Australian Amateur Brewing Championship

[Bribie G]

Polite query from a fellow brewer. I had a place with a summer ale in the State and it came last in the Nats :unsure:
However I'm hanging for the comments as I think I know what the problem was, because I subbed a bittering hop and went a bit berserk with it. I agree with you that the 'second stubbie' sounds ridiculous, first I've heard of it and if this is an option then it should be clearly publicised at the next National comp.

 

[beers]

I agree with you that the 'second stubbie' sounds ridiculous, first I've heard of it and if this is an option then it should be clearly publicised at the next National comp.

I thought I read something about it this year? along with the 500ml minimum requirements.

Personally I think bottles with a larger volume keep more stable. I recall when I used to bottle that stubbies carbed up & matured faster than tallies... well to my tastes anyways.

 

[bradsbrew]

Well I had 2 beers in and got better scores with both of them. I am guessing that serving temp was the thing that changed the judging. Beers where stouts and also a month older , perhaps that helped also. As for the transporting side of things , I sent 2 glass tallies in the post so they were well packed, ...bubble wrap-cardboard -polo shirts-box, perhaps that would have also helped with any heat issues. Is it a noticable thing that the host city has the majority winners/better performance??? I dont know I havnt looked into that much.

The judging sheets are most anticipated though. What do you get for a place,,,, certificate??


Brad

 

[Andyd]

Agreed - bigger bottles are better from a management and (probably) endurance perspective. Just reporting on what I've observed over the years. I've never seen both bottles "blended" though (equally, I don't recall beers being called back except at this years nationals).

On many occasions if these's a beer that has been deemed "infected" some judges will ask if there was a second bottle, but it rarely turns out to be the case.

Nothing unfair about it really - it's the same beer (sans a possible point infection), and if the first is infected there's a good chance a "re-pour" will be tainted by the impressions of the first...

Andy

 

[Maxt]

Haysie, if you entered 2 beers, only one will be opened. The other stays as a back up. I have been in flights that recalled beers, in fact this year we recalled 4 beers in one flight (to sort out 1st-4th).

As for your answer, yes it's disappointing when your beer does not as well as at the state comp, perhaps the standard of judging was higher at the Nats?
As the good doc mentioned, to make it that far means you have placed in your state comp, and unless it was in a style with little competition, you brewed a good beer.

Haysie if it upsets you too much, then your right it's a mug's game and perhaps comps are not for you.

 

[bigfridge]

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.

OTOH, I have never met a trained judge that does not want to give the best feedback possible so would say 'this would seem to be a bad bottle - is there a 2nd bottle abailable'. The judges should not see the bottle so they wouldn't know if the beer same out of a stubby or longneck or even a keg.

Standard practice in most comps that run under the BJCP guidelines.

I have seen a situation where an American IPA was dry-hopped in the bottle - the first picked up a bug but the second was sublime.


Dave

 

[Guest Lurker]

I have seen a situation where an American IPA was dry-hopped in the bottle - the first picked up a bug but the second was sublime.


Dave

Interesting question. If you submit an infected and a sublime beer, do you deserve the score for the sublime one? Both were in theory representative of your brewing practices. I guess I can agree the higher score should prevail.

 

[Online Brewing Supplies]

Most of these posts are subjective.It comes down to the "Best beer" on the day scores higher weather judged by amateurs or well trained judges.You have to be happy with what scores you received.I can agree that there is an over all home state advantage when it comes to national comps but that's to be expected.
GB

 

[beers]

I'm stoked with my equal 2nd last in the Strong Ale Cat... Rock on :beerbang:

 

[Maxt]

I can agree that there is an over all home state advantage when it comes to national comps but that's to be expected.
GB

The advantage could only be that the home state gets their beers to the venue easier. Judges don't know who's beers they are judging, and from which state they originate.

 

[homekegger1]

There is no use being offended by your result. End of the day, someone has to come last in the nationals, who placed in a state comp. FACT of life. As for being a major difference between scores at State level and national, one needs to realise that each bottle is different, time between comps is different, and the judges are different. Obviously the major factor here is difference.

You place in state level, Well done, bragging rights. You bomb out in Nationals, no need to get upset, wait till the judging sheets are received, take on board their comments and hope for a better result next time.

Remember, at state level the judges may not be as qualified as what they are at National level. So you are going to end up with differences.

Again, it is a different set of circumstances that judge each comp. Not a radar gun, not a calibrated computer, but DIFFERENT people.

If this upsets you in anyway, then you need to decide whether you really wanted feedback on your beers or if you had the small mind to think you were better than everyone else. Take it on the chin, suck it up, learn from it, and come back next year swinging with a much better effort.

That's what I did, last year was bottom of the run in State, this year, one got through and then was "Lucky" enough to do well in Nationals.

My 2c

Cheers

HK

 

[haysie]

Haysie, if you entered 2 beers, only one will be opened. The other stays as a back up. I have been in flights that recalled beers, in fact this year we recalled 4 beers in one flight (to sort out 1st-4th).

As for your answer, yes it's disappointing when your beer does not as well as at the state comp, perhaps the standard of judging was higher at the Nats?
As the good doc mentioned, to make it that far means you have placed in your state comp, and unless it was in a style with little competition, you brewed a good beer.

Haysie if it upsets you too much, then your right it's a mug's game and perhaps comps are not for you.

Max. so why enter 2 beers? I miss your point, I thought it was a minimum 500 yada yada and thats it, no recalling "new" bottles.
The upset thing is pretty lame mate, whom gives you the call or anyone state judges are better then nats? vice versa.
I stick by mugs game when so many differences appear. Hey, I`ll still support it.
Cheers
Haysie

 

[Darren]

The advantage could only be that the home state gets their beers to the venue easier. Judges don't know who's beers they are judging, and from which state they originate.

Max,

The home state advantage probably comes from the fact that most of the judges (within a state) sample each others beers. Familiarity with a beer flavour (that a judge may have liked previously) could possibly skew an unbiased assessment.

Other effects such as water profile would almost certainly alter perception of a beer.

cheers

Darren

 

[megs80]

There is no use being offended by your result. End of the day, someone has to come last in the nationals, who placed in a state comp. FACT of life. As for being a major difference between scores at State level and national, one needs to realise that each bottle is different, time between comps is different, and the judges are different. Obviously the major factor here is difference.

You place in state level, Well done, bragging rights. You bomb out in Nationals, no need to get upset, wait till the judging sheets are received, take on board their comments and hope for a better result next time.

Remember, at state level the judges may not be as qualified as what they are at National level. So you are going to end up with differences.

Again, it is a different set of circumstances that judge each comp. Not a radar gun, not a calibrated computer, but DIFFERENT people.

If this upsets you in anyway, then you need to decide whether you really wanted feedback on your beers or if you had the small mind to think you were better than everyone else. Take it on the chin, suck it up, learn from it, and come back next year swinging with a much better effort.

That's what I did, last year was bottom of the run in State, this year, one got through and then was "Lucky" enough to do well in Nationals.

My 2c

Cheers

HK

HK
I agree. Making the nationals means you have had six trained judges give feedback to one of your beers. Youve gotta be happy with that.

Cheers

 

[Maxt]

Max,

The home state advantage probably comes from the fact that most of the judges (within a state) sample each others beers. Familiarity with a beer flavour (that a judge may have liked previously) could possibly skew an unbiased assessment.

Other effects such as water profile would almost certainly alter perception of a beer.

cheers

Darren

Is this a troll or are your presenting this as serious?? You really believe most judges within a state sample every member's beers? Really? So in Vicbrew, for example, the tens if not hundreds of beers entered through the various clubs, in the 18 main categories and further sub catagories, would be sampled by most of the judges. Too funny. :icon_cheers:

For your assumption to be true, it would hinge on the same judges judging the same flight in both state and Nats (and being able to remember weeks later exactly the profile of that beer compared to the others in the flight).
This year at the nats there were at least 1 and sometimes 2 interstate judges in each flight, and remember the judges independantly score and then need to be within 5 pts.
Darren, your dreamin'.

 

[samhighley]

The home state advantage probably comes from the fact that most of the judges (within a state) sample each others beers. Familiarity with a beer flavour (that a judge may have liked previously) could possibly skew an unbiased assessment.

What a load of bollocks. Judges at the nationals typically come from all parts of Australia.

 

[haysie]

What a load of bollocks. Judges at the nationals typically come from all parts of Australia.

You dont say hey! Read the thread and inpart some sort of pro`s or con`s comment.
If you bypass post`s like yours, theres a general hype of the nat`s dont get it right every time, boo hoo thats life.
Still its worth sharing.

 

[Darren]

What a load of bollocks. Judges at the nationals typically come from all parts of Australia.

I probably missed it but was a final score sheet posted?

cheers

Darren

 

[Bribie G]

I probably missed it but was a final score sheet posted?

cheers

Darren

Yes you missed it

 

[Andyd]

If you bypass post`s like yours, theres a general hype of the nat`s dont get it right every time, boo hoo thats life.

I don't know that anyone ever gets it "right" per se. From my experience with international sports, you can only "get it right" if there is an acknowledged, accepted and utilised set of protocols to run the competition.

At the moment I think we're still working to get things to a point that you could write those protocols. For example, in Melbourne last year there was a general feeling that having the stewards milling around the central table tasting talking about the beers while they were still being judged was not condusive to the judging process. This year in Canberra the judges were instructed to not discuss anything with the judges and were not able to taste the beers - many thought this was also not optimal, this time because it provided no opportunity for stewards to improve their skills as judges. I think that somewhere in between there may be an "ideal" experience.

The real problem though, i that there is very little in the way of rigour when it comes to capturing information about what works and what doesn't. At present the competitions are organised be individual clubs or state bodies and while a lot of work goes into the planning and execution of the events, significantly less effort goes into capturing information about how the event ran. When I mentioned this to the Canberra crew the response was less than enthusiastic - and understandably so too. After the conference last year we had trouble finding the energy to do any of the follow up activities (something we're getting batter at now).

None-the-less, the after-event organisation and documentation is just as, if not even more important than anything that comes in the lead-up to an event, particularly if you intend to improve in subsequent events.

So... I might actually start up another thread for this purpose. If you have any feedback on what you thought went well or did not at the AABC this year, post it there - I'll start collating it into a living document we can use to either maintain consistency or even improve future events.

Andy