When a great beer doesn't place in a competition....

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.

BudzAndSudz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2011
Messages
446
Reaction score
32
Location
Boulder
Is it actually a great beer?

I have a batch of English Old Ale that I thought was by far my best beer to date. It was just phenomenal to my taste, and if I could have bought it in a bar I would have blown an entire paycheck on it. Roommates and friends thought the same.

Entered into a competition and didn't even place. Haven't seen scoresheets yet so I don't know what the specifics were, but it's making me second guess if this one is worth re-brewing for the NHC.

It was on the same table as barleywines, so part of me wonders if a 7.5% ABV Old Ale (no matter how delicious, or true to style it actually is) just seemed bland compared to 12% ABV barleywines.
 
Its a waste of time to bring any english style to a competition these days.

Yes and no...depends on the competition. If they had a Strong Ale category it would fit in....if they have an English Brown Category...you obviously wouldn't make an American Brown Ale and enter it in that category...plus there may be an English Pale Ale category.

But if it's just an all open beer competition...then probably not since they would see it as too malty, sweet and no hops. Which is unfortunate nowadays that everyone is so hoppy that the actual "taste" of beer is no longer there - the new taste is just cold carbonated hop tea. More hops...more hops....in this country - we're all about more of something...but the ironic thing is more is not always better. Hops have not only a numbing characteristic to your palette but also it tends to make your food taste differnent than what it was intended. Don't take my word for it - there are plenty of studies out there. Hops as it is a preservative for beer is a low level antiseptic...which numbs tastes buds.

I for one want to taste all the ingredients in beer...not just having one thing overpower everything else....these ultra hoppy beers may by definition be "beer" but they don't taste like beer that has been made for 300-500+ years. To each his own...but I think it's sad to say this is what beer tastes like....same as saying Miller Lite or Coors...is what beer is supposed to taste like.
 
At competitions you are at the mercy of the judges and their worldly experiences and preferences.

May be the "bigger the better" effect in play.


(or your tastebuds are off :p )
 
Its a waste of time to bring any english style to a competition these days.

How so?


At competitions you are at the mercy of the judges and their worldly experiences and preferences.

May be the "bigger the better" effect in play.

That's exactly what I was getting at. Sharing a table with barleywines surely didn't do me any favors. It does make me wonder though if a competition like the NHC would favor my beer more since each style will have it's own table. So many entries there's just no reason to share a table.
 
Yes and no...depends on the competition. If they had a Strong Ale category it would fit in....if they have an English Brown Category...you obviously wouldn't make an American Brown Ale and enter it in that category...plus there may be an English Pale Ale category.

But if it's just an all open beer competition...then probably not since they would see it as too malty, sweet and no hops. Which is unfortunate nowadays that everyone is so hoppy that the actual "taste" of beer is no longer there - the new taste is just cold carbonated hop tea. More hops...more hops....in this country - we're all about more of something...but the ironic thing is more is not always better. Hops have not only a numbing characteristic to your palette but also it tends to make your food taste differnent than what it was intended. Don't take my word for it - there are plenty of studies out there. Hops as it is a preservative for beer is a low level antiseptic...which numbs tastes buds.

I for one want to taste all the ingredients in beer...not just having one thing overpower everything else....these ultra hoppy beers may by definition be "beer" but they don't taste like beer that has been made for 300-500+ years. To each his own...but I think it's sad to say this is what beer tastes like....same as saying Miller Lite or Coors...is what beer is supposed to taste like.

I totally agree with you on the hops issue. It's easy to think a beer is "good" at xxx ibu, but the hops are just masking the true beer, good or bad. I have to wonder if it's compensation for not being able to brew a good balanced or malty beer. I still haven't been able aquire the taste for super hoppy beers, I guess I can blame that on all the Belgian beers I've had to taste. Dammit Westvleteren! (and Rochefort, Duvel, Trolle, Gulden Drak, etc.)
 
Wait until you get the scoresheets back, and see why it scored poorly.

Beers are judged according to the BJCP guidelines, no matter what else is in the same flight, and the judges have the guidelines with them as they score the beer. Maybe the beer has a great taste, but it's just not "to style". That sounds like the issue, if you and your friends think it's fabulous.

The scoresheets will tell the tale.
 
At competitions you are at the mercy of the judges and their worldly experiences and preferences.

What? BJCP guidelines have nothing to do with preferences. If your beer didnt score well, go look at the style guidelines, look at what the judges said. Their comments are to help you bring it into the guidelines. They don't comment on a poorly scored IPA "I just don't like hops" They comment "The balance of malt and hop aroma is too one sided, consider a bigger grain bill."

Sure, your beer is probably great. BUT it probably isnt in the style. You can alter the recipe and resubmit to another competition if you care about those things. Most importantly, dont listen to the people in this thread who said your beer didnt do well because it's English or it wasnt 100 IBUs. They have no idea what BJCP is.
 
Wait until you get the scoresheets back, and see why it scored poorly.

Beers are judged according to the BJCP guidelines, no matter what else is in the same flight, and the judges have the guidelines with them as they score the beer. Maybe the beer has a great taste, but it's just not "to style". That sounds like the issue, if you and your friends think it's fabulous.

The scoresheets will tell the tale.

I will of course wait until I get the score sheets but it's worth speculating still.

The style guidelines for Old Ale are the most broad in the entire BJCP spectrum save for a few like Specialty Ale or FHV beers. I'm 100% sure it was within the broad ranges of the spectrum, but must have missed the specific example of Old Ale that the judges were looking for.

And I think what else is in the flight has to affect the outcome of the tasting. They have the guidelines, but if it says "malty with a bit of alcohol warmth" then obviously mine will seem very lacking in that category compared to the 10 barleywines they just tasted, even if it's not. Obviously judges will do their best to follow the guidelines, but palates do get fatigued and overwhelmed.....
 
Just like everyone is saying, you can have a really wonderful tasting beer but once thrown into a BJCP style it just doesn't measure to the style real well and scores poorly. The guidelines are what a beer is measured against as it's not just a taste contest.
 
.

And I think what else is in the flight has to affect the outcome of the tasting. They have the guidelines, but if it says "malty with a bit of alcohol warmth" then obviously mine will seem very lacking in that category compared to the 10 barleywines they just tasted, even if it's not. Obviously judges will do their best to follow the guidelines, but palates do get fatigued and overwhelmed.....

But that's not the way the flights go. We go with lighter flavors first, and then progress to "heavier" flavors, to reduce palate fatigue. We also sip water and use crackers to clear our palates. I doubt any Old Ale would be put in a flight after a barley wine, but until you see where you were at in the flight order and read the scoresheet, speculation isn't really all that helpful.

I would suggest pulling out a scoresheet (free on the BJCP website) and scoring the beer yourself according to the guidelines. Look especially at this part:

Aroma: Malty-sweet with fruity esters, often with a complex blend of dried-fruit, vinous, caramelly, molasses, nutty, toffee, treacle, and/or other specialty malt aromas. Some alcohol and oxidative notes are acceptable, akin to those found in Sherry or Port. Hop aromas not usually present due to extended aging.

And this part:
Flavor: Medium to high malt character with a luscious malt complexity, often with nutty, caramelly and/or molasses-like flavors. Light chocolate or roasted malt flavors are optional, but should never be prominent. Balance is often malty-sweet, but may be well hopped (the impression of bitterness often depends on amount of aging). Moderate to high fruity esters are common, and may take on a dried-fruit or vinous character. The finish may vary from dry to somewhat sweet. Extended aging may contribute oxidative flavors similar to a fine old Sherry, Port or Madeira. Alcoholic strength should be evident, though not overwhelming. Diacetyl low to none. Some wood-aged or blended versions may have a lactic or Brettanomyces character; but this is optional and should not be too strong (enter as a specialty beer if it is).

If you're lacking "luscious malt complexity" in the flavor, or some of the described complexity in the aroma, you would be gigged on that. Or if you've got a prominent smoke or roast flavor, and so on.
 
do not confuse "good beer" with "competition winning beer". they might be the same, or they might not. traditional BJCP competitions are about how well you represent the style, and what the judges' interpretations of the style are. and the most drinkable beer might not be the closest to style.

this past weekend i scored really well at an IPA competition, yet a friend's beer who scored lower finished second while i didn't place at all (it was a best in show competition, so the highest scoring beers were moved on to the final table where judges chose their 3 favorites). my beer "competed" better, but his tasted better. having had both beers, i agree with the judges - his was the better brew. it might not have conformed to the style guide as well as mine did, but i'd rather be drinking his :mug:
 
do not confuse "good beer" with "competition winning beer". they might be the same, or they might not. traditional BJCP competitions are about how well you represent the style, and what the judges' interpretations of the style are. and the most drinkable beer might not be the closest to style.

this past weekend i scored really well at an IPA competition, yet a friend's beer who scored lower finished second while i didn't place at all (it was a best in show competition, so the highest scoring beers were moved on to the final table where judges chose their 3 favorites). my beer "competed" better, but his tasted better. having had both beer, i agree with the judges - his was the better brew. might not have conformed to the style guide as well as mine did, but i'd rather be drinking his :mug:

See that makes absolutely no sense to me. Why on earth would a beer that receives a good score not place? That right there is definitive proof that competitions are complete bulls*&t. I would be livid if I scored a 48 out of 50 and didn't even medal, I feel like that example right there completely relegates that entire competition to "irrelevant and petty."

But I suppose, aren't all competitions?

And Yooper - You really think I didn't even read the style guidelines? Come on now :p
 
In the 2010 World Series, the Texas Rangers were defeated 4 games to 1. That 1 game was Game 3 of the series. Would anyone claim that after losing that game, the San Francisco Giants weren't "great"?

No, they just lost that day.

If your beer was truly a great beer but didn't place, a lot of things could have happened.

1) There could have been 3 better beers in the flight.
2) The judges could have been weak.
3) The judges might have had preconceived notions of style that yours didn't fit.
4) Your order in the flight could have had an impact (i.e. in an IPA category, a very hoppy IPA near the end of the flight doesn't seem as hoppy as if it is early in the flight).
5) Maybe that individual bottle had a carbonation issue, or something else that made it just so very slightly "off".

With competition, like with the World Series, you need to take it in the aggregate. If you submit it to a couple different competitions, and it places in 4 of them but not in the 5th, then it's a great beer. If it places in 1 of them but not in the other 4, then it's a good beer but not a great beer.

But judging the beer based purely on a SINGLE data point just isn't fair to the beer.
 
Its a waste of time to bring any english style to a competition these days.
At competitions you are at the mercy of the judges and their worldly experiences and preferences. May be the "bigger the better" effect in play.

As has been said, not true. I once had an English IPA win the category and it was grouped with American IPA's and IIPA's. It's all about brewing to style.
 
^This. If you beer is great to you then your beer is great! I make beer for myself and a select few to enjoy, as long as we like it nothing else matters!
 
You're very surprised that your world shattering Old Ale didn't win a medal. Everyone who tasted it agreed with you that it was excellent and worthy of all superlatives. It may well be. But Old Ale is a fairly obscure style. My friends are serious brewers and I would venture that none of them is terribly conversant with the style parameters of Old Ale, nor very familiar with many good examples of the style. If I brewed an Old Ale and my brewing day went very well but missed on a few style points they'd taste that beer and call it awesome and if I praised it to Aetna they'd probably agree with me. But if I handed them the judging sheets and the guidelines and asked them to judge the beers, all bets would be off.

I hope that our judging sheets identify some deficiencies that make you say "oh, yeah, that's probably true" so that you won't feel like you were victimized by errant judging. Judging is a hard thing to do, and it's done by volunteers who try hard to get it right.

That having been said, enter it into another competition. I have a porter that I like that I entered into four competitions before it medaled.

Good luck.
 
See that makes absolutely no sense to me. Why on earth would a beer that receives a good score not place? That right there is definitive proof that competitions are complete bulls*&t. I would be livid if I scored a 48 out of 50 and didn't even medal, I feel like that example right there completely relegates that entire competition to "irrelevant and petty."

because competition don't end at scoring. scoring well is what gets you to the finalists' table. once you're in the final show-down, it comes down to which beer the judges like best. if you're at that table, you've already proven that you've brewed to style. it will come down to what the judges feel are the best beers, without looking at a scoresheet.

admittedly you need a certain constitution to enter competitions. also, this is your first one. if this happens to you consistently, you can get upset... but this is one comp with one beer. and as amazing as your beer is, there might be others that are even better.
 
Agree with most everyone above. A great beer can be a great beer and not fit its style guidelines. And the notions of hoppy=better is the same for high abv=better, at least it seems on sites like BeerAdvocate. However, when you're looking at BJCP competitions, that's irrelevant since you're competing as much against style guidelines as other beers. The last competition I entered, my Wee Heavy scored very well and took second in category, but the beer that beat it for first in category was 60 shilling.

And while competition judging is supposed to be objective, there's still subjectivity. Someone else nailed it- if the judges have preconceived notions of the style and yours don't fit it, you won't do well. With something like an IPA where they're a dime a dozen, I wouldn't see that happening too severely. But with something a little more obscure like an Old Ale, I could see a judge only having tried one or two commercial versions, which may or may not be the best representations, and yours may not line up with them, even if it's still in style. And if a judge hasn't had a proper commercial version, and is just going on what the guidelines say, then it's up to how said judge interprets guidelines. In the comments on the above Wee Heavy, one judge besmirched the lack of smoke. Smoke is an OPTIONAL characteristic of the style. But if that judge sees it in the guidelines, and all the commercial versions that judge has had have had a smoked character, they're going to expect it.

So yeah. Wait for the score sheets. See what they say. And then either they're right or they're wrong. And enter it elsewhere and see if other judges say the same.
 
So it seems to me that some people here think I'm crying and whining because I wasn't voted prettiest girl at the party and that I feel the judges personally victimized me at the competition. That's just ridiculous. If you reread the title of the thread and the first sentence, it was really intended to be more of a semantic debate.

Obviously if my beer didn't win, it wasn't the "best." I have no illusions of grandeur that I'm going to be the next Jamil or whatever.

But it was f*&%ing delicious.

So thus the debate, can a beer truly be "great" if it doesn't medal? Or are competitions just petty dick waggling contests?


Especially the post below. No need to be such an ass, you're turning my simple question into a personal attack. Take a deep breath.

You're very surprised that your world shattering Old Ale didn't win a medal. Everyone who tasted it agreed with you that it was excellent and worthy of all superlatives. It may well be. But Old Ale is a fairly obscure style. My friends are serious brewers and I would venture that none of them is terribly conversant with the style parameters of Old Ale, nor very familiar with many good examples of the style. If I brewed an Old Ale and my brewing day went very well but missed on a few style points they'd taste that beer and call it awesome and if I praised it to Aetna they'd probably agree with me. But if I handed them the judging sheets and the guidelines and asked them to judge the beers, all bets would be off.

I hope that our judging sheets identify some deficiencies that make you say "oh, yeah, that's probably true" so that you won't feel like you were victimized by errant judging. Judging is a hard thing to do, and it's done by volunteers who try hard to get it right.

That having been said, enter it into another competition. I have a porter that I like that I entered into four competitions before it medaled.

Good luck.
 
It's all about brewing to style.

Turn to page 213 in Brewing Like a Monk and read what Gordon Strong wrote, he sums it up much better than the whole thread combined. My interpetation of what he wrote is...

Well that is what competitions are interpetations, by humans, which are fallible by nature. Right?
 
And Yooper - You really think I didn't even read the style guidelines? Come on now :p

Oh, no- I know you did! I was just pointing out those two areas- how they are VERY specific on the aroma, and flavor. That is exactly what the judges are told to look for, and if it's lacking any part of those exact flavors your beer will not score as well.


because competition don't end at scoring. scoring well is what gets you to the finalists' table. once you're in the final show-down, it comes down to which beer the judges like best. if you're at that table, you've already proven that you've brewed to style. it will come down to what the judges feel are the best beers, without looking at a scoresheet.

That's exactly correct! The BOS round is the best of the best, and I've seen a great kolsch win BOS over a very good Flanders red. The BOS round may boil down to preferences in that a "great beer" may win over a "very good beer" by taste, but we are still all looking for the beer to excel in it's style.

Remember that you "place" from the style. You get a ribbon or are awarded a place from that. The BOS medals are an additional round for the whole competition.

There is no way a high scoring beer that places first in its category wouldn't get a ribbon in its style even if it doesn't win best of show!
 
So thus the debate, can a beer truly be "great" if it doesn't medal? Or are competitions just petty dick waggling contests?

In short, yes. You can have an amazing, world class, fantastic tasting beer.

But if it's entered as a Russian Imperial Stout, but tastes and looks like a cream ale, you will not score well at all.

Brewing competitions are all about brewing to style. For specialty beers, there are some wild and crazy beers in there, and even then a "base beer style" should be specific.

I did well in the specialty category once. I tried to make an Arrogant Bastard clone, but really had poor efficiency (like 54%!) The beer tasted really good, though, and so I entered it as an "Imperial Amber Ale". It scored well, in the 40s, and I got good feedback. Had I entered it as an Arrogant Bastard type beer, though, I would have bombed.

If your beer is a classic example of an Old Ale, then you should be incensed that it did poorly. But if it's a great and amazing beer, but not exactly to the style guidelines, then you could still pat yourself on the back.

When you get your scoresheets back, you'll know more.
 
Yes, a beer can be great and not medal. It happens all the time. It doesn't even have to be a style issue, either. I have had a beer score a 40 in competition and not even get an honorable mention, because there were 4-5 other beers in the same category that were also great.
 
Regardless of the whole "great beer not medaling" debate, it is worth mentioning that entering English style beers in most competitions is basically a roll of the dice. The vast majority (I would even say 90%) of beer judges have never had English beer in its real element and have skewed perceptions of what it should taste like; as from drinking crap US commercial attempts or old/oxidized bottles that end up on our beer shelves.

The quality of judging for the English styles has become so appallingly poor that I don't even bother trying to produce authentic English beers for comps any more. Just ferment it at 72F to get lots of fruity esters, use no aroma hops, and stuff the thing full of dark crystal malts so the judges can't complain about the beer not having enough caramel flavor. High bitterness and some oxidation helps too. Basically, the more your beer tastes like an old bottle of Fullers ESB, the better. And if your brewing a mild, make a robust porter and just water it down to an appropriate alcohol percentage. Simple.
 
I personally don't brew for competitions at all. I brew beers that I want to drink, and then if a competition is coming around that I feel like entering, I will enter one of those beers in an appropriate category.

That said, I have judged English styles in competition and if you think fruity, bitter, oxidized, overly caramelly beer should score well then I'm sorry you don't have a better pool of judges in your area.


If I deliberately brewed crap like that for a competition, I'd have to figure out what to do with the other 4.5 gallons of crappy beer left over.
 
...or you could wait to get your scoresheets back. How is anyone here supposed to know why your beer didn't medal? Are you operating under an assumption we all possess mental superpowers far beyond those of your average human? Because, I just need to set you straight on that and let you know that is not the case for at least 51% of the people on this border, possibly more, but I am estimating.
 
I personally don't brew for competitions at all. I brew beers that I want to drink, and then if a competition is coming around that I feel like entering, I will enter one of those beers in an appropriate category.

Me too. And then you have to add in the "was I too lazy to bottle?" and "is the dropoff point really near my house?" questions to see if I'll bother competing.

Hell, the Maltose Falcons just had their Doug King event, and with their convoluted style guidelines I have a session red that *finally* fits a category (since it doesn't fit right in American Amber Ale for BJCP). But hell, I'm not driving all the way up to Culver City to drop off my entry!
 
Me too. And then you have to add in the "was I too lazy to bottle?" and "is the dropoff point really near my house?" questions to see if I'll bother competing.

Hell, the Maltose Falcons just had their Doug King event, and with their convoluted style guidelines I have a session red that *finally* fits a category (since it doesn't fit right in American Amber Ale for BJCP). But hell, I'm not driving all the way up to Culver City to drop off my entry!

Correction: the competition is actually tomorrow (I'm judging). I agree about driving to Culver City. It's fine if you live in the area, and a traffic nightmare otherwise.
 
That said, I have judged English styles in competition and if you think fruity, bitter, oxidized, overly caramelly beer should score well then I'm sorry you don't have a better pool of judges in your area.

I was being sarcastic about that 'how to brew' comment; obviously there are homebrewers making quality English style beer and being rewarded for it. After all, well-made beer wins competitions, regardless of how accurate it is to the real stuff.

Although, I wouldn't mind that "better pool of judges in my area." :)
 
Interesting that you thought I was attacking you. I'm genuinely sorry you took it that way. It really wasn't my intent.

So it seems to me that some people here think I'm crying and whining because I wasn't voted prettiest girl at the party and that I feel the judges personally victimized me at the competition. That's just ridiculous. If you reread the title of the thread and the first sentence, it was really intended to be more of a semantic debate.

Obviously if my beer didn't win, it wasn't the "best." I have no illusions of grandeur that I'm going to be the next Jamil or whatever.

But it was f*&%ing delicious.

So thus the debate, can a beer truly be "great" if it doesn't medal? Or are competitions just petty dick waggling contests?


Especially the post below. No need to be such an ass, you're turning my simple question into a personal attack. Take a deep breath.
 
Yes, a beer can be great and not medal. It happens all the time. It doesn't even have to be a style issue, either. I have had a beer score a 40 in competition and not even get an honorable mention, because there were 4-5 other beers in the same category that were also great.

Exactly!! I think what matters more than "winning" is your score. Would you rather medal with a 33 pt beer or receive a 40+ point score and not medal? I have struck out with beers that have gotten in the high 30's and meads in the low 40's. The point is that you don't know what your competition is!!
 
Exactly!! I think what matters more than "winning" is your score. Would you rather medal with a 33 pt beer or receive a 40+ point score and not medal? I have struck out with beers that have gotten in the high 30's and meads in the low 40's. The point is that you don't know what your competition is!!
I don't agree with this. First of all, it's a competition. As much as the PC group would like to make you think we're all winners, it just ain't so.

But more important is that the actual number is somewhat subjective and can vary from judge to judge. Some judges are free with their scores in the 40's. Others reserve them so there's a place to go if something better comes along that wow's them even more. Either way, it doesn't matter, as long as the judging is consistent. You're being judged equally against the other beer in your flight. From table to table, competition to competition, region to region you will see differences in scoring style. This is why when there are several tables for a category that advance to a mini-BOS the scores don't follow to the new table. It becomes a clean slate with the new round of judging. The actual number from that first round doesn't mean a thing, just that the beer was scored better than its peers and is good enough to advance.

Personally, I am pleased with any score of 30 and up. It lets me know that I made a really good beer. Only that on that day, someone else was better. Beyond that, the number is only the dick waggling contests mentioned earlier and doesn't mean too much.


BJCP.org said:
Within a mini-BOS round, the judges choose the top entries as directed by the competition director (typically, this means choosing the first, second, and third place winners). The mini-BOS judges are told the entry number and style, but not prior scores. Some competitions choose to re-label the bottles to disguise the identity of the entry so that judges will have a harder time using knowledge from the initial round of judging. This can be logistically difficult to manage, but may help ensure blind judging.
 
I don't agree with this. First of all, it's a competition. As much as the PC group would like to make you think we're all winners, it just ain't so.

But more important is that the actual number is somewhat subjective and can vary from judge to judge. Some judges are free with their scores in the 40's. Others reserve them so there's a place to go if something better comes along that wow's them even more. Either way, it doesn't matter, as long as the judging is consistent. You're being judged equally against the other beer in your flight. From table to table, competition to competition, region to region you will see differences in scoring style. This is why when there are several tables for a category that advance to a mini-BOS the scores don't follow to the new table. It becomes a clean slate with the new round of judging. The actual number from that first round doesn't mean a thing, just that the beer was scored better than its peers and is good enough to advance.

Personally, I am pleased with any score of 30 and up. It lets me know that I made a really good beer. Only that on that day, someone else was better. Beyond that, the number is only the dick waggling contests mentioned earlier and doesn't mean too much.

Well the whole judging process is subjective and open to many, many variables. You are right it is a competition but just because you don't win doesn't mean your beer sucks. In fact it can be an excellent beer.
 
Well the whole judging process is subjective and open to many, many variables. You are right it is a competition but just because you don't win doesn't mean your beer sucks. In fact it can be an excellent beer.

That's very true. Also competions are all about having fun. Having known the above about the subjectivity of contests, I always enter the same beer in at least three comps. That way three judges give me feedback as to how it stacked up stylewise. The judges are human beer loving folks who are doing thier very best, and doing it for nothing.
Competions are also becoming more stringent because we have better judges and also better brewers....
 
Great beers can and do tank in competitions. They can be entered in the wrong category, they can fail to fit style guidelines, and they can come up against great competition.
Regardless, you should get some good feedback on your beer, and be able to understand why it didn't do well from the judging sheets.
Judging certainly is subjective, so entering multiple competitions with the same beer may be one way to get a better idea of how good your beer really is (N=9 to 12 is always better than N=3).
 
Back
Top