Contradictory IPA names?

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Getzinator

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2012
Messages
360
Reaction score
10
Location
Wilmington
So one thing I've been noticing recently: seemingly inaccurate names for beer. Maybe I'm way off base here, but that's why I wanted some clarification.

How in the world can you have anything but a "pale" IPA? Dark, double Dark, Amber, Oatmeal... I've just seen a variety of these and more, but don't understand. Wouldn't these just be overly hopped versions of other beers, or maybe a new category of "India Dark Ale" or "India Oatmeal Ale"?
 
The way I see it , when a beer is referred to as "India" it is an indication that it is excessively hoppy. The pale part I assume is a reference to anything lighter than black except in the case of CDA or "black IPA" or brown IPA or amber IPA. I think people struggle with catagorizing their beers and need ways to describe it in a few short words. Personally I dont think calling somethin a "blank" IPA is bad because it is an indication of what the beer may taste like.
 
So one thing I've been noticing recently: seemingly inaccurate names for beer. Maybe I'm way off base here, but that's why I wanted some clarification.

How in the world can you have anything but a "pale" IPA? Dark, double Dark, Amber, Oatmeal... I've just seen a variety of these and more, but don't understand. Wouldn't these just be overly hopped versions of other beers, or maybe a new category of "India Dark Ale" or "India Oatmeal Ale"?

This.... I was reading BYO this month. They have an article devoted to the progression of IPA's, Wheat, Dark, Black, Amber. The general public has a hard enough time with beer catagories. Lets not make it harder for them to decipher what is what
 
The way I see it , when a beer is referred to as "India" it is an indication that it is excessively hoppy. The pale part I assume is a reference to anything lighter than black except in the case of CDA or "black IPA" or brown IPA or amber IPA. I think people struggle with catagorizing their beers and need ways to describe it in a few short words. Personally I dont think calling somethin a "blank" IPA is bad because it is an indication of what the beer may taste like.

This^

If it is a descriptor of what type of IPA it is then it makes it easier to gauge certain aspects of it for the less educated beer drinker.

I personallly think that in the beer aisle of every store they should have a quick reference chart showing the name and a basic rundown of what it entails in laymens terms. Always strive to educate your customer because the more they know the more likely they are to try new things, otherwise they are seeing it as a crapshoot that could backfire.

Me personally when I see a style I am unfamiliar with I buy a stinger of it and give it a shot, I have found some great beers and styles this way.
 
Miller High Life.....doesn't make me high, just drunk (barely)!

Kona Fire Rock Ale.....no fire or rocks in the bottle at all (BS)!

La Fin De Monde.....I wake up from a drunken stooper only to find that the world did not actually end (WICKED PISSA)!

Some batches of Pliny the Younger are actually OLDER than Pliny the Elder (WTF?)!
 
So one thing I've been noticing recently: seemingly inaccurate names for beer. Maybe I'm way off base here, but that's why I wanted some clarification.

How in the world can you have anything but a "pale" IPA? Dark, double Dark, Amber, Oatmeal... I've just seen a variety of these and more, but don't understand. Wouldn't these just be overly hopped versions of other beers, or maybe a new category of "India Dark Ale" or "India Oatmeal Ale"?

Well why call them india anything? its not like they're going to India..........

anyways, snark aside, we tend to name things as modifications of others because it makes it easier for folks to understand what they're getting into. For someone who's not totally up on beer culture, which does a better job of conveying what a beer is: Black IPA, or Cascadian Dark Ale? The average beer drinker would have no idea what to expect from a Cascadian Dark Ale. Now, it is also true that the average beer drinker isn't buying either one. But I certainly believe there is non-trivial set of people who like IPAs and might be intrigued by a Black IPA and not have a clue what a CDA was.

All that said, I don't get bent out of shape at all about what anyone chooses to call their product. Of course, I say that now, but if someone bottled a Chili Bacon Pilsner and called it a Robust Porter, I guess I might be a little miffed when I opened it.
 
Miller High Life.....doesn't make me high, just drunk (barely)!

Kona Fire Rock Ale.....no fire or rocks in the bottle at all (BS)!

La Fin De Monde.....I wake up from a drunken stooper only to find that the world did not actually end (WICKED PISSA)!

Some batches of Pliny the Younger are actually OLDER than Pliny the Elder (WTF?)!

LOL I nearly spit out my drink when I read WICKED PISSA in a British accent in my head.
 
I hate the term Belgian IPA. Belgium does not have IPAs, or anything with hop taste or aroma. I get that these IPAs use Belgian yeasts, but it's misleading, and lazy naming.

That said, I have no idea what an alternative name should be. Tough to come up with quick and apt names.
 
libeerty said:
I hate the term Belgian IPA. Belgium does not have IPAs, or anything with hop taste or aroma. I get that these IPAs use Belgian yeasts, but it's misleading, and lazy naming.

That said, I have no idea what an alternative name should be. Tough to come up with quick and apt names.

Well, it could be called IPA with a Belgian Yeast. Or Belgian Yeasted IPA. Or simply Fake Belgian IPA. But that makes me think there might be a real Belgian IPA. Hmm....
Big Hopped Belgian Beer
Hoppy Tripel
Hoppy Pale
I give up.
 
I'm ok with Belgium IPA, black IPA and the rest. It's pretty straight forward to me. The name in front signifies what's different.
 
My only issue with "Belgian IPA" is that it's ambiguous. There are the american IPA's with belgian yeasts (stone's cali-belguiqe, raging *****) and then there are the hopped up Tripels (achouffe, etc). We need better nomenclature to differentiate the two.
 
belgian IPA is perfectly acceptable. I once brewed a excessively hopped pale ale with belgian malts, hops, and yeast. The only way I can figure to convey any idea as to what is in the bottle and what it may taste like is to call it a belgian IPA, because it is an IPA made with belgian ingredients.
 
captwalt said:
belgian IPA is perfectly acceptable. I once brewed a excessively hopped pale ale with belgian malts, hops, and yeast. The only way I can figure to convey any idea as to what is in the bottle and what it may taste like is to call it a belgian IPA, because it is an IPA made with belgian ingredients.

Most commercial Belgian IPAs use American hops.
 
Maybe I'm just spoiled by Dogfish Head living in Delaware. They name pretty much everything by BJCP standards, and then put a description right on the front of every bottle.
I just don't see the problem with naming something whatever you want to, e.g. DoobiePoop, and then describing it somewhere like "A ridiculously hoppy porter."

Thanks for all the feedback guys. Even if some of you seem to have just discovered sarcasm.... Also brush up on the forum rules regarding trolls
 
Since Belgium never had colonies in India, we should name their superhopped pale ale after someplace they did colonize. Who wants a Congo Pale Ale?
 
Back
Top