Is it just me or is the BJCP going to hell?

[newguy]

I've been less & less involved over the past 7 years or so. Kind of turned off by some things, particularly the new style guidelines. Then today, this: http://forum.bjcp.org/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=1158

I wonder how long before some ********* judge writes down "oxidized" under appearance.

 

[TheWiggman]

Worth noting I can't access that link because I'm not a member of that forum.

 

[Dave70]

When did 'session beer' become a style?

 

[Bribie G]

BJCP guidelines have always struck me as a bit erratic at the best of times:

Low to moderate to high esters although some "heritage" brews may not exhibit ester characters at all, but could nevertheless show extremely high ester notes..... (I made that up but you know what I mean)

Also since when are UK best bitters actually supposed to be distinctly bitter. Bollocks.

 

[newguy]

If you can't access the link it started off with a question as to why a beer would look "dull". The answer the president of the BJCP gave was "oxidation".

Sorry but I file that under "pretentious ******* wanker".

Totally agree about the style guidelines. Most of them seem okay but there are instances where you wonder if they ever drank real world examples. The new guidelines annoy me because they're very bloated - every minute substyle is now classified. Will make passing the exam in future way more difficult and judging in competitions way more tedious.

 

[mje1980]

What? You mean you don't think that ginger apple blackberry black pale India Californian pizza lager should be it's own style, and is just as valid a style as Czech pils or porter?

 

[mje1980]

The beauty of it is whatever beer you make, regardless of how it turns out will fit in a style guideline soon, and can be entered into a beer comp. I wonder if that's planned ? or have I been watching too much x files ?

 

[fraser_john]

I like to keep it all in context of(and I quote):

1. The BJCP Style Guidelines are guidelines not specifications. Take those words at face value, or their plain meaning. Guidelines are meant to describe general characteristics of the most common examples, and serve as an aid for judging; they are not meant to be rigorously-applied specifications that are used to punish slightly unusual examples. They are suggestions, not hard limits. Allow for some flexibility in judging so that well-crafted examples can be rewarded. The guidelines are written in detail to facilitate the process of the structured evaluation of beer as practiced in homebrewing competitions; don’t take each individual statement in a style description as a reason to disqualify a beer.

"not meant to be rigorously applied".

If a beer is within the guidelines or even slightly outside of it, or in their terms "slightly unusual", should not be discarded or "punished" as out of style if it is still a well crafted beer.

 

[AndrewQLD]

Never been a fan of the BJCP, as bribie said just take a look at their English styles and you have to wonder if they ever drank any before writing them

 

[Nizmoose]

Chiming in to the above, new guy that definitely goes into the pretentious wanker file no doubt, what a way to make himself look like a dick, and I think by the sounds of it (never entered a beer into competition) it's not the guidelines so much that screw it up, it seems to be the overly anal and frankly snobby judges that slam quite reasonable beers for undetectable or non-existent defects in order to further their feeling of self importance. A fairly narrow stereotype sure but I think valid and true in many cases.

 

[Mr. No-Tip]

Chiming in to the above, new guy that definitely goes into the pretentious wanker file no doubt, what a way to make himself look like a dick, and I think by the sounds of it (never entered a beer into competition) it's not the guidelines so much that screw it up, it seems to be the overly anal and frankly snobby judges that slam quite reasonable beers for undetectable or non-existent defects in order to further their feeling of self importance. A fairly narrow stereotype sure but I think valid and true in many cases.

Maybe you should enter one, or better yet apprentice judge on one before slamming half our community.

Undetectable to one person's palate is prevalent and distracting to another. The judges can only work to
Guidelines, or else they have no common ground. If the guidelines say diacetyl is out of place and get it in your beer, it should be pinged. Three judges aren't going to get it wrong and two would largely normalise a confused third.

By all means get annoyed about judges faulting beers where the guidelines don't support them (my favourite is when I got told a lambic needed more malt backbone), but you really don't see "overly anal and frankly snobby judges that slam quite reasonable beers for undetectable or non-existent defects in order to further their feeling of self importance", you see passionate judges wanting to make sure the best beers are recognised and that beers that don't fit a stylistic bill are given feedback against the style.

 

[Mr. No-Tip]

If you can't access the link it started off with a question as to why a beer would look "dull". The answer the president of the BJCP gave was "oxidation".

Sorry but I file that under "pretentious ******* wanker".

Totally agree about the style guidelines. Most of them seem okay but there are instances where you wonder if they ever drank real world examples. The new guidelines annoy me because they're very bloated - every minute substyle is now classified. Will make passing the exam in future way more difficult and judging in competitions way more tedious.

You're right on a ridiculous number of sub styles, but what is wankery about the explanation? Are you saying beers can't look "dull" or it's not caused by oxidation?

I judged farmhouses at nats in 2013. Allmost all the Wits could only be described as "dull". They almost looked grey. The three of us suspected these were wits that had been very good at state comps, but suffering from age having not been rebrewed for nats. Dull is definitely a descriptor.

As for oxidation being the cause, I wouldn't feel confident enough to write that on a judging sheet, but it is known to darken beers, so it's possible?

 

[newguy]

Mr. No-Tip, on 06 Feb 2015 - 1:59 PM, said:

You're right on a ridiculous number of sub styles, but what is wankery about the explanation? Are you saying beers can't look "dull" or it's not caused by oxidation?

I judged farmhouses at nats in 2013. Allmost all the Wits could only be described as "dull". They almost looked grey. The three of us suspected these were wits that had been very good at state comps, but suffering from age having not been rebrewed for nats. Dull is definitely a descriptor.

As for oxidation being the cause, I wouldn't feel confident enough to write that on a judging sheet, but it is known to darken beers, so it's possible?

What I was getting at is that a beer's appearance can be arrived at via an infinite number of pathways. Your orange beer may be because of x% of this malt and y% of that, but my orange beer (exactly the same hue) can be the result of a, b, and c. Saying that a beer looks oxidized is only valid if you have a time machine so that you can retrieve a young version of the same beer to compare it with.

My fear (a valid fear because I've seen it before) is that if one judge states that the beer looks oxidized before he/she even tastes it, the other judges at the table automatically will either become hyper sensitive to oxidation or they'll begin to imagine it if they can't actually detect it.

This type of thing is a major bone of contention with Canadian homebrewers that enter US competitions. For example, until about 5-10 years ago, the US favourite bottle, the pop-top, wasn't very common here. Microbreweries used screw-tops - the same bottles the big breweries used. Pop-tops were relatively rare, usually being European or US in origin, and also more expensive than the mega-swill alternative. So, naturally screw-tops are what we used and still use. Guys that went through the headache and expense of shipping beers to the AHA or MCAB finals almost exclusively got completely pilloried for the cardinal sin of using screw-top bottles. It would start with "shouldn't use screw top bottles" on the bottle inspection portion and then would quickly deteriorate from there. Here, most competitions are "cellar pours" where the stewards pour the beers and the judges don't even see the bottles. We prefer to judge the beer, not the bottle. When we wised up to this and started coaching people to ship pop-top bottles to US competitions, they did immensely better score-wise.

Now that our president has stated that oxidation can be definitely detected just by looking at a beer, I'm confident that it will start to become a thing for judges to declare that a beer is oxidized just by looking at it. God help us all.

 

[kevo]

My fear (a valid fear because I've seen it before) is that if one judge states that the beer looks oxidized before he/she even tastes it, the other judges at the table automatically will either become hyper sensitive to oxidation or they'll begin to imagine it if they can't actually detect it.

Fair point - suggestion can be a powerful influence.

 

[Bribie G]

In a State competition I entered an English ordinary bitter made without crystals.. along the lines of "Summer Lightning" and appearance got marked down as too pale, despite:

The lightest of the bitters. Also known as just “bitter.”
Some modern variants are brewed exclusively with pale
malt and are known as golden or summer bitters

The judges at that table were unanimous so one wonders if they often bother to fully read the guidelines.
I always do when I'm judging.. particularly with styles that I'm not too familiar with such as AIPAs.

Especially in State comps the judges are also exhibitors and are only able to judge styles they have not entered themselves. In other words judging styles that they probably don't brew personally or even like very much. So reading the guide thoroughly, and comprehending it, is very important.

 

[manticle]

I agree reading is very important but totally disagree that judges end up judging styles they don't like or are unfamiliar with.
I haven't entered a comp for a couple of years but make an effort to judge a few times a year. I always tell the judge director to put me wherever needed. Even when I have entered, there's still a large number of cats and styles I'll enjoy but not have entries for. I know you brew a lot for comps and may carpet bomb as the expression goes (nothing wrong with that - you brewed it, you can enter it) but not everyone does. Most don't I would argue.
BJCP is often off the mark and some judging can be dreadful but as pointed out above - it's an evolving set of guidelines. Up to the judges how to interpret and apply and that's what separates good judges from bad.

Write clearly, offer good, critical feedback and describe what you see, smell and taste. Avoid pretending you know how a beer is made or what particular pathway led to the faults you discern and make suggestions that brewers can take on board for improving. Don't assume.

If you enter, don't expect every judge is an expert who can pick diacetyl at ten paces and remember judges are consuming alcohol and using an extremely variable measuring instrument which is subject to fatigue. Also there are often many more entries per flight than there should be so help lift the quality by volunteering to judge and learning as much as you can about it. Who can expect good feedback from 3 blokes judging 40+ pale ales in one flight?

 

[Nizmoose]

Maybe you should enter one, or better yet apprentice judge on one before slamming half our community.

Undetectable to one person's palate is prevalent and distracting to another. The judges can only work to
Guidelines, or else they have no common ground. If the guidelines say diacetyl is out of place and get it in your beer, it should be pinged. Three judges aren't going to get it wrong and two would largely normalise a confused third.

By all means get annoyed about judges faulting beers where the guidelines don't support them (my favourite is when I got told a lambic needed more malt backbone), but you really don't see "overly anal and frankly snobby judges that slam quite reasonable beers for undetectable or non-existent defects in order to further their feeling of self importance", you see passionate judges wanting to make sure the best beers are recognised and that beers that don't fit a stylistic bill are given feedback against the style.

Sorry if I offended anyone, I'm not making a generalisation about most judges, I meant to describe the typical minority that people seem to get frustrated with, half of the community I'm sure aren't bad judges and 98% of them like you said are probably going to be completely reasonable, but I've read plenty of stories (more so in the Us tbh) where an entry has scored well with a few judges then been killed by one in particular who has taken the route of the bjcp president episode mentioned by new guy. Not trying to have a go at anybody and like I said I've never entered a beer into a competition, and am completely basing what I say on other people's experiences, everyone has a different palate as well, all noted by myself, I just think based on some other people's experiences there seem to be a few snobs in the bunch.

 

[Mr. No-Tip]

Now that our president has stated that oxidation can be definitely detected just by looking at a beer, I'm confident that it will start to become a thing for judges to declare that a beer is oxidized just by looking at it. God help us all.

Hopefully the other two will call the clown out then!

 

[Mr. No-Tip]

there seem to be a few snobs in the bunch.

Best way to keep the bastards honest is to get involved. Steward. Work up to judging. Train your palate by drinking beers against the style guidelines, better yet, do it with friends and compare results.

 

[Nizmoose]

Best way to keep the bastards honest is to get involved. Steward. Work up to judging. Train your palate by drinking beers against the style guidelines, better yet, do it with friends and compare results.

Yeah absolutely, I think this community (brewing in general) is one of the best for people that want to be able to get involved and help people out as well as receive helpful and honest advice. My other hobby/passion is Japanese cars and some of the people within that community are really toxic, I think the brewing community sets a damn good standard.