Thirsty Boy
ICB - tight shorts and poor attitude. **** yeah!
- Joined
- 21/5/06
- Messages
- 4,544
- Reaction score
- 106
ahh - its hardly worth the bother. Anything short of someone winning the nationals with nothing but a series of light lagers and maybe a kolsch or two is going to be dismissed.
Competition results were called for as proof of quality and they were produced -- BUT
Someone has won champion brewer of show in a capital city club comp that would have been fairly keenly contested - ba bom... not good enough.
Looks like a couple of other firsts and places at the same show - ba bom... not good enough.
Katzke has a first (and wife a third in his club comp) - ba bom .... not good enough.
PP has a bronze out of the Perth wine and beer show - ba bom not good enough.
I have a first out of last year's Vicbrew (6th in the nationals) - nnnnnrk. Not good enough.
And I know there are a series of pother people who have placed in different comps both here and in the states.
But winning comps in and of itself is just not good enough - no, you have to win comps in certain categories and they better be "good" comps.
Just remember everybody - the ground rules for brewing well have changed. We have been notified. The following conditions now apparently apply.
* Your brewing method, and presumably your skill as a brewer or ability to brew a good beer, simply cannot be measured if you brew dark full flavoured beers. You must brew light delicate beers. Any pleasant taste you experience drinking beers such as this is potentially a mistake on your part. It could well be a rank brewing error that you simply cannot recognise.
* Judges are not capable of distinguishing between good and bad beers if those beers happen to be dark and full of flavour. All their training and experience aside - they are incapable of telling good from bad unless they are presented with the differences in the least challenging setting possible. Any competition feedback you may have received for a beer that was not a light lager or similar - was pointless because the judges obviously couldn't give you useful information about beers like that.
* Any medal, ribbon, trophy or prize you have won at a comp that was not the Nationals (or maybe the states if we are feeling generous) -- was valueless. Brewing better beers than the other members of you club is nothing more than proving that your are the least bad of a suspect bunch. Oh and if it wasn't for a light lager .. well, see above.
OK, I am taking the piss, but if you think about it, that's whats being said. And if its true of a technique like BIAB, then its true of individual brewers as well.
So remember - until you win a medal at the nationals with a light and delicate beer... you're just kidding yourself, there is no admissible proof that you are capable of brewing a decent beer at all.
Competition results were called for as proof of quality and they were produced -- BUT
Someone has won champion brewer of show in a capital city club comp that would have been fairly keenly contested - ba bom... not good enough.
Looks like a couple of other firsts and places at the same show - ba bom... not good enough.
Katzke has a first (and wife a third in his club comp) - ba bom .... not good enough.
PP has a bronze out of the Perth wine and beer show - ba bom not good enough.
I have a first out of last year's Vicbrew (6th in the nationals) - nnnnnrk. Not good enough.
And I know there are a series of pother people who have placed in different comps both here and in the states.
But winning comps in and of itself is just not good enough - no, you have to win comps in certain categories and they better be "good" comps.
Just remember everybody - the ground rules for brewing well have changed. We have been notified. The following conditions now apparently apply.
* Your brewing method, and presumably your skill as a brewer or ability to brew a good beer, simply cannot be measured if you brew dark full flavoured beers. You must brew light delicate beers. Any pleasant taste you experience drinking beers such as this is potentially a mistake on your part. It could well be a rank brewing error that you simply cannot recognise.
* Judges are not capable of distinguishing between good and bad beers if those beers happen to be dark and full of flavour. All their training and experience aside - they are incapable of telling good from bad unless they are presented with the differences in the least challenging setting possible. Any competition feedback you may have received for a beer that was not a light lager or similar - was pointless because the judges obviously couldn't give you useful information about beers like that.
* Any medal, ribbon, trophy or prize you have won at a comp that was not the Nationals (or maybe the states if we are feeling generous) -- was valueless. Brewing better beers than the other members of you club is nothing more than proving that your are the least bad of a suspect bunch. Oh and if it wasn't for a light lager .. well, see above.
OK, I am taking the piss, but if you think about it, that's whats being said. And if its true of a technique like BIAB, then its true of individual brewers as well.
So remember - until you win a medal at the nationals with a light and delicate beer... you're just kidding yourself, there is no admissible proof that you are capable of brewing a decent beer at all.
