the second bottle if they thought it was infected - I suppose you would have been extremely unlucky

I'd love to hear the feedback when you get it in...

Regards,

Andy

 

[Maxt]

The other big variable is the transportation to the nats. Can you be certain it didn't sit in a hot postal van for ages, or in a sunny spot?
(Caveot) Knowing the fastidious nature of the comp organiser and head steward, I know that once arrived in the ACT, the beers would have treated like the precious cargo they were...straight to the pool room, I mean coolroom.

 

[haysie]

Set me straight someone, if i send 2 bottles BOTH are poured/presented? I have never heard of judges asking for the second stubbie that wasnt poured, i see this as some sought of unfair advantage i.e enter 2 beers (stubbies) under one entry.

The point spread between state and nationals is crazy. Echo, Mugs game.

 

[Bribie G]

How did you go in the various comps this year, Haysie? :icon_cheers:

 

[haysie]

How did you go in the various comps this year, Haysie? :icon_cheers:

For mine, I held my own. Whats the ?
Referring to a 121 state verse a 87 nat`s. Its not transport, its >>>>>>>

BribieG , if there was some under lying smartarse referral, I missed it. Nevertheless, its not the thread to throw mud.


edit11, i have never met a judge whom would want "seconds" from an infected sour beer."grab the other it maybe better" was the suggestion?
Could not work.