Other Comps With Specialty Category?

[BrenosBrews]

Topic pretty much says it all.

Does any one know if there are other comps with a specialty category excluding the state qualifiers for AABC?

Cheers.

 

[floppinab]

Didn't need to look too far there Brenos,

Castle Hill is doing Ciders and Meads along with Specialties this year

http://www.aussiehomebrewer.com/forum//ind...showtopic=37956

 

[BrenosBrews]

Cheers for that. Sorry for my laziness.

 

[Fourstar]

It would be good if one of the Melbourne based clubs did a Specialties/Other Competition considering the amount of entries for Vicbrew.

I'd say there would be some interest there. Also a good palce for people to entere theri one offs like an Imperial Pilsner, Imperial Milds, etc.
Saves us having to ship our entries to another state.

 

[BrenosBrews]

It would be good if one of the Melbourne based clubs did a Specialties/Other Competition considering the amount of entries for Vicbrew.

I'd say there would be some interest there. Also a good palce for people to entere theri one offs like an Imperial Pilsner, Imperial Milds, etc.
Saves us having to ship our entries to another state.

I was thinking exactly that this morning when I posted this. Not being limited to only two entries would also be pretty cool.

Even Beerfest doesn't have a speciality category

 

[Bribie G]

I suppose it boils down to "when is a style a style". I used to breed dogs - Smooth Fox Terriers to be precise - and there was no such thing as a mini-foxy, there was no category for them and no breed standards. Then Don Burke came along and unilaterally 'invented' Tenterfield Terriers. I don't know whether they ever got accepted as I've been out of dogs for 20 years.

However there are always the beer equivalents of Tenterfield terriers popping up - my Kiwi Gold Ales I am developing - - but certainly NZ Pilseners are now talked about with the use of Motueka etc etc, but nothing in the BJCP as yet.
It would be good to see a specialty category to cover these brews. People keep telling me "put the beer in the Specialty Category" but I got the impression with our own club comp (could be wrong I'll double check) that specialties were limited to stuff like hazelnut etc with no real space on the entry form to say things like "a classic Pilsener with a New Zealand touch" whatever.

 

[Ross]

However there are always the beer equivalents of Tenterfield terriers popping up - my Kiwi Gold Ales I am developing - - but certainly NZ Pilseners are now talked about with the use of Motueka etc etc, but nothing in the BJCP as yet.
It would be good to see a specialty category to cover these brews. People keep telling me "put the beer in the Specialty Category" but I got the impression with our own club comp (could be wrong I'll double check) that specialties were limited to stuff like hazelnut etc with no real space on the entry form to say things like "a classic Pilsener with a New Zealand touch" whatever.

Bribie,

The BJCP comps allow for all your beer experiments - Just read the catergorys - The one you want follows:

18.7 Other Specialty [BJCP]
This is explicitly a catch-all category for any beer that does not fit into an existing style category. No beer is ever
out of style in this category, unless it fits elsewhere.
The category is intended for any type of beer, including the following techniques or ingredients:
Unusual techniques (e.g., steinbier, ice beers)
Unusual fermentables (e.g., maple syrup, honey, molasses, sorghum)
Unusual adjuncts (e.g., oats, rye, buckwheat, potatoes)
Combinations of other style categories (e.g., India Brown Ale, fruit-and-spice beers, smoked spiced beers)
Out-of-style variations of existing styles (e.g., low alcohol versions of other styles, extra-hoppy beers, imperial
strength beers)
Historical, traditional or indigenous beers (e.g., Louvain Peetermann, Sahti, vatted Porter with Brettanomyces,
Colonial Spruce or Juniper beers, Kvass, Grtzer)
American-style interpretations of European styles (e.g., hoppier, stronger, or ale versions of lagers) or other
variants of traditional styles
Clones of specific commercial beers that arent good representations of existing styles
Any experimental beer that a brewer creates, including any beer that simply does not evaluate well against existing
style definitions
This category can also be used as an incubator for any minor world beer style (other than Belgians) for which
there is currently no AABA category. If sufficient interest exists, some of these minor styles might be promoted to
full styles in the future.

Cheers Ross

Edit: Spelling

 

[Fourstar]

Bribie,

The BJCP comps allow for all your beer experiments - Just read the catergorys - The one you want follows:

18.7 Other Specialty [BJCP]
This is explicitly a catch-all category for any beer that does not fit into an existing style category. No beer is ever
"out of style" in this category, unless it fits elsewhere.
The category is intended for any type of beer, including the following techniques or ingredients:
Unusual techniques (e.g., steinbier, ice beers)
Unusual fermentables (e.g., maple syrup, honey, molasses, sorghum)
Unusual adjuncts (e.g., oats, rye, buckwheat, potatoes)
Combinations of other style categories (e.g., India Brown Ale, fruit-and-spice beers, smoked spiced beers)
Out-of-style variations of existing styles (e.g., low alcohol versions of other styles, extra-hoppy beers, "imperial"
strength beers)
Historical, traditional or indigenous beers (e.g., Louvain Peetermann, Sahti, vatted Porter with Brettanomyces,
Colonial Spruce or Juniper beers, Kvass, Grtzer)
American-style interpretations of European styles (e.g., hoppier, stronger, or ale versions of lagers) or other
variants of traditional styles
Clones of specific commercial beers that aren't good representations of existing styles
Any experimental beer that a brewer creates, including any beer that simply does not evaluate well against existing
style definitions
This category can also be used as an "incubator" for any minor world beer style (other than Belgians) for which
there is currently no AABA category. If sufficient interest exists, some of these minor styles might be promoted to
full styles in the future.

Cheers Ross

Edit: Spelling

The only problem with this catch all (atleast the way it appears to me) is if everyone is brewing imperial versions of styles or left of center styles (such as a kiwi gold in bribies instance), its almost like a Best of Show competition where you are not so much judging the beer against their own style but against the other beers in the flight and the over all impression on their 'coined' styles. How can a Black IPA be judged against an Imperial Kolsch for instance. Overall impression?

It would be good if the specialties could be broken down somewhat into lagers and ales by colour for instance.

A way of doing it could be asking for 2 bottles to be entered. one to allow for individual bragging rights per style (colour/lager/ale) and then a bottle leftover for 'best of specialties' say? If you dont submit 2 bottles and you place, you dont get a chance at the 'best of show'?

Just throwing ideas around.

 

[haysie]

It would be good if the specialties could be broken down somewhat into lagers and ales by colour for instance.

A way of doing it could be asking for 2 bottles to be entered. one to allow for individual bragging rights per style (colour/lager/ale) and then a bottle leftover for 'best of specialties' say? If you dont submit 2 bottles and you place, you dont get a chance at the 'best of show'?

Just throwing ideas around.

A very sensible suggestion! Lagers or Ales,not the be all and end all of defining a beer style but its the best suggestion I`ve seen thus far. This would break the specialties into 2 groups therefore allowing judges a more heads up approach. Soooo many sub come sub styles within a category must be rattling for any palate.

 

[Fourstar]

A very sensible suggestion! Lagers or Ales,not the be all and end all of defining a beer style but its the best suggestion I`ve seen thus far. This would break the specialties into 2 groups therefore allowing judges a more heads up approach. Soooo many sub come sub styles within a category must be rattling for any palate.

Not just lagers and ales, lagers and ales by colour!

1. Other Specialty
1.1 Light Lagers
1.2 Light Ales
1.3 Dark Lagers
1.4 Dark Ales

Then a SBOS (Specialty Best of show) for the "1. Other Specialty" overall category. Would be like awarding a root category award to say, Light Lagers, English Bitters over awarding just 1st to munich Helles, 1st to Standard Light Lager, 1st to Ordinary Bitter, 1st to ESB etc etc.

I guess you get the gist.

 

[Thirsty Boy]

But there is a thing to cater for that - you have to tell the judges what it is you are trying to do - how its different? - what you were trying to achieve? Brew an imperial pilsner... they will judge it with the Pilsner standards in mind and see how well you "imperialized" it - same with a fruit beer... you say raspberry hefeweizen.. it will get judged not only as a raspberry beer, but also as a hefe.

So the beers aren't being judged against each other, they are being judged against themselves. A black IPA would be judged by two key things... is it black and how good an IPA is it. It would be awarded a number of points. An imperial kolsch would be judged pretty much as a kolsch - presumably with the expectation that it would be a more intense flavour experience... but still recognizably a kolsch. Then it would be awarded some points. The most points is the winner and the beers were never compared to each other.

With style guidelines and good judging standards, there is no real reason why any beers need to be judged in separate categories - they could all be lumped into one big group and judges judge each beer on its merits.

Sure, there are logistical reasons - palate fatigue, the fact that every judge would have to taste every beer to make it fair and things like that - but if a Witbier can be judged in the same category as a Flanders Red - a Belgian strong dark vs a Trippel is OK - a Mild and a Light Australian Lager are comparable.... then I think that the judges are capable of taking pretty much any disparate set of beers and judging each of them on their individual merits. Perhaps not logistically possible for a 300+ beer competition... but certainly for the 20-30 beers a big comp might have in the specialty category - especially when only some of those will be "other" specialty beers.

 

[haysie]

I disagree, the category is soooo open. It needs to be more brewer focused than outrageous style. Its always hard to define, FWIW throw your opinion to Vicbrew, and I will mine.
Haysie

 

[Stuster]

It needs to be more brewer focused than outrageous style.

What do you mean?

 

[haysie]

What do you mean?

No offense, Cant Read?

Without repeating myself the cat. is too open. Nearly un
- wait for it, judgeable.
What do I mean, read the thread, the styles are faaaark out there with no home.

How do you judge these far outs that fill "no style" cat. Mark em down and move on .

 

[Fourstar]

But there is a thing to cater for that - you have to tell the judges what it is you are trying to do - how its different? - what you were trying to achieve?

I entered a Hazelnut Brown Ale this year in vicbrew under spice/herb/vegetable. I get a note on my scores with "Sorry, style wasn't communicated to judges, will fix our procedures for next year". All of the major notes i get are "great chocolate flavour" and great Chocolate aroma. (i can see how hazelnut can be picked as chocolate considering everyone has downed a jar of nutella in their time)

A note on one was "assume chocolate beer" from the style notes for the style part on the judging sheet. It seems the judges where totally unsure what style it was due to poor stewarding. One with "chocolate stout?" in overall comments, another with "more info required on submission please" and one with recipe suggestions (even though there was no style to compare it against, moreso beer to style comparisons).

And yes, i did enter it cleary with "HAZELNUT BROWN ALE" written under name of brew and next to the style number notation on the entry form so i didnt enter it incorrectly either.

Im happy with the results i got but i wonder if my score would have done any better if the style was conveyed corectly. (i'd say so.)

 

[Fourstar]

Sure, there are logistical reasons - palate fatigue, the fact that every judge would have to taste every beer to make it fair and things like that - but if a Witbier can be judged in the same category as a Flanders Red - a Belgian strong dark vs a Trippel is OK - a Mild and a Light Australian Lager are comparable.... then I think that the judges are capable of taking pretty much any disparate set of beers and judging each of them on their individual merits. Perhaps not logistically possible for a 300+ beer competition... but certainly for the 20-30 beers a big comp might have in the specialty category - especially when only some of those will be "other" specialty beers.

But thats the thing, having a specific 'specialty competiton', where you have up to 100 entrants and you can split them up.

Just throwing ideas around.

 

[haysie]

. It seems the judges where totally unsure what style it was due to poor stewarding.

OMFG!!! Serious? You cant be, retract or confirm the statement?

 

[Stuster]

I think that your sentence makes no sense. What is brewer focussed exactly? All the beers that you think are 'way out there' are also brewed by brewers. That's the beers that those brewers wanted to brew. What beers were you thinking of that weren't brewed by brewers? :unsure:

I've certainly read the thread. I've also been involved in a number of comps (and run a big one). I'm also a judge. Judges had no issue with judging these 'far out' styles. The category needs careful ordering so that the beers go from less intense to more intense. Other than that, it's not really any harder than judging the Strong Belgian category where you go from Belgian Blonde up to Belgian Strong Dark. That's a huge range of beers and the specialty range doesn't usually throw up any more of a range of beers. If the competition were very good, it would certainly be good to split this category so in some ways I agree with you. I think that most comps don't have enough entries into this category to make that practical though.

 

[haysie]

I think that your sentence makes no sense. What is brewer focussed exactly? All the beers that you think are 'way out there' are also brewed by brewers. That's the beers that those brewers wanted to brew. What beers were you thinking of that weren't brewed by brewers? :unsure:

I've certainly read the thread. I've also been involved in a number of comps (and run a big one). I'm also a judge. Judges had no issue with judging these 'far out' styles. The category needs careful ordering so that the beers go from less intense to more intense. Other than that, it's not really any harder than judging the Strong Belgian category where you go from Belgian Blonde up to Belgian Strong Dark. That's a huge range of beers and the specialty range doesn't usually throw up any more of a range of beers. If the competition were very good, it would certainly be good to split this category so in some ways I agree with you. I think that most comps don't have enough entries into this category to make that practical though.

Well said. At the end of the day entries????
Judge a dark belgian against a blonde, chalk n cheese only for the malt.Yeast character walks the walk. If you had the numbers? The numbers,enthusiasm aint there.

 

[haysie]

I would be the first to acknoweldge, stupitity.
Nevermind a judge is always more competent then a steward. Shithouse comment.Really takes from the "we all put in" mantra.
Maybe next year I wll judge specialties!