Well said, Ed.
Here is the issue with brewing a carefree recipe and then deciding what style to place it in afterwards. Let me start with an example.
I love pale ales, and I drink lots of the British and American versions. When I brew to my personal taste, I prefer my pale ale to have a prominent bitterness, but with an up-front malty flavour, much like the British ales. To that end, I like British pale ale malts, plus a touch of biscuit malt and darker crystals for flavour. I also typically use a British yeast (I love the complexity the fruity esters add, too!), and don't let it dry out too much. To balance, I put in a generous amount of American bittering hops (particularly the big citrusy hops, like Centennial or Cascade). I also like to dry hop with American hops to really emphasize that wonderful citrusy, piney aroma. Sometimes I will chuck in some Fuggles or EKG just to add a bit of floral or earthy complexity. To finish the beer, I want to make sure that the soft malty notes don't get overwhelmed by the hops and hop bitterness, so I typically carbonate on the low side and don't let it get too cold when I serve it (much like a British ale).
I call it a Canadian pale ale, because much like the influences on modern Canadian society, my beer has strong roots in British tradition but also a dominant American influence to liven it up!
The problem of course is that this beer does not easily place into any BJCP beer style. The distinctive aromatic hops immediately identify this as an American beer on the first sniff. But the malty profile and low carbonation don't fit that category well -- American ales should be dry and lively. My recipe is, for the most part, a modified British ale. It just has an identity crisis. I suppose I could always enter it in Category 23, Specialty Beer, but the comments I have received from other judges is that, "oh its pretty similar to an English pale and should go there", or "oh, it is pretty similar to an American pale ale and should go there", or "this beer just isn't distinctive enough" (i.e. isn't 'special' enough) to go in Category 23 Specialty Beer and do well.
I have received valuable feedback for beers like this, but the scoresheets can be a little underwhelming. I guess if you are going to brew a good beer that doesn't fit well within a particular style, you should expect that most judges are just going to focus on the obvious deviations from style (like that hop aroma isn't expected in a British ale, or the carbonation is to low for an American ale), and that will keep it from scoring high. That doesn't mean they think it is a good and drinkable beer, but they aren't there to evaluate those subjective components, either.
This is a very misunderstood aspect of BJCP competitions IMO, and it is probably most often responsible for brewers complaining that their favourite beer (that all their friends just LOVED!) only scored a 25 with those 'idiot' judges.
Bottom line: I suggest one considers whether: (1) they want to enter a comp for the general feedback, in which case, don't worry too much about the final score or the stylistic things you get dinged on; or (2) deliberately brew your beer with the end goal of targetting a particular style's characteristics
explicitly (i.e. for the intended purpose of BJCP competitions). Your reaction to the evaluations should be very different in each case. I have done a bit of both of the above, and I have been lucky enough to not had complaints about the judges' comments (once I put my evaluations into the appropriate perspective).
