Vicbrew 2010

[BrenosBrews]

I put in two beers - one i was pretty happy with (Belgian Golden Strong) & an ESB i knew there was something wrong with but didn't know quite what it was & figured the judges would tell me. Pretty brave, huh.

The BSGA i got 109.5 - which i was pretty pleased about - as well as a few good tips. My first ever belgian.
The ESB was rightly punished with a low mark - but got what I paid for - some helpful feedback.

But one of the comments was: 'carbonation a bit low'. But i just came back from the UK, and it has more carbonation than the bitters on the hand pump i was drinking. Is that just an aussie perception or should a bottled version have more carbonation?

I also figured out that when i bought my first bag of malt, i stuck it in the freezer for ages because i didn't have anywhere mouse-proof. Big mistake. The subtle unidentifiable off flavour in my ESB one of the judges mentioned i now think is a fridgy taste.

A bottled ESB should/will have more carbonation than handpumped ESB. But an ESB with a low carbonation, even if bottled, isn't a major issue. Was that the only negative comment?

 

[brendo]

But one of the comments was: 'carbonation a bit low'. But i just came back from the UK, and it has more carbonation than the bitters on the hand pump i was drinking. Is that just an aussie perception or should a bottled version have more carbonation?

:icon_offtopic:

having been to the UK last year and now running some beer engines at home, I can definitely tell you that it affects the way carbonation is received. Bottled versions are typically higher and you have to remember that with cask conditioned ale - the carbonation levels do change depeneding on where it is at in the serving process.

 

[bcp]

A bottled ESB should/will have more carbonation than handpumped ESB. But an ESB with a low carbonation, even if bottled, isn't a major issue. Was that the only negative comment?

No, it was a minor flaw in the overall. There were some good suggestions about mash temps, bitterness etc. Honestly, getting all the constructive feedback was very helpful. Next time i brew it i know what to adjust. Worth every penny of the price of admission.

 

[felten]

There was an interview with gordon strong on TBN about brewing for competitions, it was interesting to hear him talk about that even if he enters the best beer he can make into a category, he figures he only has a 1/3rd chance to actually place with it because taste and judging is so subjective.

One thing that perplexed me was the comments about head retention, I had 2 negative and 1 positive comments each on 2 diff beers, I thought head retention would be a constant factor. Not that I'm complaining, I'm happy with all the feedback on my beers.

 

[brett mccluskey]

Sodium hyporchlorite is the active ingredient in chlorine bleach no?

Could it be chlorephenols from not rinsing well enough?

Good point.That 'extra dash for good measure' mightn't be such a great idea.Over time it can leech into your fermenter,48 hours is a long time to let it sit IMO.Smell your fermenter when it's dry,it should smell of NOTHING :icon_cheers:

 

[brettprevans]

As someone who judged and did bjcp I found some of tge scoring sheet comments to be perplexing and in some cases wrong. Others were good.

New pet hate: saying a beer is ok or good but them having no input into how to make it better. Kind of useless comment. They probably aren't going to tell me anything I don't already know but u never know.

I'm also not sure how 17.5 (oud bruin) gets judged as Flemish red?

 

[bconnery]

One thing that perplexed me was the comments about head retention, I had 2 negative and 1 positive comments each on 2 diff beers, I thought head retention would be a constant factor.

Not necessarily. Glassware, even whether you got the first or a later pour, and other factors can influence this.
Personally I've always tried to implement a 'best glass' rule because of this.

If the same beer is poured into three different glasses and one of them has a good head with good retention then to me it should be marked on this one.

This does require discussion from the judges for that particular score but I've seen such wildly varying head from the same beer that it seems the best way to me...

 

[felten]

Do you get docked points for poor head retention?

I know my stout that got 2 negatives, has a head on it you could float a 50c coin on and stays there for 15 minutes, oh well -_-

 

[pk.sax]

Might be a bottle and jug thing, I noticed some of the beers poured beautifully from the bottles into the jug and from jug to glass 1 with a nice head but it was difficult to get that head in glasses 2 & 3.

 

[Fourstar]

Might be a bottle and jug thing, I noticed some of the beers poured beautifully from the bottles into the jug and from jug to glass 1 with a nice head but it was difficult to get that head in glasses 2 & 3.

Thats where you should take the 'retention' part from the jug if its got a head to style in the jug. otherwise if it was poured very very gently and there is no foam in the jug, take the head factor from the glass. The amount of swirling i end up doing i drive off abit of carbonation so this should produce foam regardless, if it doesnt. It probabaly wont for the rest of the time its at the table.

Another thing to note, 'appearance' and 'body' components are easy places for judges to dock points on middle of the road beers. if you make these parts faultless on every beer you enter, its an easy 10 points.

for example if i was presented a bohemian pilsner and it had great 'tight' foam stand, good gold appearance but had chill haze it would loose 1 point. if it had yeast in suspension it would loose 2-2.5 points. if the head was loose, another point would go. all up you could be losing 3.5 points for something thats typically here nor there for beers you'd be serving for yourself.

That is why the extra steps taken of cold conditioning, polyclar, gelatine and/or filtration are important for majority of styles.

 

[threepwood]

This years VicBrew was my first ever comp and I wasn't sure what to expect in terms of criticism or praise from the judges. I was absolutely astounded by the great level of feedback that the judges provided, pretty much across the board there was constructive feedback. What I considered my good beers got pluses & minuses and advice for improvement and guess what, so did my bad beers. Even my worst beer in the comp received constructive feedback. Nowhere, good or bad beers, did I see any half-arsed judging attempt or overly critical comment. As a novice brewer I find this advice invaluable and if I take it on balance then I believe it will help me to improve my quality.

With so many entries and so many beers to taste I can imaging that judging can be a bit of a trial and that it would be easy to get into the habit of ticking a box and moving on however pretty much all of you judges have something valuable to say on all the beer you judge. Well done guys; I'm well impressed. Thanks for taking on the job.

 

[Pennywise]

My sheets arived yesterday, thanks heaps to those who chipped in to make the event possible. I was really impressed with the feedback from both my placings. Was supprised to have one BJCP judge say my Cal Common was the best beer they've had in years :kooi: Whoohoo. Some constructive critisism about my IIPA was well recieved and I will be sitting down with a now found bottle I had left over, and nitpicking it again with the notes in front of me, although there were some points I do disagree with, as someone said previously, beer is a subjective thing so what works for some wont always work for others.

Lastly, I appologise to the 3 poor souls that were forced to put my 3can/rushjob/coles clearance Stout in their mouths, but I really wanted to know what you boys though of such things, and I agree. But next year you will be getting another so ner. The comments made were hilarious though, and I suppose it can only get better :unsure: