Pro V Amateur - Who Has The Real Advantage?

[Lord Raja Goomba I]

Totally agree Ross (and it took some balls to do what you did).

I'd like to think that, since I wasn't brewing the same 5-6 beers ad nauseum (which most smaller commercials will), I'd produce more variety and hopefully better beer. I also don't have the restriction of commercial reality - namely I have to make a profit, so my ingredients can only cost so much. If I want to blow the budget, I can.

I'd welcome the opportunity to compete against commercial brewers.

However, the problem the other topic has noted is that the definition of an amateur is the crux of the issue. Whilst it remains the AABC, commercials can't enter. Therefore, amateur (or commercial by reason of exclusion) needs to be defined.

Ideally, this should lead to one of two actions:

1. Open it up and call it the ABBC (Aust. Beer Brewers Championship) or AAPBC (Aust. Amateur & Prof. Beer Brewing Championship; or
2. If it is going to remain AABC - define Amateur more clearly.

Either way, something needs to change. Though my preference is for the former, if the former is not decided upon, then the latter surely needs to occur.

Goomba

 

[argon]

Its my understanding so far that these beers were brewed on the same system as that which makes beer for sale commercially, is this correct?

Yep, correct. And the system was not operated by the person who submitted them. Although they were the designer and the financial owner of the product.

 

[jayse]

Yep. And the system was not operated by the person who submitted them. Although they were the designer and the financial owner of the product.

Seems a pretty clear cut breach of the rules then to me, if Ross had have brewed them himself at home then I think that is fine and within the rules.

If Bachus was simply a fresh wort factory then the line might be a little less clear but if they brew beer for sale to the public on the same equipment then I think its pretty clear cut.

Any advantages and disadvantages are meaningless.

 

[jayse]

There is one issue left and that is anyone else could enter a fresh wort that was fermented at home from Ross and maybe if Ross had fermented at home is that any different?

 

[winkle]

Seems a pretty clear cut breach of the rules then to me, if Ross had have brewed them himself at home then I think that is fine and within the rules.

If Bachus was simply a fresh wort factory then the line might be a little less clear but if they brew beer for sale to the public on the same equipment then I think its pretty clear cut.

Any advantages and disadvantages are meaningless.

Does that mean there are some FWKs that are ok and others that ain't :blink:, ban the lot and there isn't a issue.

 

[browndog]

We are dealing with two serperate issues;

1 that fermenting a FWK is not actually brewing.

and more importantly

2 What is an amateur beer.

For my mind, a FWK brewed, fermented, filtered, kegged and bottled in a commercial premises by paid employees is not an amateur brew, I don't care how many times I get quoted the rules, it is just not an amatuer beer. If the AABC committee does not address this, then they should just throw out the rule book and open the competition to everyone and everything. That way there will be nothing to debate.

cheers

Browndog

 

[Ross]

It's black and white.

When you choose to do a hobby or sport or occupation commercially and or professionally you are no longer an amateur.

The question of advantage is mute.

It's an amateur competition.

End of story.

This thread, if you read the opening post, is about what advantages do a commercial brewer have over a home brewer. It has nothing to do with your statement here.

cheers Ross

 

[Nick JD]

It's not very difficult to make beer at a professional level at home.

I fail to see how this is a revelation.

 

[bconnery]

To me both this thread and the other should be moving on from whether or not Ross was right or wrong to enter and focusing on peoples opinions on the rules as that stand and whether they need to be changed, and, in the case of this related thread, whether pro brewers have an advantage as brewers overall. Regardless of how we might feel about Ross's actions the results of the comp are now in and he isn't in there. Lets debate the point moving forward, where we might get change (if your opinion is that it is warranted) not endlessly rehash the past, which can't be changed

 

[the_new_darren]

Seems a pretty clear cut breach of the rules then to me, if Ross had have brewed them himself at home then I think that is fine and within the rules.

If Bachus was simply a fresh wort factory then the line might be a little less clear but if they brew beer for sale to the public on the same equipment then I think its pretty clear cut.

Any advantages and disadvantages are meaningless.

Ah, I didnt realise that the beer was made on commercial equipment that is used to also make commercial beer sold to the public.
If that is the case (and especially if Ross didn't actually make the beer) then that is clearly a professional product.

Why didn't Ross make the beer at home on his amateur equipment? Clearly he could have but chose not to.
Thanks for clearing that up Jayse

I can see Ross screaming bloody murder himself if Dr. Cooper entered some of his kits and knocked Ross out of a place.

We have quite a few commercial brewers here in SA that were oce quite successful homebrewers. As far as i know NONE of them entered the Amateur comp once becoming professionally paid brewers.

Again, it comes down to ethics!!

the_new_darren

 

[Ross]

Guys, please leave the comments re the QABC & AABC out of this thread - There are 2 going already where you cant share your views.

This thread is for the discussion of who has the advantage to make the best beer - I believe it's firmly stacked in the home brewers favour...

cheers Ross

 

[Nick JD]

If commercial breweries are entering comps to push their product then quickly the competition will go to hell.

If you brew for profit - sell your beer and have it reviewed in a commercial realm.

 

[the_new_darren]

Guys, please leave the comments re the QABC & AABC out of this thread - There are 2 going already where you cant share your views.

This thread is for the discussion of who has the advantage to make the best beer - I believe it's firmly stacked in the home brewers favour...

cheers Ross

OK Ross,

You hold a monolopy for Cryer Malt in Australia AND you are a commercial brewer!!!!!

I therefore believe that YOU as a commercial brewer and supplier of ALL Cryer Malt in Australia have a distict advantage over the "average homebrewer"

Its known as cheating mate!!

cheers

the_new_darren

 

[felten]

OK Ross,

You hold a monolopy for Cryer Malt in Australia AND you are a commercial brewer!!!!!

I therefore believe that YOU as a commercial brewer and supplier of ALL Cryer Malt in Australia have a distict advantage over the "average homebrewer"

Its known as cheating mate!!

I'm sensing a little bitterness here

back OT, I think the OP is right, there's very little advantage a commercial (micro) brewer has that a homebrewer can't match in theory.

 

[browndog]

Guys, please leave the comments re the QABC & AABC out of this thread - There are 2 going already where you cant share your views.

This thread is for the discussion of who has the advantage to make the best beer - I believe it's firmly stacked in the home brewers favour...

cheers Ross

Fair call Ross, I was just trying to answer Jayse's question, I should have posted it in one of the other threads. Back to the topic at hand, Pro V Amateur - Who has the real advantage?

Well, I guess that depends on who is the pro. Joe Blogs brewing 50,000L in a hit at Yatala has no advantage at all, he's behind the 8 ball big time because he is most likely brewing some tastless megaswill, no doubt he is doing a great job of it, but there is little advantage to him in a craftbeer scenario. I have to differ on the craftbeer microbrewer brewer though. I don't believe for a second that these guys are just churning out the same craftbeer all the time. They will be keeping an eye on the latest new hops and malts emerging and doing small pilot brews all the time. How else are they going to develop new product? They have, or should have excellent knowledge of ingrediants and the tools of their trade, after all, this is how they make their living is it not? Certainly every microbrewer I've had the fortune to speak to knew more about brewing than I can ever hope to. So I say maybe not the megabrewer, but definitey the microbrewer has the upper hand in relation to the homebrewer.

cheers

Browndog

 

[chadjaja]

Can we have a separate category for us brewers that don't use a tempmate to ferment? I use a cooler bag with ice blocks to achieve the temps I want and it requires twice daily checking and changing! That's a fair bit of knowledge and skill to predict especially in the early parts of fermentation where it creates its own heat. You guys that flick a switch and ferment are a complete rort ...........

 

[Bribie G]

OK Ross,

You hold a monolopy for Cryer Malt in Australia AND you are a commercial brewer!!!!!

I therefore believe that YOU as a commercial brewer and supplier of ALL Cryer Malt in Australia have a distict advantage over the "average homebrewer"

Its known as cheating mate!!

cheers

the_new_darren

Hi OLD Darren
Ross does not hold the monopoly for Cryer Malt in Australia. I was talking to the Cryers themselves in NZ last year when I met them at Beervana, and came out with the same statement (believing it to be true at the time) and was very quickly given the rounds of the kitchen - I think things have changed since you got your dealership taken off you Dazz.

 

[Barley Belly]

This thread, if you read the opening post, is about what advantages do a commercial brewer have over a home brewer. It has nothing to do with your statement here.

cheers Ross

Thanks Ross, duely noted.

In reply to your OP:-

I feel the amateur has the real advantage over the professional in this instance because after all, they are an amateur, not a professional which makes them eligible to enter the competition in question. Only professionals who go home from work and brew non-commercial beer as an amateur, should be considered to be amateur in this instance, if not, they are ineligible to enter the competition in question.

To sum up amateurs (by rule description) have the real advantage here because they are eligible to enter and professionals are not.

Ross, hope the above comments are more on topic for you.

 

[Batz]

Guys, please leave the comments re the QABC & AABC out of this thread - There are 2 going already where you cant share your views.

This thread is for the discussion of who has the advantage to make the best beer - I believe it's firmly stacked in the home brewers favour...

cheers Ross

I can't see your point here Ross, plenty of pro brewers like yourself also brew on home brew equipment. If your saying that you have more room to diversify on small home brew equipment then yes I'm sure you have, it's not rocket science.

Like it or not this thread will follow the other two and I don't believe that's a bad thing. I hope some changes for the better will come out of it, perhaps it's some of the reason I've not entered a comp. now for 5 years.

 

[drew9242]

Interesting point you have made Ross. I would think like browndog has said that the microbrewers who still have a small scale production are at a advantage. But the big brewreys maybe not, unless you are up against some of these big european ones.

:icon_offtopic: I do think that it should be defined to home brews in the amatuer comp. I doubt that we could enter a beer into the comercial beer comp so why should they be entering in the amatuer comp.