Anyone else entering Upper Mississippi Mashout?

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.

AnchorBock

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
557
Reaction score
34
Location
Minneapolis
http://www.mashout.org/index.html#Poster

Anyone else entering? If so, what are you submitting? I've only heard good things about this competition, supposed to be one of the best judged and most well ran competitions annually. I was hoping to volunteer as a steward (never done that), but have to work Friday night and go to a wedding Saturday night.

I'm submitting an APA, Scottish 70/- (Jamil's), Mild and IIPA (Pliny Clone). I have high hopes for the APA, 70/- and IIPA - however the Mild has an almost overpowering flavor that I think comes from the Crisp Amber malt I used, but I really want some opinions on it to see if the judges agree.
 
AnchorBock said:
Nice - what did you enter it as?

I had 3/4 place (1st 2nd 2nd). My mild that I didn't particularly like got 1st and my APA that I thought was a slam dunk didn't place! Shows what I know!

English IPA since I used WLP 007.

I honestly just entered to get some constructive feedback. It was a complete whim. I haven't even been brewing for a year yet.
 
My Brown Porter took 1st in the "Light Roasty Ales" category...! This was my 2nd competition and first time to place so I'm pretty pumped..!
 
Cool - congrats guys. I was pleasantly surprised to get 3 2nd's out of 5 entries - N.Eng. Brown, Pilsner and Oktoberfest. Couldn't quite pull out a first - but that is OK - 3 placers definitely exceeded my expectations. Looking forward to seeing the feedback.
 
Anyone know if they picked the "Pour Decisions" award yet? I feel like they haven't said anything about it...like maybe the idea fell through.
 
Anyone know if they picked the "Pour Decisions" award yet? I feel like they haven't said anything about it...like maybe the idea fell through.

I haven't gotten any summary emails or anything - I also sent an email asking how many entries there were this year out of curiosity, but did not get a response yet.
 
Has anyone gotten their scores back?


My American Amber took 2nd. I also submitted a Munich Helles that didn't place...
 
Nope - not yet. Was kind of thinking we would have by now. Not that it has been a long time or anything, but, simply because they had listed on their site that they were mailing stuff out this past monday. Maybe they did not get them mailed yet (understandable with that many entries).
 
I'm sure it just takes awhile. I'm just anxious about the Pour Decisions thing and seeing if they had something bad to say about my beer. I really only entered because I thought I'd get my beer torn up.
 
Im sure you all got the email but they had a postage issue amd had to mail everything back out over the weekend. Im sure we'll all receive our scoresheets and such this week.
 
I'm sure it just takes awhile. I'm just anxious about the Pour Decisions thing and seeing if they had something bad to say about my beer. I really only entered because I thought I'd get my beer torn up.

You won BOS so I don't think you have to worry about them having bad things to say - even if they do that's how you learn to improve your process/ingredient selection, etc. The Pour Decisions thing is really about a beer that fits the brewery - they focus primarily on under-brewed and under-appreciated styles - not necessarily the best beer in the competition.
 
You won BOS so I don't think you have to worry about them having bad things to say - even if they do that's how you learn to improve your process/ingredient selection, etc.

Anxious probably wasn't the right word. Overly excited is more like it :D. I'm looking forward to the results and hope there's some excellent feedback.
 
Hey guys - I just found this thread and wondered if you all got your feedback yet? I got mine and the comments were very constructive.

Milk Stout - scored a 31 and advanced to mini-BOS. I did get some very conflicting views on this one from the judges. One thought it was infected! The other said it was great and would drink several, but it was lacking a little in complexity.

Cherrywood Smoked Blonde Ale - 22.5. Needed work on the aroma and further attenuation, as well as some work on the balance with the smoke. I did get a nod that this would be a tough beer to make well-balanced.

Scotch Ale - 22.5. Needs work on the diacetyl. This was my first shot at the style and was kind of a last-minute entry. I probably shouldn't have rushed it, and I also brewed it right as it was getting cold out, so I may have kept it a little too cool to clean things up at the end of fermentation.

Anyways - good to see others here from the UMMO! It was my first competition and I was pretty happy with the scores and comments overall.
 
I got mine today too... good feedback, I agree. Had a scoresheet from Gordon Strong (oktoberfest that placed second) which was kind of cool....

Question - two of my scores were "adjusted" scores. They were both beers that placed. I have never received a scoresheet where it had a "final assigned score" that was marked as adjusted???? Just curious if anyone knows why that is the case. Were they "rescored" in the mini-BOS round and that score was used? Just wondering how that new score is arrived at or where it came from... Maybe some BJCP people have insight on this.. Like I said, had never noticed it in another competition.
 
I got mine today too... good feedback, I agree. Had a scoresheet from Gordon Strong (oktoberfest that placed second) which was kind of cool....

Question - two of my scores were "adjusted" scores. They were both beers that placed. I have never received a scoresheet where it had a "final assigned score" that was marked as adjusted???? Just curious if anyone knows why that is the case. Were they "rescored" in the mini-BOS round and that score was used? Just wondering how that new score is arrived at or where it came from... Maybe some BJCP people have insight on this.. Like I said, had never noticed it in another competition.

I was wondering the same thing. My Scottish 70 /- that got 2nd was adjusted from a 41 to a 39. My IIPA that got 2nd was adjusted from a 37 to a 43! A 6 point increase is pretty crazy. My Mild that got 1st had a 39 and was not adjusted so it must have to do with where you place in the mini BOS. I don't think most competitions change the scores and just give medals out based on the top 3 in the mini BOS without factoring in scores, I'd guess UMMO does that while also adjusting scores, but if anyone has first-hand knowledge please share.

I agree though, probably the best feedback I've received from any competition.I still haven't gotten a response to my email about how many entries there were, anyone hear anything?
 
My Mild that got 1st had a 39 and was not adjusted so it must have to do with where you place in the mini BOS.

Question for you - is this one of the recipe's on your website? I have checked it out before and it is pretty cool. My "mild" got its butt kicked with a 29. I like the beer and my friends just love it as a great "drinker" - but it has done crap in competition. I will keep brewing mine because I like it, but want to brew another version to see what it is I am missing - obviously, I am doing something wrong as it is consistently in the 28-32 range or so. You definitely did something right, so, if it is on your website, I might check it out and give it a try in the next couple weeks.

Thanks
 
What do you guys typically do to improve your beers in competition, other than try to directly address the feedback? For example, how does one typically "improve complexity" vs. doing a better job of cleaning up diacetyl?

Also, are scores in the high 20s/low 30s considered relatively poor? That kind of skews my vision about what the numbers I've been presented with actually mean.
 
Question for you - is this one of the recipe's on your website? I have checked it out before and it is pretty cool. My "mild" got its butt kicked with a 29. I like the beer and my friends just love it as a great "drinker" - but it has done crap in competition. I will keep brewing mine because I like it, but want to brew another version to see what it is I am missing - obviously, I am doing something wrong as it is consistently in the 28-32 range or so. You definitely did something right, so, if it is on your website, I might check it out and give it a try in the next couple weeks.

Thanks

Yes it is, I actually just posted again about these results and talked a little more about how I didn't even like how that batch turned out (the amber malt just added WAY too much dry/roasty/grainy flavor in my opinion). I posted a recipe I was going to brew, but probably wont get to it for a month or two now (since I'm just going to enter this version in NHC instead of a new one). What is your recipe?
 
What do you guys typically do to improve your beers in competition, other than try to directly address the feedback? For example, how does one typically "improve complexity" vs. doing a better job of cleaning up diacetyl?

Also, are scores in the high 20s/low 30s considered relatively poor? That kind of skews my vision about what the numbers I've been presented with actually mean.

If the judges want more complexity it could mean a lot of things, usually they'll be specific like "additional esters would improve complexity" which would typically mean increase your ferment temps. I've had a few looking for more malt complexity, which you can accomplish in many ways with your recipe/process (ie. switch from an American Ale yeast to English, or add character malts, decrease bitterness, etc).

High 20s and low 30s are good - I wouldn't call them poor, typically means you have a pretty solid process and recipes, but could probably make some adjustments with either to get into the high 30s/low 40s. If you aren't really getting direct feedback on process/recipe issues you'll really have to dig in and try to find the trends between scoresheets from multiple competitions (typically though you should get comments like, "additional bitterness would improve" or "beer is thin, could use additional body" where you will know right away what you could do to improve your score).
 
What do you guys typically do to improve your beers in competition, other than try to directly address the feedback? For example, how does one typically "improve complexity" vs. doing a better job of cleaning up diacetyl?

Also, are scores in the high 20s/low 30s considered relatively poor? That kind of skews my vision about what the numbers I've been presented with actually mean.

I think one thing you have to separate a little is the difference between a "good" score, and a "good" beer. I LOVE to drink the mild I make.....and so does everyone else. I have had many people tell me it is their favorite beer of mine. So, you can have a really great beer (taste wise) that still misses the mark somehow when it comes to style. In my experience, when I have had beers in the 20's it was because I missed something rather fundamental, or had some error. Not to say all of those beers tasted bad, they just did not stand up very well as a representative of that style.

As for complexity... that is one I have struggled with too. I have found that in darker beers, using specialty malts like Brown, Coffee Kiln, Pale Chocolate, Victory, Melanoiden, cara aroma, etc. (in small quantities) can lend some complexity. Gotta be careful though - it is just as easy to swing the other way and just turn out a beer that is a mess of flavors that don't blend well.
 
I think one thing you have to separate a little is the difference between a "good" score, and a "good" beer.

I have a feeling that's where my Blonde sits. I like it, other folks like it, it's something different, but it'll probably never do well in competition since it's something no one really does. Not that I won't try to fix some of the minor flaws mentioned, but I'm just not sure it'll compete well.

Gotta be careful though - it is just as easy to swing the other way and just turn out a beer that is a mess of flavors that don't blend well.

The joy of brewing, eh? :)
 
Here are the last two versions. Both very good drinkers. Both scored ok-solid in a couple comps. 28-34. The second one is the one I sent to UMMO. I added the various specialty grains to #2 in the never ending pursuit of adding "complexity" and "substance" to a 1.040 type beer. I have #2 in a couple other comps in the next two weeks so that will allow me to sort of "average" the feedback and see if I notice any consistencies in what the judges are saying.

Main knocks on the recent one were too much carbonation, not enough malt aroma and flavor. Just a little too "lifeless" too neutral.


Dark mild
Style: Mild
Type: Calories: 137
Rating: 0.0 Boil Size: 6.87 Gal
IBU's: 19.72 Batch Size: 6.00 Gal
Color: 17.3 SRM Boil Time: 60 minutes
Preboil OG: 1.040
Estimated Actual
Brew Date: - 09/16/2012
OG: 1.042
FG: 1.010
ABV: 4.19 %
Efficiency: 80 %

Fermentation Steps
Name Days / Temp Estimated Actual
Primary 21 days @ 66.0°F 09/16/2012 09/16/2012

Grains & Adjuncts
Amount Percentage Name Time Gravity
6.00 lbs 64.86 % Fawcett Maris Otter Pale Malt
2.00 lbs 21.62 % Briess 2-Row Brewers Malt
0.50 lbs 5.41 % Caramel/Crystal Malt - 60L
0.25 lbs 2.70 % Caramel/Crystal Malt -120L
0.25 lbs 2.70 % Fawcett Pale Chocolate
2.00 ozs 1.35 % Simpsons Black Malt
2.00 ozs 1.35 % Caramel/Crystal Malt - 80L

Hops
Amount IBU's Name Time AA %
1.25 ozs 19.72 Goldings, East Kent 60 mins 5.00

Yeasts
Amount Name Laboratory / ID
1.0 pkg 1469 west Yorkshire rep itch Wyeast Labs 1469

Mash Profile
Medium Body Infusion In 60 min @ 154.0°F


Version #2

Dark mild
Style: Mild
Type: Calories: 147
Rating: 0.0 Boil Size: 7.39 Gal
IBU's: 20.21 Batch Size: 6.50 Gal
Color: 19.7 SRM Boil Time: 60 minutes
Preboil OG: 1.043
Actual
Brew Date: - 12/07/2012
OG: 1.045
FG: 1.011
ABV: 4.45 %
Efficiency: 80 %

Fermentation Steps
Name Days / Temp
Primary 21 days @ 64.0°F

Grains & Adjuncts
Amount Percentage Name
6.00 lbs 55.98 % Fawcett Golden Promise Pale Malt
2.00 lbs 18.66 % Munich Malt
1.00 lbs 9.33 % Briess 2-Row Brewers Malt
0.50 lbs 4.66 % Caramel/Crystal Malt -120L
0.25 lbs 2.33 % Fawcett Pale Chocolate
1.50 ozs 0.87 % Black (Patent) Malt
0.25 lbs 2.33 % Dingemans Cara 45
0.25 lbs 2.33 % Victory Malt
2.00 ozs 1.17 % Fawcett Chocolate Malt
0.25 lbs 2.33 % Oats, Flaked

Hops
Amount IBU's Name Time AA %
0.75 ozs 10.64 Goldings, East Kent 60 mins 5.00
0.75 ozs 9.57 Fuggles 60 mins 4.50

Yeasts
Amount Name Laboratory / ID
1.0 pkg 1469 west Yorkshire rep itch Wyeast Labs 1469
 
Here are the last two versions. Both very good drinkers. Both scored ok-solid in a couple comps. 28-34. The second one is the one I sent to UMMO. I added the various specialty grains to #2 in the never ending pursuit of adding "complexity" and "substance" to a 1.040 type beer. I have #2 in a couple other comps in the next two weeks so that will allow me to sort of "average" the feedback and see if I notice any consistencies in what the judges are saying.

Main knocks on the recent one were too much carbonation, not enough malt aroma and flavor. Just a little too "lifeless" too neutral.


Dark mild
Style: Mild
Type: Calories: 137
Rating: 0.0 Boil Size: 6.87 Gal
IBU's: 19.72 Batch Size: 6.00 Gal
Color: 17.3 SRM Boil Time: 60 minutes
Preboil OG: 1.040
Estimated Actual
Brew Date: - 09/16/2012
OG: 1.042
FG: 1.010
ABV: 4.19 %
Efficiency: 80 %

Fermentation Steps
Name Days / Temp Estimated Actual
Primary 21 days @ 66.0°F 09/16/2012 09/16/2012

Grains & Adjuncts
Amount Percentage Name Time Gravity
6.00 lbs 64.86 % Fawcett Maris Otter Pale Malt
2.00 lbs 21.62 % Briess 2-Row Brewers Malt
0.50 lbs 5.41 % Caramel/Crystal Malt - 60L
0.25 lbs 2.70 % Caramel/Crystal Malt -120L
0.25 lbs 2.70 % Fawcett Pale Chocolate
2.00 ozs 1.35 % Simpsons Black Malt
2.00 ozs 1.35 % Caramel/Crystal Malt - 80L

Hops
Amount IBU's Name Time AA %
1.25 ozs 19.72 Goldings, East Kent 60 mins 5.00

Yeasts
Amount Name Laboratory / ID
1.0 pkg 1469 west Yorkshire rep itch Wyeast Labs 1469

Mash Profile
Medium Body Infusion In 60 min @ 154.0°F


Version #2

Dark mild
Style: Mild
Type: Calories: 147
Rating: 0.0 Boil Size: 7.39 Gal
IBU's: 20.21 Batch Size: 6.50 Gal
Color: 19.7 SRM Boil Time: 60 minutes
Preboil OG: 1.043
Actual
Brew Date: - 12/07/2012
OG: 1.045
FG: 1.011
ABV: 4.45 %
Efficiency: 80 %

Fermentation Steps
Name Days / Temp
Primary 21 days @ 64.0°F

Grains & Adjuncts
Amount Percentage Name
6.00 lbs 55.98 % Fawcett Golden Promise Pale Malt
2.00 lbs 18.66 % Munich Malt
1.00 lbs 9.33 % Briess 2-Row Brewers Malt
0.50 lbs 4.66 % Caramel/Crystal Malt -120L
0.25 lbs 2.33 % Fawcett Pale Chocolate
1.50 ozs 0.87 % Black (Patent) Malt
0.25 lbs 2.33 % Dingemans Cara 45
0.25 lbs 2.33 % Victory Malt
2.00 ozs 1.17 % Fawcett Chocolate Malt
0.25 lbs 2.33 % Oats, Flaked

Hops
Amount IBU's Name Time AA %
0.75 ozs 10.64 Goldings, East Kent 60 mins 5.00
0.75 ozs 9.57 Fuggles 60 mins 4.50

Yeasts
Amount Name Laboratory / ID
1.0 pkg 1469 west Yorkshire rep itch Wyeast Labs 1469

High carbonation can really kill these beers so that could be the main source of your problem. Also, with the starting gravity of your recipes I wonder if they wouldn't have competed better as a Southern English Brown Ale (considered by many to just be a stronger Mild)?

I'm by no means an expert on this style, but I'd probably target 1.036-38 and want it to finish around 1.012-14.

The next one I brew is going to be along these lines:

1.038 OG (targeted)
1.013 FG (estimated)
60 min boil
Mash @ 154
21.7 SRM
20 IBU (EKG)
83.5% MO
3% Bairds Carastan (37L)
9% Simpson's Extra Dark Crystal (150-160L)
4.5% Simpson's Chocolate Malt (430L)
WLP002 - pitch at 62, ferment at 66.

Aiming for more chocolate flavor and the complexity that Extra Dark Crystal brings to a beer (I love this malt). The Carastan is there to get some caramel/toffee/general sweetness.
 
I'm a little confused by the adjusted scores as well. I guess the sheet does say that the judges can mutually agree to the final score, and it's not necessarily an average of the scores they gave me.

The thing I'm confused about is how AnchorBock got a beer that was adjusted up to a 43 and didn't win BOS over me. Mine was only adjusted to a 40, so not sure why that necessarily makes mine BOS. Otherwise the judges gave the beer a 36 and 37. Would be hilarious if they mistakenly put my name on the PDF hahaha.

I guess I suffered in flavor the most because it wasn't stylistic of an English IPA. Apparently one judge said it was more like an American IPA... I didn't know which one to pick so I went with English IPA because I used WLP007. The advice I got was to increase the malt flavor, specifically by using more English specialty malts...which is funny because I'm not using any.
 
I'm a little confused by the adjusted scores as well. I guess the sheet does say that the judges can mutually agree to the final score, and it's not necessarily an average of the scores they gave me.

The thing I'm confused about is how AnchorBock got a beer that was adjusted up to a 43 and didn't win BOS over me. Mine was only adjusted to a 40, so not sure why that necessarily makes mine BOS. Otherwise the judges gave the beer a 36 and 37. Would be hilarious if they mistakenly put my name on the PDF hahaha.

I guess I suffered in flavor the most because it wasn't stylistic of an English IPA. Apparently one judge said it was more like an American IPA... I didn't know which one to pick so I went with English IPA because I used WLP007. The advice I got was to increase the malt flavor, specifically by using more English specialty malts...which is funny because I'm not using any.

I don't think they really factor in scores in the actual BOS round - they just pick the best beer overall. My IIPA got 2nd so you weren't against mine in BOS, but if mine was adjusted to 43 then the 1st place must have been higher I would think?
 
Here are the last two versions. Both very good drinkers. Both scored ok-solid in a couple comps. 28-34. The second one is the one I sent to UMMO. I added the various specialty grains to #2 in the never ending pursuit of adding "complexity" and "substance" to a 1.040 type beer. I have #2 in a couple other comps in the next two weeks so that will allow me to sort of "average" the feedback and see if I notice any consistencies in what the judges are saying.

Main knocks on the recent one were too much carbonation, not enough malt aroma and flavor. Just a little too "lifeless" too neutral.

Your second recipe has a ton of different malt in it. I've never brewed a mild so I could be giving you really crappy suggestions here. For the fermentables, I'd scrap the Victory and Munich malts. I don't know why, but those just mentally put me in the wrong place. Instead of in mild land, I'm feel like I'm at Gasthof's on Oktoberfest.

Briess 2-Row is good, but I've lately discovered Canadian Malting's Pale Ale Malt. It's roughly the same but...maltier I guess? I haven't gone back to plain old Briess 2-row in awhile. I like Golden Promise. Ever think of throwing in some Aromatic Malt? Sometimes the malt aroma does more for the tongue than actual malt flavors.
 
yeah - I knew it was a little high on carbonation. I filled out of a keg though and thought I might lose a little, plus, sometimes I think maybe they sit after opening and pour for a while. The gravity was over specs, but, in my experience, almost every beer I have brewed that has done well in competition tends to be right at the high end of the specs, or even over. So, I always tend to enter them down a category - I routinely enter "technical" IPA's as APA's for example
As for the adjustments - I am thinking they only adjusted within the mini BOS and judged the overall BOS as normal - not assigning scores, just ranking. This way, beers are ranked by score against each other within category. Just a guess though.
 
I don't think they really factor in scores in the actual BOS round - they just pick the best beer overall.

Your understanding is correct, at least for every competition that I have looked into entering. For the BOS there is normally no "scoring" involved. I think of it more as a "ranking" of the beers from "the best" to "not quite the best".

Congratulations! to everybody that entered and scored well.
 
Back
Top