All 4 of my entries to Pittsburgh scored much lower than expected, including one beer that just took a silver medal in the Great Az HBC with 42 points. I know it's the nationals but they only gave it a 28. Looks like Pittsburgh judges were tough this year.
NHC 2012 First Round Scoresheets
- Thread starter HYGBrewin
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 64,951
- Reaction score
- 16,516
You never know with competitions. You just don't ever know....
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 64,951
- Reaction score
- 16,516
Exactly, BJCP judging is more art than science.
There are so many factors that go into it - how was your bottle handled during shipping? How was it stored before the comp? When was it opened? How was the pour? How long did it sit in the glass? What temp was it stored at? What temp was it poured at? What temp was it tasted at? What place was it in the flight? What are the judges experience levels? What are the judges tasting preferences? Etc. Etc. Etc.
Remember, BJCP comps are there to tell you that you're beer is great. They're there, in part, to tell you the finer points of how your beer doesn't meet the style. We've gone soft as a society when it comes to criticism.
I entered several beers, meads, and ciders in the AZ, NHC, and Mazer Cup comps because they are all held around the same time (multiple judging on the same batches). The variety of scores and comments were......shall I say, interesting.
That's part of the fun of competitions, in my opinion.
BMan1029
Well-Known Member
Palate fatigue and mental exhaustion. It happens to judges. Its also why the mini BOS is supposed to be the great equalizer. Ive certainly had scoresheets come back and I had to honestly wonder what beer they were tasting. But after going through judging class and judging myself, I have a deeper understanding of the process and dont get nearly as worked up as I used to. Unless you tell me my beer is not fermented....at all....cause Im definitely certain I didnt bottle up wort and send it in.
I entered Atlanta as well. Just checked the mail today and, like Ralphie Parker waiting for his Little Orphan Annie decoder pin...skunked again.
Exactly, BJCP judging is more art than science.
There are so many factors that go into it - how was your bottle handled during shipping? How was it stored before the comp? When was it opened? How was the pour? How long did it sit in the glass? What temp was it stored at? What temp was it poured at? What temp was it tasted at? What place was it in the flight? What are the judges experience levels? What are the judges tasting preferences? Etc. Etc. Etc.
Remember, BJCP comps are there to tell you that you're beer is great. They're there, in part, to tell you the finer points of how your beer doesn't meet the style. We've gone soft as a society when it comes to criticism.
I entered several beers, meads, and ciders in the AZ, NHC, and Mazer Cup comps because they are all held around the same time (multiple judging on the same batches). The variety of scores and comments were......shall I say, interesting.
That's part of the fun of competitions, in my opinion.
I have no opposition to criticism. I do have opposition to a professional brewer that cannot recognize a pedio contamination, or a serious contamination issue at all. So unless they totally screwed up the entries and screwed up who's was who's then I don't know what was going on. The beer has a very detectable lactic sourness and a viscosity of motor oil. Yet it scored better than the non f-ed up beers. So either that says my non f-ed up beers suck worse than a dubbel that pours like psuedo jello, or the judges are idiots.
I can say I fully expected this, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to criticize their judging abilities. Snot strings reach from the glass to the bottle, seriously. In a comp I helped judge if the steward noticed something like that we would give it a 10-13 smell it, then a brave judge would taste it, and note the probable contamination issue.
The Pittsburgh judges make me really wish I wasn't sleeping at the wheel so I could have entered at Philadelphia.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 64,951
- Reaction score
- 16,516
I'm sure you know comparing scores from beers in different categories doesn't say that one is "better" than the other.
Any chance that bottle had a more subdued contamination?
Have you contacted the judges?
It was 100% bottled.
I will admit one of the beer was brewed as a beer heavily inspired by Orval. It had near 4 vol of carbonation and appropriate body. In fact I think it tastes eerily like Orval, and I got dinged for high carbonation. There was mention of "difficult to judge do to lack of base style". In this case I felt the base style was a belgian specialty. There is no category for a beer that I entered. So they knocked it for being not to any style I guess.
This is only my third ever comp. The other two my beers did stellar at took BOS at both. So either the judges where I won were SUPER easy at the last two comps or there is something up with theses Pittsburgh judges.
In full disclosure, as of Monday, I am a brewery QA lab tech. I feel I know my contamination issues. I finished up classes on Friday and started working on Monday. It's not like I'm paranoid. I verified through differential testing media and with a microscope there's a bacterial issue with this beer. Short of genetic testing through PCR or something like that I've done it to make sure while still able to use the university lab equipment.
I know I brewed non-traditional beers so they were going to be judged harshly. Heck there were less than 15 entrants in each category out of 750 total entrants. I just can't get over the "high" score of the contaminated beer. I don't want to beat the dead horse any further though.
I will admit one of the beer was brewed as a beer heavily inspired by Orval. It had near 4 vol of carbonation and appropriate body. In fact I think it tastes eerily like Orval, and I got dinged for high carbonation. There was mention of "difficult to judge do to lack of base style". In this case I felt the base style was a belgian specialty. There is no category for a beer that I entered. So they knocked it for being not to any style I guess.
This is only my third ever comp. The other two my beers did stellar at took BOS at both. So either the judges where I won were SUPER easy at the last two comps or there is something up with theses Pittsburgh judges.
In full disclosure, as of Monday, I am a brewery QA lab tech. I feel I know my contamination issues. I finished up classes on Friday and started working on Monday. It's not like I'm paranoid. I verified through differential testing media and with a microscope there's a bacterial issue with this beer. Short of genetic testing through PCR or something like that I've done it to make sure while still able to use the university lab equipment.
I know I brewed non-traditional beers so they were going to be judged harshly. Heck there were less than 15 entrants in each category out of 750 total entrants. I just can't get over the "high" score of the contaminated beer. I don't want to beat the dead horse any further though.
wonderbread23
Well-Known Member
I'm curious what additional information you submitted with it? On the entry form, did you state that it was a clone of Orval? That would have probably been the best route to take.
Competitions are a funny thing. I'm moving (at least) 10 beers on. Within the entire set of beers I sent in, there are some better than the 10 that were selected. Several beers simply got lost in the fray, likely because of some seriously inexperienced / poor judging in the region I was in which failed to place the beers into mini-bos where it would have been tasted by more experienced judges. Unfortunately, numbers are a big part of the game. You have to count on numbers and a big sample set to start eliminating the luck factor in entering.
All I sent was belgian specialty "bottle conditioned with brett". Like I said only third comp ever, and I don't know the "ins and outs" of most BJCP stuff. Not to mention I don't know the "ins and outs" of NHC which seems to be a whole other can of worms.
smokinghole said:
I did the same thing in my first comp with my Orval. Got the same results.
If you read the requirements for 16E, you MUST specify a base style OR the commercial beer being cloned. Lesson learned.
dwarven_stout
Well-Known Member
Something else that I've learned the hard way is that when it comes to additional information, there are times to be specific and times to be obtuse.
Judges tend to be very suggestible- you can write what you were going for with your specialty ingredients on a 16E, 21A or 23 form and they'll make doggone sure they taste it. OTOH they can be very picky about base styles.
Say you made an Absinthe-barrel aged Bavarian Hefe with ginger and habeneros and you'll score in the 20-30 range because they can't taste clove. Say you did all that to a "wheat beer" and you'll get the benefit of the doubt and a 30+ score (at least in my experience so far). Am I jaded and cynical? Yeah.
Judges tend to be very suggestible- you can write what you were going for with your specialty ingredients on a 16E, 21A or 23 form and they'll make doggone sure they taste it. OTOH they can be very picky about base styles.
Say you made an Absinthe-barrel aged Bavarian Hefe with ginger and habeneros and you'll score in the 20-30 range because they can't taste clove. Say you did all that to a "wheat beer" and you'll get the benefit of the doubt and a 30+ score (at least in my experience so far). Am I jaded and cynical? Yeah.
Specialties and spice beers are the WORST to judge. Sometimes there isn't any information, sometimes there is too much.
One time I had a Belgian Golden Strong aged on Spanish Cedar soaked in bourbon. It was a good Golden Strong, but neither the cigar box or the bourbon came through... so I had to ding it for saying it was there when it wasn't. Had they entered it as a Golden Strong, it probably would have done much better. Spice/fruit/specialty beers are all about balance between the base style and the strange additions (or the beer being cloned).
Keep in mind, judging is BLIND tasting, we can only go on what we know... and that's usually not much.
Nada. Waiting on them as well. Hopefully no news is good news.
Docjay
Active Member
I can say that I sent in 6 beers, 6 came back with nothing written on them for place and the scores were medicore at best. I did get good feedback but wish the one beer I made special would have done better. Ohh well. I will hold off until saturday to drink my remaining bottles.
Got my scoresheets back from Portland today. My English Mild scored a respectable 36. No place was given.
dwarven_stout
Well-Known Member
Yep, I'm well aware of that. Agree with your balance comment as well- I've judged some cat 23 beers that might put my outlandish example up there to shame in the bigger is better arena.
dwarven_stout
Well-Known Member
Got my scoresheets from Portland today. Looks like of 3 beers, 1 will advance with a score of 36.5.
StoneHands
Well-Known Member
Well, I guess I'm heartbroken, my dunkel didn't advance. The thing is perfect too, next year I guess. I did advance one of my 3 beers, Altbier took third in Atlanta. I thought that one was mediocre. Looking forward to the scoresheets.
BryceL
Well-Known Member
Results are on their site now...
r2eng
Well-Known Member
Portland - placed #1 and #2 in Category 18! Belgian Blond and Dubbel!
Coolness
Coolness
Scored a 39.5, a 38, and a 35 in Philly, and the 35 advanced with a 3rd.
chutracheese
Well-Known Member
How do you find out if you scored well enough, but didn't place, to advance?
We got our scoresheets several weeks ago. I knew that the 39.5 & 35 went to a mini-bos, but no places were marked. I just found out that the 35 placed 3rd on the AHA website.
You have to place to advance.
BigfootCounty
Well-Known Member
I ended up taking 2nd place in Portland for IPA
I'm really hoping my re-brew gets a better score that the last one but I'm still feeling grateful to place at all.
I'm really hoping my re-brew gets a better score that the last one but I'm still feeling grateful to place at all.
BryceL
Well-Known Member
Bummed that a 41 on my Imperial Rye IPA wasn't good enough to place in the specialty category at San Diego. Must have been some tight competition.
chutracheese
Well-Known Member
Got it. I think I was confusing that you had to score a 30 or better AND place to be able to advance.
I was thinking it was 30 or better OR place.
Thanks.
BigfootCounty
Well-Known Member
that sounds like a NICE beer dude I'm sure it was really tight competition all over
dwarven_stout
Well-Known Member
Portland - placed #1 and #2 in Category 18! Belgian Blond and Dubbel!
Coolness
Should bring those down to the Snake River meeting next week. I'd like to taste 'em.
kraypd
Well-Known Member
Managed a first in Dark Lager in Atlanta with my schwarzbier. Neither of my wheats (regular or dunkel) advanced. Still waiting on score sheets.
My IPA didn't place in Atlanta either and I didn't get my scoresheet either. First comp so I'm not surprised but I'm anxious to see the comments. Just checked the mail and it's not there. Kind of surprised that it takes so long.
I still haven't received my score sheets from Atlanta (Portland filled up before I could snag spots), but I had 4 out of 5 place. My first real comp too...
3rd in #20 - Fruit Beer; I entered a Berliner Weisse brewed Nov 2010, that then had cherry juice added for secondary fermentation.
2nd in #23 - Specialty Beer; I entered a Hair of the Dog Adam clone that was wood aged (also brewed the same day in Nov 2010).
2nd and 3rd in #27b and #27c - Standard Cider. I entered a pure Kingston Black cider brewed ~2009 (slightly sweet) and another Kingston Black cider brewed 2010 (dry).
My favorite beer - a smoked helles, I just rebrewed last month, didn't place
3rd in #20 - Fruit Beer; I entered a Berliner Weisse brewed Nov 2010, that then had cherry juice added for secondary fermentation.
2nd in #23 - Specialty Beer; I entered a Hair of the Dog Adam clone that was wood aged (also brewed the same day in Nov 2010).
2nd and 3rd in #27b and #27c - Standard Cider. I entered a pure Kingston Black cider brewed ~2009 (slightly sweet) and another Kingston Black cider brewed 2010 (dry).
My favorite beer - a smoked helles, I just rebrewed last month, didn't place
Three beers going to the second round: 5D, 22A, 23.
Similar threads
- Poll
