Nsw Amateur Brewing Competition

[grod5]

The Annual ***** fest is on again I see, maybe the best way to inform the organisers about displeasure is via a PM or some other direct contact. Maybe the best way is not to participate next year.

daniel

 

[Rob S]

My 2c, thanks for the organisers for volunteering their time and energy for this.

 

[bigfridge]

All sorting an corrections are now complete.

The envelopes will be posted tomorrow.

Thanks
Dave

 

[a_quintal]

All sorting an corrections are now complete.

The envelopes will be posted tomorrow.

Thanks
Dave

Woohoo

Thanks again for everything Dave.

 

[bigfridge]

Just confirming that the envelopes have left the building. Thanks to all the helpers and for the messages of thanks and support from the patient folks.

I have attached a copy of the final results and cobvering letter sent to all competitors. These results replace the draft versions posted here earlier due to the need to comply with the AABA requirement for separating tied scores.

Over and out,
David

View attachment NSW_State_Results_2012.pdf

 

[MHB]

A big thanks to all, especially bigfridge, the judges stewards and all involved, there were some wonderful beers presented, had the pleasure of handing out 3, 40+ point scores in the very small flight I helped judge, which says a lot about the standard of beer being brewed in NSW.

Sorry Dave but someone has to - Class 9 Peter Davis had two entries, one won the class and was the BOS runner up, the other came in 7th looks like the score for the second beer has been put in for both. Sort of dumb **** I do, glad I not the only one.
Mark

 

[bigfridge]

Sorry Dave but someone has to - Class 9 Peter Davis had two entries, one won the class and was the BOS runner up, the other came in 7th looks like the score for the second beer has been put in for both. Sort of dumb **** I do, glad I not the only one.
Mark

Thanks Mark, but the results are correct as printed.

You can see that there were 2 panels of 4 judges and each panel assigned scores to the beers that they judged. A Mini BOS was then held between the two panels of judges and they agreed on the relative merits of the top beers and assigned the placings.

Hence the actual score recorded is not absolutely related to the awarded place. It is not related to any brewer entering multiple beers in a category as the names of the brewers are never known on the competition floor.

HTH,
Dave

 

[MHB]

Fair cop
Mark

 

[Barry]

Received my score sheets and certificates today. Great feedback, especially for the not so good beers.
Thanks Dave et al :icon_cheers:

 

[Brewman_]

I also got my score sheets today, thanks again.

Some great feedback. Some of the feedback is so obvious, when you read and reflect on it and have a taste of the beers again. Some other points made by the judges are things that were not so obvious, and is more subtle. To me the feed back is what it is about.

Fear_n_loath

 

[a_quintal]

Got my score sheets and certificate just then. I can see the effort that goes in, must be so much work for that many entries.

Love the feedback.

 

[felon]

Thanks again for all the effort put in. My certificates and scoresheets arrived this morning. Some great ideas from the judges to help my beers.

 

[Jay Cee]

All sorting an corrections are now complete.

the results are correct as printed.

Are you sure about those statements, chief? There may be four people who will question a final score of 105 in category 13.

Especially the #1 listing (that's me!), who upon viewing the preliminary results, gave up his time to do the 100km round trip to get ingredients, frantically spend 10 hours brewing & bottling two batches, one of which would be decided upon to enter the Nationals.

Or spare a thought for the #4 listing, who I believe should be bumped up to 3rd place (as #2 & #3 should be). He'll be quite annoyed if he needs to re-brew, but no longer has the timeframe to do so, with the AABC entry deadline just around the corner.

the actual score recorded is not absolutely related to the awarded place

FYI: The#1 place in Category 13 should read as 70 points. This is due to three judges submitting totals of 33, 36 & 36, and recalculating to a % figure, which is BJCP standard. The scores that follow in the results sheet are significantly higher at 78, 76 & 74.5. I find it difficult impossible to accept the #1 award or the opportunity to compete in the Nationals if it means that another rightfully excellent brewer misses out due to a mistake.

I'm hoping that someone from the organising committee of HUB can (publicly) clarify these discrepancies, and make the assurance to all entrants that this is an isolated incident, which does not affect the validity of the rest of the comp results.

 

[Jay Cee]

To ensure the matters are not confused with one another (these are unrelated), allow me to present a second (of three) questions to HUB.

I have taken receipt of the following certificates, delivered by the Posite this morning. I have photographed them as reference, because I do not have a scanner:





Respectively, these beers placed 15th & 4th. The cover letter accompanying the scoresheets would indicate that #1 = Gold, #2 = Silver & #3 = Bronze.

How does a beer placed 15th a Bronze ranking ?

 

[warra48]

To ensure the matters are not confused with one another (these are unrelated), allow me to present a second (of three) questions to HUB.

I have taken receipt of the following certificates, delivered by the Posite this morning. I have photographed them as reference, because I do not have a scanner:

[Respectively, these beers placed 15th & 4th. The cover letter accompanying the scoresheets would indicate that #1 = Gold, #2 = Silver & #3 = Bronze.

How does a beer placed 15th a Bronze ranking ?

My guess, and it's only a guess:

. The Awards are done similarly to wine judging competitions.
. It is not based on your place, but where the points awarded land against a pre-determined range.

For example, it's quite possible for say 30 to 40% of the field in a class to get gold awards in wine shows etc etc.

It's obviously not done on the Olympic method!

 

[Jay Cee]

Some competitors have now claimed that they paid the wrong amount and would like a refund, so all envelopes need to be opened to check who paid $10 so that the $3 refund can be organised before they are posted back. This has all delayed the finalisation of the comp.

For me, $12 is neither here nor there, but when you multiply that by "x", one does wonder how much extra was paid across the whole comp. However, based on your statement above, I'm looking into all corners of the big yellow envelope, and I don't see a cheque. The total funds submitted was very clear on the forms, as evidenced below. It's not too big a task to determine from the names on the results tally that 4 entries = $10 per entry.

 

[MHB]

Clearly we cant find a moderator when we need one your account is still open!
Im not on the HUB committee, but I think even I know most of the answers

I think that flight might have had a third judge, personally I have always thought raw scoring was rather silly and that all results should be posted as percentage so in this case 105/150*100 or 70% or 35/50. I suspect #4 may have in fact have a score of 24.8/50 or 49.6% however you want to phrase it.

Medals are decided on a score not a place, if all the beers in the flight were stunningly good and scored over 40/50, they might all be awarded a GOLD medals, but only one of them can get first place, beers scoring between 30-40 might be awarded a SILVER medal and so on, Im far from sure what the cut-off for the various divisions is, but thats a pretty common way to distribute medals in wine comps and the like.
But I suspect you knew all that as did most here and just wanted to do a bit more whinging.
Mark

 

[bigfridge]

For me, $12 is neither here nor there, but when you multiply that by "x", one does wonder how much extra was paid across the whole comp. However, based on your statement above, I'm looking into all corners of the big yellow envelope, and I don't see a cheque. The total funds submitted was very clear on the forms, as evidenced below. It's not too big a task to determine from the names on the results tally that 4 entries = $10 per entry.

From the covering letter sent with each result pack and posted earlier to AHB.

"Finally, due to a clerical error there were some entry forms used where the fee was specified as
$10. This was quickly corrected to $7 but it may be possible that some entrants paid the incorrect,
higher fee. As it is not possible to determine whether the incorrect amount was actually paid, or if
only the form was wrong, would you please contact the organizing committee to request a refund.
Please send your banking details an the amount claimed to [email protected]."

I know that Mr Jay Cee is perfect, but a lot of people used the $10 version of the entry form, but still managed to send the correct amount.

Please just comply with our request and you will get your refund.

 

[AndrewQLD]

Clearly we cant find a moderator when we need one your account is still open!
Im not on the HUB committee, but I think even I know most of the answers

I think that flight might have had a third judge, personally I have always thought raw scoring was rather silly and that all results should be posted as percentage so in this case 105/150*100 or 70% or 35/50. I suspect #4 may have in fact have a score of 24.8/50 or 49.6% however you want to phrase it.

Medals are decided on a score not a place, if all the beers in the flight were stunningly good and scored over 40/50, they might all be awarded a GOLD medals, but only one of them can get first place, beers scoring between 30-40 might be awarded a SILVER medal and so on, Im far from sure what the cut-off for the various divisions is, but thats a pretty common way to distribute medals in wine comps and the like.
But I suspect you knew all that as did most here and just wanted to do a bit more whinging.
Mark

Moderators don't close accounts that's up to admin, however the rest of your comments are spot on from what I remember when I was a Qld delegate and several people can achieve a bronze, silver or gold in the one class.
And I agree also that it is a stupid way of awarding in a competition and was obviously introduced to "encourage" brewers to enter as there is always a good chance of receiving a medal to show off.

Andrew

 

[Rob S]

Got my beer report today. Thanks to all those involved it was excellent to get some expert feedback on my beers. I'm very happy with my silver certificate and yes I'll be showing it off to anyone that I can and telling them tall stories of how awesome the beer was. Thanks again.