Moratorium for BJCP Winners?

Williams 728
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.

Should there be a Moratorium for BJCP National Winners?

  • Yes

  • No

Results are only viewable after voting.
Willie3

Willie3

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2006
Messages
766
Reaction score
13
Location
Hackettstown
Keeping on the theme of blending (and what a great thread it was/is - thank you all for your opinions) the question I have is should someone who is well renown for brewing at an amatuer level who has moved into a more celebrity role for homebrewing (ie. GABF Winner, Brewer of the Year, Ninkasi Winner, etc...) be allowed to enter BJCP contests or do you think that there should be a moratorium as to when they can get back and enter contests? (The moratorium being a length of time - sort of like Daytona when they take the winning NASCAR of the Daytona 500 and put it on display/hold for a year). Maybe just for the category s/he won? Maybe just for Brewer of the year? Maybe s/he should be automatically hired to learn how to brew professionally.
 
Willie3, you seem to like tossing live grenades onto the table and then walking out of the room.
 
FlyGuy said:
No. Anyone should be allowed to enter, regardless of their success. Keep the bar high, I say.
Click to expand...

I am with you on that. I think it would be a shame to be put on hold if I won. However, what about the really prestigious winners?
 
DrDirt said:
Willie3, you seem to like tossing live grenades onto the table and then walking out of the room.
Click to expand...

BANG! Not really. I am taking it all in. I love learning from you all. Everyone has different takes. I am a middle of the road kind of guy. These aren't meant to piss anyone off, just looking for some information to talk about with my club.

Thanks and I promise I am not out of the room, I will chime in when I can.

Where abouts are you in Georgia? Did a stint down in Hotlanta for a couple of years back in 02 - 04, loved it and miss it.
 
FlyGuy said:
No. Anyone should be allowed to enter, regardless of their success. Keep the bar high, I say.
Click to expand...

Should we have a moratorium on PGA tournament winners? Or on the Tour De France? What about on NFL teams or NHL teams? "You won the Superbowl last year? Oh, then sorry- you're out this year to be fair to the other teams."

If someone is good enough to do it, then they deserve all the accolades. It takes great talent to be that consistently amazing. Remember, the competitions are "blind", so no one knows whose beer is who's. That makes it all the more fantastic that one brewer can do it repeatedly.
 
Willie3 said:
I am with you on that. I think it would be a shame to be put on hold if I won. However, what about the really prestigious winners?
Click to expand...

Really -- we are talking homebrew competitions here. Just HOW prestigious do they really get! (Despite the gargantuan egos of certain 'homebrewing celebrities' that get bashed a lot on this and other forums.) ;)
 
Like many "amateur" competitions, there is not really an even playing field to begin with. I go with schoolyard rules. Winner stays!
 
A moratorium would kill any chance of a new legend being born. If that happens, then all the new brewers wouldn't be able to look up to me... I mean, him. Or her.

I'll shut up now.
 
It's a no vote for a moratorium from me.

But perhaps what we need is a scoring system where when you accumulate a certain amount of points you move from amateur to expert status within a non-pro brewing status. At this point you would only compete against other expert ranked amateur brewers.


This would be a good place to allow advanced skills like blending to be part of the entries allowed.
:D:drunk::eek:

(ducking to avoid the flying debris)
 
With all of the brewers out there, it would be way to complex for the BJCP to keep up with any kind of point system. It is a volunteer organization after all. Most of the constant NHC et al winners are judges anyways. Its not necessarily that they are much better than you or I. They just brew a lot, and know exactly how to work the system. Jamil wrote an entire book on it.
 
Edcculus said:
With all of the brewers out there, it would be way to complex for the BJCP to keep up with any kind of point system.
Click to expand...
The large number of homebrews is exactly why this would work. A collaboration of the AHA and BJCP could pull it off with a little effort. There are plenty of amateur sport programs that a plan could be modeled after. It would go a long way in offering legitimacy to these competitions.


Edcculus said:
Most of the constant NHC et al winners are judges anyways. Its not necessarily that they are much better than you or I. They just brew a lot, and know exactly how to work the system. Jamil wrote an entire book on it.
Click to expand...
Experience and knowledge are what makes you better at anything in life. Having two levels of competition would offer status to the experience brewers and give new brewers a way to enter their beers without the intimidation factor of competing directly against more advanced competitors.
 
I don't know -- if you split competitions like this, I think it would just encourage all the best judges to judge the 'expert brewers' category, and the average homebrewer would get stuck with the novice judges. Not sure how that would be a benefit to anyone but the experts.
 
There is no organization that determines eligibility or rules for all competitions. The AHA does so for exactly one competition and the BJCP for zero.

There already is an "experts" division, its called the NHC second round and the MCAB.

Lots of competitions have categories for new brewers.

The fact is that a lot of divisions in a lot of competitions have around 6 entries and give 3 awards. If you can't win a medal from time to time, forcing Jamil Zainescheff into a different category isn't going to help you much.
 
+100 to all the reasons why it should be a no. More simply though, my reason is if I can enter a competition against a Ninkasi et al winner.... and win....hell yeah. Makes it all that more sweet.
 
I'm sorry, but what a dumb idea. Yooper, go ahead and smack me if you must.

If Jamil Zanasheff makes better beer than you do, learn what he does and learn how to improve your own product. Don't whine.
 
Synovia said:
For the record, if you're publishing books on brewing, you are a Professional.
Click to expand...
No, that makes you an Author.

If I author a book on basketball, does that make me a pro? (At 5'9" and my physique, I am NOT going to be playing in the NBA!)
 
Synovia said:
For the record, if you're publishing books on brewing, you are a Professional.
Click to expand...

I don't really think that should be the case. You are a professional writer at that point, not a professional brewer. In my mind if you don't brew beer to sell you are not a professional brewer.

I almost said if you brew on homebrew equipment it should be okay anyway but it would be hard to choose a break point for professional vs homebrew level equipment. There are some homebrewers out there with setups equivalent to the pilot systems in small breweries :) I am not really certain that a pro brewer really has much advantage over a homebrewer so long as he does it at home. There really isn't any secret knowledge that he has - he just has access to higher end equipment and even that is a blurry line. There are probably a number of brewers on here that would put their brews up against a commercial brewer and feel pretty good about it.
 
Like everyone else, I agree that there should be no moratorium. However, I want to raise a similar but different question:

Once one of your beers has won a particular competition, should you submit that same beer from the same batch the next year? From what I've got listening to the Jamil Show on the Brewing Network, he's had some beers that have won more than 1 year from the exact same batch -- not just the same recipe but the same batch of beer.

I'm not saying this should be banned, but it certainly seems ethically gray. What do you think?
 
Absolutely I think you should be able to. How else will you know about your particular beer within the "flavor stability" guidelines. The goal isn't just to win but to improve your process.
 
mkling said:
Like everyone else, I agree that there should be no moratorium. However, I want to raise a similar but different question:

Once one of your beers has won a particular competition, should you submit that same beer from the same batch the next year? From what I've got listening to the Jamil Show on the Brewing Network, he's had some beers that have won more than 1 year from the exact same batch -- not just the same recipe but the same batch of beer.

I'm not saying this should be banned, but it certainly seems ethically gray. What do you think?
Click to expand...

There's so much variation in how judges view beers, why not? I sure as hell would, just to get confirmation that, in fact, this WAS a great beer and I just didn't get lucky with the judging.

I think some people here are viewing judging as much less arbitrary than it often proves to be. Just because a beer DOESN'T win a medal doesn't tell you that it's crap. Some judges are better than others - and I've heard plenty of stories about judges who were absolutely clueless.

If you have what you think is a great recipe, and it wins one time... keep entering it and see how a different group of judges views it.

Besides, probably half of the battle is your processes, as much as the recipes. JZ wins his medals in no small part because of things like his temperature control and pitching rates. I can brew one of his winning recipes and it's not going to be as good (likely). So, why should he be forced to tweak a recipe when that's only half the reason he won?
 
If you have a beer from the same batch that can win multiple years in a row, then you deserve the win. Its probably big styles that need to be aged anyways. No way would his batch of Hefeweizen or even a run of the mill IPA (no matter how well brewed) would age gracefully over a year.
 
the_bird said:
There's so much variation in how judges view beers, why not? I sure as hell would, just to get confirmation that, in fact, this WAS a great beer and I just didn't get lucky with the judging.

I think some people here are viewing judging as much less arbitrary than it often proves to be. Just because a beer DOESN'T win a medal doesn't tell you that it's crap. Some judges are better than others - and I've heard plenty of stories about judges who were absolutely clueless.

If you have what you think is a great recipe, and it wins one time... keep entering it and see how a different group of judges views it.

Besides, probably half of the battle is your processes, as much as the recipes. JZ wins his medals in no small part because of things like his temperature control and pitching rates. I can brew one of his winning recipes and it's not going to be as good (likely). So, why should he be forced to tweak a recipe when that's only half the reason he won?
Click to expand...

Hey, I absolutely agree about entering the same recipe over & over -- you've got a good one, use it! To me, the weird part is entering the same batch that won across 2 or 3 or 4 years -- because then you actually don't have to see consistency of process; you just had to have a great process once.
 
Yeah, except that beer's generally not going to get BETTER over time, unless it's a barleywine.

This all just sounds like someone who didn't place well in a competition and is looking for excuses. If your beer isn't "good enough" (said skeptically due to the known issues with judging), learn how to make better beer. Invest in a temp-controlled fermenter. Buy a stirplate and pitch more yeast. Age your beer longer. Cold-crash it. Use finings. Build a better wort chiller. Find a better supplier, so that you always use fresh ingredients. Read some books and learn how to make a better recipe.

Don't blame "blending".

Don't blame that some people have won before. We can't all be above-average. I sure as **** ain't.

Just keep learning and make the best ****ing beer that you can.
 
mkling said:
Hey, I absolutely agree about entering the same recipe over & over -- you've got a good one, use it! To me, the weird part is entering the same batch that won across 2 or 3 or 4 years -- because then you actually don't have to see consistency of process; you just had to have a great process once.
Click to expand...

He can do that because he has excellent sanitation, low oxygen pickup, and cold storage. Those are all part of the process.
 
Why do these conversations all seem to center around Jamil? I don't know the guy personally but when I've had a question I email him and he actually responds. And in a timely matter. I have improved my process by listening to him and also to Kai when he has been on BBR. The goal for me is to improve. If I'm not improving I might as well just save time and money and drink miller.
 
I've mentioned JZ just because he's probably the most well-known homebrewer as well as someone who enters a lot (and wins a lot) of competitions. You could sub in "Tasty" McDole if you'd like.
 
Yeah bird I agree with that. I was referring to the posts that were vague as to who the "winner" was but we could all read between the lines.
 
Here is a thought:

There seems to be a lot of confusion about competition rules. Rules for the competition are set by the sponsoring organization, which for the NHC is the AHA and which is never the BJCP. Most organizations will use BJCP guidelines and seek BJCP judges, but they don't have to.

The reason competitions have similar rules is that the people who organize competitions and compete a lot of sort of settled on those rules.

If you want to have a competition with division for experts and novices and in which blending or entering beer that has won a medal before are against the rules, you may do so.
 
Here's the thing, something someone earlier in the thread kinda mentioned.

I was hanging out this weekend with an HBT regular who (I didn't know this before) entered a competition that JZ was also entered in... and lost to him by ONE freakin' point. Now, obviously he would have preferred to have won, but had he gotten that one extra point....

Would you rather be able to beat "the best", or not have the best brewers in the contest to begin with? How do you REALLY know how your stuff stands up, if you deliberately limit the competition?

Sounds like the OP's really looking for a JV team.
 
FlyGuy said:
No, that makes you an Author.

If I author a book on basketball, does that make me a pro? (At 5'9" and my physique, I am NOT going to be playing in the NBA!)
Click to expand...

Not the same, but I would argue that a Hitting coach is a professional at baseball.
 

Similar threads

julia_1
  • Poll
1/24-1/31 - Time to Enter - National Homebrew Competition Entry Window
Replies
7
Views
1K
julia_1
julia_1
seatazzz
BJCP Competition Question regarding entering the same beer in two classes...
Replies
4
Views
1K
jdauria
jdauria
J
My First Competition: Results, Disappointments, Improvements
Replies
15
Views
2K
mashpaddled
M
zippyclown
Remembering ismellweird this November
2 3
Replies
116
Views
9K
Kent88
Kent88
Boomer
HBT Iron Brewer Sign Up
Replies
8
Views
1K
bkboiler
bkboiler

Latest posts

Back
Top