Castle Hill Brewing Competition

[Trev]

As for the photo, here's the list of who's who:-

(left to right)

Stuster
Brett M
Mikem108
Justin - but I'm not sure of his handle here
Linz
Callum (chief honcho brewer from Paddy's)
Jarrod- but I'm not sure of his handle here either
Mel, aka Little Squares
Brett T - handle etc
Fabian (almost chief honcho brewer at Blue Tongue)
Kevin O'Neill (This man actually owns Snowy Mountains Brewery, and a bloody fine drop it is!)
Damn Fine Looking Guy, there more for show than go!
Randall aka RMJ
Barry Cranstan - have you got any idea how hard it is to get him to judge a category he's not going to win

Seriously, it was a good comp with some really great entries. I had the pleasure of walking the President of the Castle Hill Showground Society through a number of beers to allow him to pick his favourite, effectively a 'how good is this award'. Congrats to the winners and I hope the inclusion of the Kit beer section will be carried on in future comps - the best kit beer came out with one of the highest scores of the comp - and a damn fine drop it was!.

Trev

 

[Thommo]

Stuster
Brett M aka Duff
Mikem108
Justin - but I'm not sure of his handle here - I think it's Spud
Linz
Callum (chief honcho brewer from Paddy's)
Jarrod- but I'm not sure of his handle here either - Jazzafish
Mel, aka Little Squares
Brett T - handle etc Thommo What do you reckon Trev? I think He looks a bit like Brad Pitt!!!
Fabian (almost chief honcho brewer at Blue Tongue)
Kevin O'Neill (This man actually owns Snowy Mountains Brewery, and a bloody fine drop it is!)
Damn Fine Looking Guy, there more for show than go! Ugliest ******* I have ever Seen
Randall aka RMJ
Barry Cranstan - have you got any idea how hard it is to get him to judge a category he's not going to win

 

[///]

I hope the inclusion of the Kit beer section will be carried on in future comps - the best kit beer came out with one of the highest scores of the comp - and a damn fine drop it was!.

Trev

As much as I love you you lovable hunk of man, i gotta ask why why why has the Castle Hill Comp gone back 5 years in time and decided to discriminate between kit and 'whatever else' beers. And you know this is not personal attack, far from it.

As a mash brewer and comp organiser, together with (according to Victorian's it seems) a troublesome lot we aregue long or hard for any discrimiation to end, particuarly the mash vs k+k carp-oula.

The old excuse was 'the kit brewers felt intimidated...', when you looked at the wording of the entries forms one understood why - it is all in the wording and message delivered. The other thing is that unscrupules dealers, particuarly Country ones, used the comps as an unsavoury free marketing vehicle and who promised support but forgot to forward the cheque for support - on a more than one occasion.

If the mash brewers cannot keep up with the K+K guys that is there problem, so why be discriminatory and not follow the examples of come one, come all and may the best beer win, no matter how it got there - as in the NSW Comp????

I am also suprised my BJCP brethren would follow such distinction when none is offered in the BJCP?

Scotty

 

[Phrak]

Ladies & Gents,
I've uploaded some more pics of the day to the AHB Gallery:
http://www.aussiehomebrewer.com/forum/inde...m&album=104

Regards,
Tim. :beer:

 

[Tseay]

I hope the inclusion of the Kit beer section will be carried on in future comps - the best kit beer came out with one of the highest scores of the comp - and a damn fine drop it was!.

Trev

As much as I love you you lovable hunk of man, i gotta ask why why why has the Castle Hill Comp gone back 5 years in time and decided to discriminate between kit and 'whatever else' beers. And you know this is not personal attack, far from it.

As a mash brewer and comp organiser, together with (according to Victorian's it seems) a troublesome lot we aregue long or hard for any discrimiation to end, particuarly the mash vs k+k carp-oula.

The old excuse was 'the kit brewers felt intimidated...', when you looked at the wording of the entries forms one understood why - it is all in the wording and message delivered. The other thing is that unscrupules dealers, particuarly Country ones, used the comps as an unsavoury free marketing vehicle and who promised support but forgot to forward the cheque for support - on a more than one occasion.

If the mash brewers cannot keep up with the K+K guys that is there problem, so why be discriminatory and not follow the examples of come one, come all and may the best beer win, no matter how it got there - as in the NSW Comp????

I am also suprised my BJCP brethren would follow such distinction when none is offered in the BJCP?

Scotty

As the person with overall responsibility and control for establishing growing and directing this competition, its predecessor and those on the drawing board, these questions are more appropriately addressed to me.

I am surprised, that this question is raised now, following the successful completion of the competition and not in months preceding it.

As you know we are certainly not the only competition to offer specific opportunities to kit brewers. Kit brewers are the other half of the sky and as far as I am concerned innovations that encourage them to become involved in competitions, have their beer evaluated and help them understandhow they can improve, are on the agenda.

A Kit section was just one of the innovations introduced this year. Others included the retailer award, the opening up of the competition to overseas entrants and the presidents choice award. Is anyone complaining about these? I don't think they are offered at the State comp. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Will we do it again next year?

Going by the communication on this web site, we should be expanding the section and not shutting it down. The judge evaluation sheets suggest the judges are happy with what we've done. Numbers of entrants have grown, so I guess they must be happy.

What I can tell you is that my colleagues and I will continue to look at ways of making the comp exciting and interesting to entrants and judges alike. Some innovations we will continue, some we will drop and some we will develop. We certainly won't be constrained in looking at approaches that differ from other competitions.

T

 

[Phrak]

The local paper covered our illustrious competition as well.

I reckon these are the best lookin' judges out of the lot of them! :blink:


Tim.

 

[///]

I thought an innovation was something new .... anyway thats just me.

With the demographic of the stores in the Hills area and the brewers, things have obviously moved on and as anything should do, things should move with the masses. I am suprised that the biggest point of arguement between Kit Brewers and Mash brewers (and retailers) when it came to comp's has changed, and if it is a good thing then its a good suprise.

For years we were beaten from pillar to post for discriminating between the 2 types of brewers, but if that brings results and happy entrants then ce la vie!

I'm far from complaining about the matter, just making an observation, i just leave complaining to the Mexicans....

Scotty

 

[Gulpa]

Trev

As much as I love you you lovable hunk of man, i gotta ask why why why has the Castle Hill Comp gone back 5 years in time and decided to discriminate between kit and 'whatever else' beers. And you know this is not personal attack, far from it.

As a mash brewer and comp organiser, together with (according to Victorian's it seems) a troublesome lot we aregue long or hard for any discrimiation to end, particuarly the mash vs k+k carp-oula.

The old excuse was 'the kit brewers felt intimidated...', when you looked at the wording of the entries forms one understood why - it is all in the wording and message delivered. The other thing is that unscrupules dealers, particuarly Country ones, used the comps as an unsavoury free marketing vehicle and who promised support but forgot to forward the cheque for support - on a more than one occasion.

If the mash brewers cannot keep up with the K+K guys that is there problem, so why be discriminatory and not follow the examples of come one, come all and may the best beer win, no matter how it got there - as in the NSW Comp????

I am also suprised my BJCP brethren would follow such distinction when none is offered in the BJCP?

Scotty

Hi Scotty,

As one of those who asked for an expansion of the kit classes I thought I would chip in as I have been thinking on this issue some more. Im not really sure that kit brewers feel intimidated.

I think that kit brewers are becomming better educated. It is now very easy to access good information and there is a growing variety of good local and imported beers we can compare our beers to.

As a result of this, I think kit brewers know where their beers sit in the beer spectrum and understand that there are limitations involved with kit brewing that are going to be difficult to overcome when making some styles of beer.

As an example, this winter I brewed a kit czech pils. Its tasty and happy with it but it doesnt have the right malt flavour or much complexity for the style. If I entered this beer in a comp it should lose to someone who better managed this aspect of the style.

Why is it a problem if the best beer wins?

Im not certain, but my gut tells me that I cant really achieve the correct malt flavours in my pils while using a kit. Im pretty sure its not as simple as steeping some grains. So I couldnt be bothered entering the beer because I understand the limitation. This is a problem for the comp because it wants as many entries a possible.

I think the real issue is whether the kit brewers can effectively compete in some of the open classes commonly brewed by kit brewers (assuming good class respresentation of faultless AG examples). I have a feeling that the honest answer is in some classes yes and in some classes no. Kit sections in comps should be a recognition of this. They should allow apples to apples type comparisons.


Cheers,
Andrew.

 

[mikem108]

I don't think it matters because a good beer is a good beer regardless of how it was made. Kit or AG.
There was one kit beer I judged on sunday and if I hadn't been told it was a kit I never would have picked it up. It may have been a partial but it was esentially a faultless and very drinkable beer.

 

[///]

Why is it a problem if the best beer wins?


Cheers,
Andrew.
[/quote]

Hence the reason changes were made to the NSW as it is about the best beer winning. Where on the day the best beer won. No problem is had or was implied, but personally dicriminating between kit or mash does make an imply something to kit brewing that mash brewers do not have.

The sentiment even as 2-3 years ago (probably still exists) was the kit brewers would not enter as the perception was that they had no chance in other categories other than specified kit. And i gotta say personally, not connected to a comp, that applying limitations to where a kit 'can effectively compete' is pointless.

I have ne'er had a Cczech pils made by a mash brewer that has fitted the style guidlines or the professional example in all my years of judging so I am not sure why you would exclude a kit. The diacetyl profile is never right as is often the hopping. So why would a kit beer not be any better or worse? And is this not taking the context away from the judges on deciding whether the beer is of standard. Already by putting up a white flag and making a point of alienation for a kit brewer rather than embracing the concept and having a go.

So, i'm talking about why stack limitations on a brewer to compete in a class. this is my personal preference, and not a cursory way of how comp's should be run either. It was just a suprise that after so much hard to break down the barriers at the state and national level.

Scotty

 

[Gulpa]

Hence the reason changes were made to the NSW as it is about the best beer winning. Where on the day the best beer won. No problem is had or was implied, but personally dicriminating between kit or mash does make an imply something to kit brewing that mash brewers do not have.

The sentiment even as 2-3 years ago (probably still exists) was the kit brewers would not enter as the perception was that they had no chance in other categories other than specified kit. And i gotta say personally, not connected to a comp, that applying limitations to where a kit 'can effectively compete' is pointless.

I have ne'er had a Cczech pils made by a mash brewer that has fitted the style guidlines or the professional example in all my years of judging so I am not sure why you would exclude a kit. The diacetyl profile is never right as is often the hopping. So why would a kit beer not be any better or worse? And is this not taking the context away from the judges on deciding whether the beer is of standard. Already by putting up a white flag and making a point of alienation for a kit brewer rather than embracing the concept and having a go.

So, i'm talking about why stack limitations on a brewer to compete in a class. this is my personal preference, and not a cursory way of how comp's should be run either. It was just a suprise that after so much hard to break down the barriers at the state and national level.

Scotty

Hi Scotty and Mike,

Thanks for the response. Its an interesting topic. I dont really understand the history of comps so sorry if my understanding in that area is lacking.

Im not saying that good beer cant be made from a kit. I know that it can and Im sure you can make crap AG beer.

I guess you are right Scotty, that kit brewers still have that perception. I certainly do. I assume others do as well.

Ive tried a number of partials and AG beers, though I would like to try more. I have tasted other brewers kit beers. I recognise that I can only speak from these experiences and I admit that my experience may not be broad enough to know what I am talking about.

From tasting partials and AG beers it seems fairly clear to me that there are certain results that are achievable in AG beers that are not achievable in kits. The different malt flavours, complexity as well as texture/mouthfeel come to mind. We could also look at bittering issues. If the results from kits were the same as AG then Im not sure why people would bother with AG brewing.

As for never having a Czech pils that met the style guidelines, I think that is a separate issue. I think when entering these comps that you have to assume that there will be entries that meet the guidelines. Otherwise there doesnt seem to be any point to having classes. Perhaps the pils example was not the right example.

I think it will be interesting to watch this over the next couple of years. AG brewing is certainly gaining popularity. It seems a that a lot of AG brewers are fairly new to it. It will be interesting to see as AG skills increase whether kit brewers can continue to get the same results that have been getting in comps.

Regards,
Andrew.

 

[Gerard_M]

It looks like a very successfully run comp, with plenty of entries, growing from last years humble start. Good to see such a high standard of judges available for such events. Plenty of sponsors have come on board, and the local rag has included a pic of a guy in a horrible shirt, so obviously all is looking good for the future. Well done Chris & Randell and the Hills Brewers guys.

The previous posts leave some interesting points for discussion before next years comp. The argument has been around for ages about Kits vs all grain & has become so boring that some of the combatants seem to have changed sides to liven things up. I guess we were about due for another K+K vs AG debate.

Cheers
Gerard

 

[Jazzafish]

It is interesting that people are seeing a negative side to a Kit section. Most of the people I spoke to asked for a kit section.

The way I look at it is this is a brewing competition. There are strict guidelines that define a class of beer and the brewer is judged on his/her ability to brew to that style. We just picked the most popular kits as a beer style. Fair to say that Australian Lager or Australian Old kits are in their own style of beer.

We are not talking about what is a good brewing method. We are just setting guidelines to brew to. That is a competition.

That said I rarely brew to style

 

[RobboMC]

I thought I'd add my 20 cents worth to the K&K vs AG brew comp debate.

As a newbie and a kit brewer my experience of last year's comp left me a little reluctant to try again.
NOT because I was looked down upon as a kit brewer, in fact the feedbacks didn't mention kits.

I am reluctant because as a beginner I am a bottler; and that means the sediment from bottle conditioning
remains in the bottle. Until of course, I try and freight it off to a brew comp, when it gets stirred up into the beer.

Fellow tasters have been experimenting with me, all we did one day was drive the brew across town,
and hey presto, we could suddenly taste all the faults found by the judges.

No one is to blame for this, it's the way life is.

But as a newbie to comps it appears from my limited view that unless one has a kegging set up and one of those fancy gizmos to transfer from keg to bottle and gas up the bottle with CO2 from the cylinder then it's pretty much a waste of time submitting your brew. I didn't get the benefit of the feedback the judge would have liked to provide because the beer I am tasting at home is different from that tasted by the judges.

I would think it's safe to assume that brewers that have gone AG and enter comps would be much more likely to have spent the money on kegging gear than newbies. So this is my explanation of why you get a huge percentage of AG entries in comps.

Being a beginner, I don't know how to fix this problem, or even if it can be fixed, because a decent brew can take months to drop all it's sediment.

 

[DJR]

becuase a decent brew can take months to drop all it's sediment.

Not when you cold condition the beer and use secondary, beer is clear pretty quickly. That or use Polyclar/Gelatin/Finings in secondary as well as that. The beers are stored cold/cool (lager/ale) for a few days at most comps so most of the sediment will settle. That said, judges don't generally mark you down for hazy appearance since it's pretty common. You'll only lose 1 or 2 points out of 50 for it - under the BJCP system appearance only counts for 3 marks.

I got Best Australian entry, the President's Choice award and a couple of other places in the CH show with non-kegged, normally fermented beer, with just a bit of CC'ing and only polyclar in 1 entry (the rest might have got a bit of gelatin as well but i can't remember). Can't be assed paying big $$$'s for a kegging setup when bottles work fine (i drink most of my beer away from the house), and kegs would only increase my drinking at home to dangerous levels h34r: .

 

[Guest Lurker]

I thought I'd add my 20 cents worth to the K&K vs AG brew comp debate.


Being a beginner, I don't know how to fix this problem, or even if it can be fixed, because a decent brew can take months to drop all it's sediment.

You actually have this backwards. It is very difficult to win a comp using a kegged counter pressure filled bottle because of the small amount of oxidation that sneaks in during this process. A beer that tasted fine in the keg will often develop diacetyl after being transferred to a bottle and sent off. The yeast in a bottle conditioned beer helps protect it. As long as they stand it in a fridge for a while before the comp, you should expect to score better with a bottle conditioned beer than a pressure filled beer.

 

[HappyClem]

I'm over comps. Why send away precious beer in precious longnecks, and pay someone to tell me how bad it is?
I'll stick to trying it out on my New/VB swilling mates. Their standards are a lot easier to meet!

 

[newguy]

I thought I'd add my 20 cents worth to the K&K vs AG brew comp debate.

Fellow tasters have been experimenting with me, all we did one day was drive the brew across town,
and hey presto, we could suddenly taste all the faults found by the judges.

No one is to blame for this, it's the way life is.

But as a newbie to comps it appears from my limited view that unless one has a kegging set up and one of those fancy gizmos to transfer from keg to bottle and gas up the bottle with CO2 from the cylinder then it's pretty much a waste of time submitting your brew. I didn't get the benefit of the feedback the judge would have liked to provide because the beer I am tasting at home is different from that tasted by the judges.

I would think it's safe to assume that brewers that have gone AG and enter comps would be much more likely to have spent the money on kegging gear than newbies. So this is my explanation of why you get a huge percentage of AG entries in comps.

Being a beginner, I don't know how to fix this problem, or even if it can be fixed, because a decent brew can take months to drop all it's sediment.

As someone else has mentioned, the sediment/yeast really shouldn't have anything to do with it. Think of all the world class 'classic' beers that are bottle primed....German lagers, German wheat beers, Belgians, etc. They're shipped a lot farther than just across town, across the state or across the country. They're shipped overseas. Usually by the cheapest method, container vessel. They get stirred up, endure blistering heat for months at a time, and yet they're still great.

Bottle-to-bottle variability is a huge issue with homebrewers. You can have 100 good bottles, but one will have a dust particle fall in it, or a hair, or whatever.....It may also get splashed and oxidized. Before you know it, it's infected with bacteria or wild yeast, or oxidized. And you know what? That's usually the bottle that you'll ship to a competition. It happens to everyone, even very experienced and gifted homebrewers.

What you should take away from this is that perhaps your bottle sanitation could maybe use some improvement, as could your transfer technique, as could your overall sanitation. Address those issues and you'll likely never have bad bottles again.

Again, as someone else has mentioned, I know a couple of brewers who own a counterpressure bottle filler so that they can fill bottles directly from a keg. And both of them refuse to use them anymore. They're a pain in the butt to learn how to properly use, and the resulting product doesn't taste as good as the bottle conditioned version. From what I understand, the first few times you try to use it, you'll end up wearing and walking in more beer than what's in the bottles.

 

[DJR]

I'm over comps. Why send away precious beer in precious longnecks, and pay someone to tell me how bad it is?
I'll stick to trying it out on my New/VB swilling mates. Their standards are a lot easier to meet!

You would think so, but give some people a beer with any flavour (not the flavour of water and piss combined) and "whoa, it's the homebrew taste". No shit, i gave someone a taste of my Bohemian Pils the other day, AG beer with a 3 month lagering period, absolutely the cleanest beer i have made and "whoa, it still tastes like homebrew"

More for us

 

[floppinab]

You would think so, but give some people a beer with any flavour (not the flavour of water and piss combined) and "whoa, it's the homebrew taste".

Since getting back into the game I'm finding that most of my mates are pretty impressed in what they've tasted thus far. I've been a bit surprised, generally expecting a lot more of the reaction that you describe. That said although 90% of what they drink is plain old aussie lager they have sampled your MacQuarie's, RedOaks, etc. and recognise the real flavours when they get round to my place.

The best comments have been reserved for the ISB beauties of course