Real Brewing Comp

[Steve Lacey]

As I've had a bit to do with comps and judging in the past, threads like this always manage to extract a response no matter how much my better judgement tells me to leave it alone. So, I'll try to keep it brief.

Firstly, guidelines are generally not as "strict" as is being represented in this thread. The mash paddle is bit different in that it has reasonably strict brewing guidelines, but this approach is very squarely oriented towards finding the most skillful brewer by forcing a narrower range of variation in techniques and ingredients.

Your mainstream, run-of-the-mill comp uses guidelines mainly for the use of judges, to guide them to determine whether a beer actually does adequately fit within the style category it is purported to. It is almost as an added service to the competitor to let them know what the criteria are by which their beer is meant to be assessed as falling within the style.

Guidelines first and foremost determine style categories for the comp and, thereby eligibility of the beer to be judged against some kind of standard type. If you want to use the dog or horse analogy, they are there to make sure you don't enter a Rhode Island Red Rooster in the German Schnauzer category (or a bitzer in with the purebreds is probably a better example). Beers that fall a point or two outside the OG are not summarily tossed in the bin...for a start, nobody would even know exactly what the OG is, but if the stated guideline is 1040-1048, and you submit something that was a 1065, it is likely to stick out like the proverbials and will not represent the style it is entered in.

Judges use the guidelines to weed out beers that poorly represent the defining characteristics of the style. That's about it. After that they do have to start relying on more subjective criteria, but even so, subjectivity is minimized by the scoring system. For example, you give points for clarity, points for aroma, points for taste, points for overall impression...always with a thought about how it fits the general requirements of the style, and in all these points, the judges are very much looking for what makes it a GOOD beer!! The guidelines and scoring process just provides a systematic way of doing that with a minimisation of subjectivity and individual bias. But there is also enough scope involved to reward those certain indefinable qualities that give some beers the edge.

The system ain't perfect, and ways of improving it or even radically changing it should not necessarily be dismissed out of hand, but I honestly don't think it is broken either, certainly as an entry-level system of competition for home rewers (in that sense the comparison with the CAMRA competion is not really valid, becuse you are talking about professional brewers).

The best advice I have is to get in and try out the current system thoroughly before rejecting it; to propose new approaches you need to go in with your eyes wide open to the myriad of potential difficulties and pitfalls in trying to line beers up, one against the other, and decide a winner.

My concern, as always when this topic comes up, is that those bagging the existing procedures don't seem to have had much actual experience with it.

That'll do for now.

Steve
:beer:

 

[Sean]

A well argued defense of the system, Steve, but I don't understand what you are saying with this bit:

The system ain't perfect, and ways of improving it or even radically changing it should not necessarily be dismissed out of hand, but I honestly don't think it is broken either, certainly as an entry-level system of competition for home rewers (in that sense the comparison with the CAMRA competion is not really valid, becuse you are talking about professional brewers).

[post="58534"][/post]​

Guidelines first and foremost determine style categories for the comp and, thereby eligibility of the beer to be judged against some kind of standard type. If you want to use the dog or horse analogy, they are there to make sure you don't enter a Rhode Island Red Rooster in the German Schnauzer category (or a bitzer in with the purebreds is probably a better example).

That's fine if the guidelines are broad enough to truely the reflect the style. What worries me about the guidelines (at least the VicBrew ones, which are the only ones I have any familiarity with) is that many, probably most, of the best commercial milds (for instance) would fall noticably outside those guidelines. I can't, off the top of my head, think of a recent Mild category winner of Champion Beer of Britain that would be a good fit to those guidelines - certainly Batemans Dark, Timothy Taylors Golden Best, and Morehouses Black Cat (all CBoB winners) would not. Of this years finalists I can't remember Lees Mild well enough to say, but the 2nd & 3rd place winners (Brain's Dark and Hardy & Hanson's Kimberley Mild) would again not be great fits. I don't mean that they would fail dismally, (except Taylor's maybe), but they would definitely have to be marked down in some areas.

 

[warrenlw63]

Sean,

I think you killed Roger Protz and stole his brain. :blink:

Warren -

 

[Sean]

Sean,

I think you killed Roger Protz and stole his brain. :blink:

Warren -

[post="58595"][/post]​

I'm not sure how to take that. Which is probably a good thing.

 

[Steve Lacey]

What worries me about the guidelines (at least the VicBrew ones, which are the only ones I have any familiarity with) is that many, probably most, of the best commercial milds (for instance) would fall noticably outside those guidelines.

[post="58594"][/post]​

Well this is a case in point of the fact that there is always scope for reviewing and revising the guidelines for improvements. It is an ongoing process. But to pick up on one style that may not be up to date or somehow or other has been historically distorted...I'm not sure why it is out of whack...is not a reason for abandoning the style-based approach to homebrew judging holus bolus, IMHO. Sean, this is one style (and a not very commonly brewed one at that) in one category (low alcohol or similar) out of I suppose a dozen categories and therefore dozens of styles. And for that you are are worried about the guidelines in toto??

Milds are not a very commonly produced or imported beer in Australia or the US. Even in Britain I understand that it is reduced to very localised areas. Maybe that is why some sets of guidelines have been passed around pretty much unquestioningly. My understanding, obtained from guidelines I suppose, is that the mild part of the name comes from the fact that they have a low opening gravity, like less than 1040. And they are dark. And they are brewed with an ale yeast. And that's about it. Is that not the case, either now or ever? Anyway, if the style descriptions are wrong, and if this is the only area of the VicBrew guidelines you have a problem with 1) talk to the organisers, as it seems you have a lot of knowledge to contribute, and 2) Congratulate them on getting the rest of it right... Similarly, check the BJCP guidelines on milds and see how they fare, as really, these should be the primary reference point for comp organisers needing to put together style descriptions.

Finally, you alway get dissent and differences in opinion when putting together style descriptions and groups of classes for competitions ("Oh, why on earth have they got koelsch in with pale continental lager" etc). It is the old armchair critic syndrome. There are just always some things for which there is no perfect solution, and organisers have to make a call and go with it. The only way to improve the system is to support them (organisers) and, even better, get involved. The comps are for you and every other home brewer far more than they are for the organisers...they are just the poor sods who are community-minded enough to stick up their hands and have a go. Why not you? (And that is a general "you", not just aimed at Sean.)

Steve
:beer:

 

[Jim_Levet]

So how much fun are we supposed to have?
Will that be in the guidelines?
James

 

[ozbrewer]

Jim i moved it to a new thread

http://www.aussiehomebrewer.com/forum/Happ...wing-t5460.html



this thread has become the reason why i wanted to do something fun

 

[Sean]

Lots of good points again, Steve.

Well this is a case in point of the fact that there is always scope for reviewing and revising the guidelines for improvements. It is an ongoing process. But to pick up on one style that may not be up to date or somehow or other has been historically distorted...I'm not sure why it is out of whack...is not a reason for abandoning the style-based approach to homebrew judging holus bolus, IMHO. Sean, this is one style (and a not very commonly brewed one at that) in one category (low alcohol or similar) out of I suppose a dozen categories and therefore dozens of styles. And for that you are are worried about the guidelines in toto??

I picked Mild because it was the easiest to demonstrate my point. I have similar (if less extream) reservations about most or all of the English styles (where my expertise lies) which doesn't give me a lot of faith in the others. The references to "The best examples ..." gives me the distinct impression that someone somewhere along the way has strong personal preference for malt. Many of the best examples of just about any english style have bugger all malt accents.

Milds are not a very commonly produced or imported beer in Australia or the US. Even in Britain I understand that it is reduced to very localised areas. Maybe that is why some sets of guidelines have been passed around pretty much unquestioningly.

Probably.

My understanding, obtained from guidelines I suppose, is that the mild part of the name comes from the fact that they have a low opening gravity, like less than 1040. And they are dark. And they are brewed with an ale yeast. And that's about it. Is that not the case, either now or ever?

Like just about every other name in English brewing, the origins of the name are debateable at best. Leaving that aside about the only thing you can safely say is that a given brewery's mild is less bitter than their bitter (providing the mild isn't just the bitter with a dash of caramel, which does happen). They are usually not very bitter or hoppy, but there are excellent exceptions. They are usually between 3 and 3.5% (1030 - 1036), but there are excellent exceptions up to 6%. They are usually dark, but there are excellent exceptions. Taylor's Golden Best (multiple CBoB winner in the mild category_ is not much darker than Coopers Pale Ale, and moderately well hopped. And a stunningly good beer to boot. Anyway, back to my point, which is that (IMO) any attempt to define English beer styles to include the true range of the style ends up with as many exceptions and caveats as useful indicators.

Anyway, if the style descriptions are wrong, and if this is the only area of the VicBrew guidelines you have a problem with 1) talk to the organisers, as it seems you have a lot of knowledge to contribute, and 2) Congratulate them on getting the rest of it right... Similarly, check the BJCP guidelines on milds and see how they fare, as really, these should be the primary reference point for comp organisers needing to put together style descriptions.

I've only glanced at the BJCP guidelines, but my impression was they are at least equally as faulted.

Finally, you alway get dissent and differences in opinion when putting together style descriptions and groups of classes for competitions ("Oh, why on earth have they got koelsch in with pale continental lager" etc). It is the old armchair critic syndrome. There are just always some things for which there is no perfect solution, and organisers have to make a call and go with it. The only way to improve the system is to support them (organisers) and, even better, get involved. The comps are for you and every other home brewer far more than they are for the organisers...they are just the poor sods who are community-minded enough to stick up their hands and have a go. Why not you? (And that is a general "you", not just aimed at Sean.)

Of course. I'm fully aware that I'm playing the armchair critic. If my posts come across as abrasive, it's not because I really want to attack the hard work of the competition organisers, but because I'm passionate about English beer and spent most of free time for more than 10 years fighting to defend it.

 

[ozbrewer]

I'm passionate about English beer and spent most of free time for more than 10 years fighting to defend it.

[post="58654"][/post]​

would you like to take your fight someware else, this is just so far of what the topic started as it just not funny anymore, i find myself skimming through a topic i started just to find the parts the relate to the origonal topic.

Sean, Im passionate about Belgian beer, but i dont hijack threads with it....give it a rest

 

[Sean]

I'm passionate about English beer and spent most of free time for more than 10 years fighting to defend it.

[post="58654"][/post]​

would you like to take your fight someware else, this is just so far of what the topic started as it just not funny anymore, i find myself skimming through a topic i started just to find the parts the relate to the origonal topic.

Sean, Im passionate about Belgian beer, but i dont hijack threads with it....give it a rest

[post="58657"][/post]​

Since you ask so nicely, I'll drop the subject.

 

[big d]

so if your so passionate about pommy beers sean why are you in mildura and not in england where you could be enjoying great beers.
im curious

cheers
big d

 

[warrenlw63]

Sean,

I think you killed Roger Protz and stole his brain. :blink:

Warren -

[post="58595"][/post]​

I'm not sure how to take that. Which is probably a good thing.

[post="58603"][/post]​

More to do with your knowledge of English beer.

Warren -

 

[Sean]

so if your so passionate about pommy beers sean why are you in mildura and not in england where you could be enjoying great beers.
im curious

cheers
big d

[post="58683"][/post]​

I married an Aussie.

 

[Ross]

I'm passionate about English beer and spent most of free time for more than 10 years fighting to defend it.

[post="58654"][/post]​

would you like to take your fight someware else, this is just so far of what the topic started as it just not funny anymore, i find myself skimming through a topic i started just to find the parts the relate to the origonal topic.

Sean, Im passionate about Belgian beer, but i dont hijack threads with it....give it a rest

[post="58657"][/post]​

Ozbrewer, it's a shame your post was hijacked, but it certainly has developed into an equally interesting thread - As you've moved your thread, I guess I'm not hijacking further - good luck with your idea, the BYO article had me thinking the same... :beer: