Just wondering. I usually enter only beers which I think are really good and have sent in only three in over 10 years, but sent in one I really was a little iffy on this time. My previous low was a 42 and this Scottish Strong Ale (9E) garnered a 33. Since I obviously don't do a lot of them I wonder if you would consider this a bad score or ? I know there is a lot of variation in scoring and in different judge's tastes, but I entered and I accept the score as a fair one, I just don't know how it rates as to the average contest score.
So what score in a contest would you consider disappointing?
- Thread starter befus
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
TopherM
Well-Known Member
42 is your low?? 42s will typically go to the 2nd round and sometimes win, even at large competitions!
You are talking BFBC?? I'm a BFBC judge, and the #s are defined in lower left corner of each scoring sheet! 45-50 outstanding, 38-44 excellent, 30-37 very good, 21-29 good, 14-20 fair, 00-13 problematic.
Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew
You are talking BFBC?? I'm a BFBC judge, and the #s are defined in lower left corner of each scoring sheet! 45-50 outstanding, 38-44 excellent, 30-37 very good, 21-29 good, 14-20 fair, 00-13 problematic.
Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew
JustLooking
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2009
- Messages
- 638
- Reaction score
- 125
BFBC?
paperairplane
Well-Known Member
Did you get any helpful notes? Also did they do a calibration beer - usually like a sierra nevada - to standardize the scores, that can also help gauge, maybe
they were scoring everything low.
they were scoring everything low.
If it is a big competition (500-1000 entries), with quality judging, I generally consider my scores as follows:
Under 30 = I did something wrong. Beer was not to style, or had some problems and was not a good beer. Might be drinkable, but you probably would not buy a second if you were at a bar.
30-35 = A good solid beer. Probably nothing "wrong" with it. But, probably nothing "great" about it, and it did not stand out.
35-40 = This is a really good beer. Hit the style well, and stands out.
40+ = A great beer. Probably as good as you could buy (or better) than many commercial examples.
Under 30 = I did something wrong. Beer was not to style, or had some problems and was not a good beer. Might be drinkable, but you probably would not buy a second if you were at a bar.
30-35 = A good solid beer. Probably nothing "wrong" with it. But, probably nothing "great" about it, and it did not stand out.
35-40 = This is a really good beer. Hit the style well, and stands out.
40+ = A great beer. Probably as good as you could buy (or better) than many commercial examples.
TopherM
Well-Known Member
LOL...sorry, I'm a BJCP judge. I was actually at an event called BFBC when I was replying. Scrambled brain!
Haha, I'll see you at Brewer's Ball next month!
I just entered my first real competition and when i got my score i was very upset by it. I received a 22. then i found out that the winning score was a 28.5. So either every beer was that bad, or they scored very low. I tasted a sample of the winning beer and it was very good. So i tend to think that they just scored low. The judges were professional brewers not actual judges so i dont know if that had anything to do with how they scored.
kombat
Well-Known Member
I wish everyone would enter their beers into competition, at least once. It's a tremendous learning opportunity and can potentially instill some much-needed humility sometimes, too.
"Pitch rates and temperature control are a waste of time. I underpitch all the time and ferment in the low 70's, and my beer tastes great."
Really? Enter it into a competition and see how "great" it really is.
"Pitch rates and temperature control are a waste of time. I underpitch all the time and ferment in the low 70's, and my beer tastes great."
Really? Enter it into a competition and see how "great" it really is.
In most competitions, I rarely see a "40" or higher score.
A really good score is 37+ in most competitions.
I've had some really good tasting beers in competitions that scored in the high 20s. They may have just missed the mark on certain style guidelines.
If the OPs lowest score was a 42, they didn't enter any competitions I ever judged (including the NHC), that's for sure as that is a very high score that is rarely given and few higher scores are given. That's a fantastic score, and higher than that is rarely done. In one competitions I judged about 5 years ago, there was an APA that scored a 42 and I remember it. That's pretty remarkable.
It could depend on the competition, too, I suppose. Some judges may be more inclined to give higher scores than others I would guess.
(I'm a certified BJCP judge with lots of judging points and have judged quite a few comps including the final round of the NHC).
A really good score is 37+ in most competitions.
I've had some really good tasting beers in competitions that scored in the high 20s. They may have just missed the mark on certain style guidelines.
If the OPs lowest score was a 42, they didn't enter any competitions I ever judged (including the NHC), that's for sure as that is a very high score that is rarely given and few higher scores are given. That's a fantastic score, and higher than that is rarely done. In one competitions I judged about 5 years ago, there was an APA that scored a 42 and I remember it. That's pretty remarkable.
It could depend on the competition, too, I suppose. Some judges may be more inclined to give higher scores than others I would guess.
(I'm a certified BJCP judge with lots of judging points and have judged quite a few comps including the final round of the NHC).
Spookgolds
Well-Known Member
Just because something isn't great by a competitions standards doesn't mean it isn't good. My thought would be that if someone is brewing specifically for a competition then they will try their best to get it as close to perfect as possible based on the criteria it is being judged against, and they can take the score and feedback and really figure out what went wrong (or what was good).
If someone just brews for fun and then enters it into a competition and it scores low, that shouldn't discourage them from brewing something if they thought it was good. Maybe they might use that info to change it, or maybe not.
I like competitions, but I don't think they are the be all end all for what is "good" and what's not.
That's just my 2 cents anyways, for what it's worth...
kombat
Well-Known Member
Sure. And lots of people think McDonald's makes a great burger. It wouldn't win any competitions though.
So, objectively, is a Quarter Pounder with Cheese "good" burger? Or filler-laden, mass-produced, sodium-rich crap? Lots of people like them, so they must be "good," right?
So, objectively, is a Quarter Pounder with Cheese "good" burger? Or filler-laden, mass-produced, sodium-rich crap? Lots of people like them, so they must be "good," right?
Never know! What if it is a fast food burger competition? think of it like that when you are being "objective"
A score sheet under 25 hurts my sensitive feelings.
If there is a drop off near by, and the entry fees are cheap, it a lot of fun to get some feed back from strangers with above average palates. The comments are where it's at, who cares about the number or a 50 cent blue ribbon.
Some of my house main stays judge poorly though, but we love them. One of my ginger braggott's has been called, "medicinal", "overpowering", "you should have warned us". It scores weak but is best thing I've ever made.
If there is a drop off near by, and the entry fees are cheap, it a lot of fun to get some feed back from strangers with above average palates. The comments are where it's at, who cares about the number or a 50 cent blue ribbon.
Some of my house main stays judge poorly though, but we love them. One of my ginger braggott's has been called, "medicinal", "overpowering", "you should have warned us". It scores weak but is best thing I've ever made.
CadillacAndy
Well-Known Member
I don't consider any score disappointing. I compete a lot and my scores have ranged from 44 to 13. I don't put a whole lot of emphasis on the scores, but rather if the beer medals and the feedback. On the same day I've had the exact same beer score a 44 in one part of the state and a 22 in another part of the state.
I've learned something from probably 80% of the score sheets. It's the 20% of the score sheets that have no feedback, or just plain wrong feedback that I find disappointing.
I've learned something from probably 80% of the score sheets. It's the 20% of the score sheets that have no feedback, or just plain wrong feedback that I find disappointing.
i can usually tell what is good and what isn't. if i enter a beer that i think is really good and it scores under 35 or 36, i would be disappointed. frankly if something i think is good doesn't place, i'm very disappointed. if i enter something that isn't so good for pointers (something i am doing less and less as I learn more off-flavors and causes), then i don't really care about the score but expect it to be in the mid 20s.
Darwin18
Well-Known Member
Anything in the 40's is what I would consider an exceptional beer. I've only given a few scores in the 40's but those beers really did stand out.
Here's my break down:
40 - 45: Exceptional. A beer in this range is well brewed and exemplifies the style.
35 - 40: Very Good. A beer in this range is well brewed and is a good example of the style. Could use just a minor tweak to take it to the next level.
30 - 35: Good. A beer in this range is well brewed but not the best example of the style. Could use a couple tweaks to bump it up.
25 - 30: Okay. A beer in this range may have a perceptible flaw, but it's minor. Could use a few tweaks to bump it up.
20 - 25: Below average. A beer in this range has a perceptible flaw or two, and it detracts.
15 - 20: Poor. A beer in this range has two or more significant flaws that are very distracting.
15 - 13: Very poor. A beer in this range is exceptionally poor. It is either poorly brewed with numerous flaws or it has a nasty infection that ruins the beer completely.
Anyway that's what I think of when I see people's scores. You also have to understand that your beer is being judged against other beers in your flight. If all the other beers are in the low-mid 20's, you could end up with a beer in the 35 - 40 range just because it's that much better compared to the competition. The inverse may be true with a flight of beers of above average quality.
Generally in a flight of 10 this is the general scoring breakdown that I've personally observed:
40 - 45: 1
35 - 40: 1
30 - 40: 2
25 - 30: 2
20 - 25: 2
15 - 20: 2
Here's my break down:
40 - 45: Exceptional. A beer in this range is well brewed and exemplifies the style.
35 - 40: Very Good. A beer in this range is well brewed and is a good example of the style. Could use just a minor tweak to take it to the next level.
30 - 35: Good. A beer in this range is well brewed but not the best example of the style. Could use a couple tweaks to bump it up.
25 - 30: Okay. A beer in this range may have a perceptible flaw, but it's minor. Could use a few tweaks to bump it up.
20 - 25: Below average. A beer in this range has a perceptible flaw or two, and it detracts.
15 - 20: Poor. A beer in this range has two or more significant flaws that are very distracting.
15 - 13: Very poor. A beer in this range is exceptionally poor. It is either poorly brewed with numerous flaws or it has a nasty infection that ruins the beer completely.
Anyway that's what I think of when I see people's scores. You also have to understand that your beer is being judged against other beers in your flight. If all the other beers are in the low-mid 20's, you could end up with a beer in the 35 - 40 range just because it's that much better compared to the competition. The inverse may be true with a flight of beers of above average quality.
Generally in a flight of 10 this is the general scoring breakdown that I've personally observed:
40 - 45: 1
35 - 40: 1
30 - 40: 2
25 - 30: 2
20 - 25: 2
15 - 20: 2
BreezyBrew
IPA is my spirit animal
That is simply amazing.
CadillacAndy
Well-Known Member
Yeah. That's what I said too. It was a Blind Pig inspired American IPA. One set of judges thought it was dead on and even asked for the recipe while the other set thought it was too light in color and needed crystal malt.
TopherM
Well-Known Member
Here's some real numbers, I judged four flights of brews between this last Friday and Sunday for a BJCP competition with a little under 800 total homebrew entries.
Those four flights were cider, scottish and irish ale, IPA, and Porter, with about 100-110 total beers/ciders represented in the total field for those four categories (9 flights of 6-7 for IPA!). There were about 5-6 total brews of those 110 with composite average scores of 40+, with the highest composite being a 42.5. Of the categories I was involved in, a composite 37.5 even won a best in show (An Irish Red).
I would say the average score of the 30-35 brews I judged was about a 32.
Those four flights were cider, scottish and irish ale, IPA, and Porter, with about 100-110 total beers/ciders represented in the total field for those four categories (9 flights of 6-7 for IPA!). There were about 5-6 total brews of those 110 with composite average scores of 40+, with the highest composite being a 42.5. Of the categories I was involved in, a composite 37.5 even won a best in show (An Irish Red).
I would say the average score of the 30-35 brews I judged was about a 32.
At a recent competition a bunch of us were waiting to hear how our beers did. One of my friends asked how to know if a judge thought he did a bad job. I told him if a judge walked up and told him that he judged his beer and then sucker punched him in the mouth for insulting his mouth that much he probably did a bad job. He thought that was very funny. He ended up getting a first place with his Munich Helles.
He thought that was very funny. He ended up getting a first place with his Munich Helles.Thanks to all.
Yooper, I think my score was too high in the contest I got a 42 in. I am sure if you were judging it would have deservedly been scored lower. It didn't even win its class, which tells you how high they were scoring that day.
I haven't received the score sheets yet. I just got the posted score online. It was not a huge competition and I have no idea what the winner's scores were. I do know that in the Irish/Scotch ale class, strong scotch ales got first and third, so I was down the list somewhere. I'll be interested to see the actual tasting notes. I have made two big beers and both seemed really sweet to me, but when I read the guidelines it seems that is acceptable for such brews. Hopefully the results will be here by next week.
Yooper, I think my score was too high in the contest I got a 42 in. I am sure if you were judging it would have deservedly been scored lower. It didn't even win its class, which tells you how high they were scoring that day.
I haven't received the score sheets yet. I just got the posted score online. It was not a huge competition and I have no idea what the winner's scores were. I do know that in the Irish/Scotch ale class, strong scotch ales got first and third, so I was down the list somewhere. I'll be interested to see the actual tasting notes. I have made two big beers and both seemed really sweet to me, but when I read the guidelines it seems that is acceptable for such brews. Hopefully the results will be here by next week.
A friend of mine took first place in a BJCP competition and 2nd overall (score unknown as of last week - still waiting on score sheet) and got a 21 for the same beer in another BJCP 2 weeks later. We pondered why the second might be so low, and if the others were just bad in the first competition.
Darwin18
Well-Known Member
It could be something as simple as poor bottling technique. All it takes is one oxidized or infected bottle to get the judging table.
TopherM
Well-Known Member
You really can't get a 35 then two weeks later get 21 if everything is the same. The system is better than that. I would assume that even though it was the same batch of beers, the bottle they tasted from at one event did not contain the exact same thing as the bottle from the other event.
About 80% of the points in any BJCP sanctioned judging come from very objective criteria, like color, carbonation levels, ABV, clarity, the presence of style factors (like a sour must be sour, an IPA must have a certain level of hop bitterness and aroma, etc.), so there really isn't any sort of conspiracy or even room for interpretation for the exact same beer to be judged differently on the majority of points.
That said, the remaining 20% are a bit open to each invidicual judge's interpretation. People's palates are different, and a fruity, floral flavoring hop to one judge can easily seem a bit soapy or medicinal to another. That's why every beer is always judged by 2-3 judges, and if their individual scores vary by 7 or more, the BJCP guidelines urge the judges to discuss why they are apart and compromise to within a 7 point spread.
The vast majority of judges I have met take the job very seriously, and they are always trying really hard to give points, not deduct them, but take pride in knowing the style guidelines and sticking to them as strictly as possible within their experience.
Where brewers get all twisted is when they are ignorant of the style guidelines and think they should get good scores just based on how good the beer is. It literally has to tick all of the style points to score highly. Just because the recipe you bought is named "American IPA" and you brew it perfectly doesn't mean all of the criteria land firmly in the BJCP criteria. You need to know the guidelines and make sure everything in the recipe is in range with the criteria BEFORE you brew it, then double check afterwards.
If you KNOW the criteria, you can pretty much figure out what your score will be before submitting it, within a reasonable range. You are not going to brew a beer that legitimately lands firmly in the middle of the criteria and get a 20. There is no conspiracy. The system's as professional and objective as anyone could hope for.
I had a beer over the weekend that was an absolutely phenomenal Baltic Porter. Higher ABV balanced by sweet malt with licorice and black currant notes with a clean, lagered finish. However, they entered the beer under Robust Porter. Very different beers with very different style criteria. It may have scored a 40+ in the Baltic Porter category, but scored about a 30 in the Robust Porter category. Not a value judgement on the beer itself, just how it measured against the established criteria for the category entered. The brewer may have literally just made a mistake in the category entered, or may just not have done his homework on the style criteria.
Either way, I not only judged it properly against the Robust Porter criteria, but at the end told the brewer that he should review the guidelines and consider entering it again as a Baltic Porter. If he follows the advise, I think he has a great recipe that would score well.
About 80% of the points in any BJCP sanctioned judging come from very objective criteria, like color, carbonation levels, ABV, clarity, the presence of style factors (like a sour must be sour, an IPA must have a certain level of hop bitterness and aroma, etc.), so there really isn't any sort of conspiracy or even room for interpretation for the exact same beer to be judged differently on the majority of points.
That said, the remaining 20% are a bit open to each invidicual judge's interpretation. People's palates are different, and a fruity, floral flavoring hop to one judge can easily seem a bit soapy or medicinal to another. That's why every beer is always judged by 2-3 judges, and if their individual scores vary by 7 or more, the BJCP guidelines urge the judges to discuss why they are apart and compromise to within a 7 point spread.
The vast majority of judges I have met take the job very seriously, and they are always trying really hard to give points, not deduct them, but take pride in knowing the style guidelines and sticking to them as strictly as possible within their experience.
Where brewers get all twisted is when they are ignorant of the style guidelines and think they should get good scores just based on how good the beer is. It literally has to tick all of the style points to score highly. Just because the recipe you bought is named "American IPA" and you brew it perfectly doesn't mean all of the criteria land firmly in the BJCP criteria. You need to know the guidelines and make sure everything in the recipe is in range with the criteria BEFORE you brew it, then double check afterwards.
If you KNOW the criteria, you can pretty much figure out what your score will be before submitting it, within a reasonable range. You are not going to brew a beer that legitimately lands firmly in the middle of the criteria and get a 20. There is no conspiracy. The system's as professional and objective as anyone could hope for.
I had a beer over the weekend that was an absolutely phenomenal Baltic Porter. Higher ABV balanced by sweet malt with licorice and black currant notes with a clean, lagered finish. However, they entered the beer under Robust Porter. Very different beers with very different style criteria. It may have scored a 40+ in the Baltic Porter category, but scored about a 30 in the Robust Porter category. Not a value judgement on the beer itself, just how it measured against the established criteria for the category entered. The brewer may have literally just made a mistake in the category entered, or may just not have done his homework on the style criteria.
Either way, I not only judged it properly against the Robust Porter criteria, but at the end told the brewer that he should review the guidelines and consider entering it again as a Baltic Porter. If he follows the advise, I think he has a great recipe that would score well.
UglyDude
Loud Mic
LOL I thought it meant Big Effin Beer Contest!
In my experience, the smaller the competition, the higher the scores. A substantial majority of the comps. I enter are 400-1000 entries. The substantial majority of my 40+'s are in comps under 200.
Also, it seems more common that small, local comps. bring in "area experts" that might not even be BJCP judges. You can get some funny scores in these comps because beers are being judged more on personal preference or simply if they "like it" or not. There are beers that I dislike - simply because I dislike that kind of beer..... Does not change the fact that they might be a "45" for that style.
Like others, I have had the same beers scoring widely apart in a narrow window of time. Generally, I chalk this up to something I did wrong when filling bottles, something that happened in shipping, or something that happened in handling at the comp. If I am really serious about getting real feedback on a beer I brew, I send it to 3-5 different comps that are close together - get 8-10 scoresheets back, take the 5 or so most experienced judges and look for consistencies in what they said (good or bad). If 3 or 4 highly experienced judges tell me the same thing, about the same beer - I am inclined to believe it is something I should pay attention to.
Also, it seems more common that small, local comps. bring in "area experts" that might not even be BJCP judges. You can get some funny scores in these comps because beers are being judged more on personal preference or simply if they "like it" or not. There are beers that I dislike - simply because I dislike that kind of beer..... Does not change the fact that they might be a "45" for that style.
Like others, I have had the same beers scoring widely apart in a narrow window of time. Generally, I chalk this up to something I did wrong when filling bottles, something that happened in shipping, or something that happened in handling at the comp. If I am really serious about getting real feedback on a beer I brew, I send it to 3-5 different comps that are close together - get 8-10 scoresheets back, take the 5 or so most experienced judges and look for consistencies in what they said (good or bad). If 3 or 4 highly experienced judges tell me the same thing, about the same beer - I am inclined to believe it is something I should pay attention to.
CadillacAndy
Well-Known Member
I'm going to have to disagree with this. My example of getting a 44.5 (National and Recognized BJCP judges) at a competition is Philly and then getting a 22 (Apprentice and non-BJCP) on the exact same day shows that the system can't prevent wild swings like this.
The apprentice's score sheet totally left the overall box blank and had one or two word descriptions for everything. He scored it a 20. The non-BJCP judge was a little better and suggested in the overall box that it was "lacking malt and hop complexity".
Ultimately the beer scored a 32 and a 28 at other competitions within a 2 week span of the first judging, so that helps me to say the 44.5 was probably on the high end, and the 22 was on the low end. Since it was an IPA, a person's palate unfortunately comes in to play much more, and the order of the flight matters.
They were all bottled at the exact same time, the exact same way, with the exact same caps and stored exactly the same (while in my control at least).
I guess the bottom line is to not rely on 1 set of scoresheets to tell you if you have a world class beer or a recipe that should be burned.
BoomerHarley
Well-Known Member
This is why I enter in multiple subcategories.
Welllllll....... that is not exactly and indictment on the "system" - it is an indictment on the improper "implementation" of the system. You had two "in"experienced judges (who appear to not have known what they were doing entirely) score it improperly. The assertion was that "IF" the judges do what they are supposed to, you won't get these wild swings on the same beer. Seems highly likely that these judges did not do what they were suppose to - thus the wild swing.
And, as you mentioned - that is why you look for several different comps to get feedback because one set of sheets is not necessarily enough. In your case - I would have paid a lot more attention to the high ranking judges than the others.
Edit- should have said "in"experienced judges that did not know what they were doing.
CadillacAndy
Well-Known Member
I agree with this 100%. I guess my point was kind of that these wild swings happen and to not be too disappointed if and when you get a low score.
Just sat down and looked over the score sheets and find myself getting frustrated all over again by getting a 4/10 in the overall and having it left totally blank.
TopherM
Well-Known Member
Definitely! I'm an Apprentice judge, and I'm not even allowed to touch a BJCP entry unless I'm paired with a judge that's Certified or higher.
That's the only way to learn and implement that system correctly, and that is explicitly defined in the BJCP guidelines.
FYI, I also would never be allowed to leave anything blank. There are about 3 more people who check and double check the scoresheets prior to finalizing them that look for errors and omissions and make sure the judges correct it.
Unfortunately, it sounds like some people may just have some bad experiences with poorly administered competitions. I'm also on the organizing committee for this last particular contest, and we literally have about 60 people between judges, stewards, volunteers, etc. to pull off a single contest. It would be terribly difficult if we didn't have those kind of resources.
Also, none of this is classified information either. You can go educate yourself on the BJCP site. Just reading their literature will probably increase your competition scores significantly, as you'll pay more attention to details that matter on brew day!
That's the only way to learn and implement that system correctly, and that is explicitly defined in the BJCP guidelines.
FYI, I also would never be allowed to leave anything blank. There are about 3 more people who check and double check the scoresheets prior to finalizing them that look for errors and omissions and make sure the judges correct it.
Unfortunately, it sounds like some people may just have some bad experiences with poorly administered competitions. I'm also on the organizing committee for this last particular contest, and we literally have about 60 people between judges, stewards, volunteers, etc. to pull off a single contest. It would be terribly difficult if we didn't have those kind of resources.
Also, none of this is classified information either. You can go educate yourself on the BJCP site. Just reading their literature will probably increase your competition scores significantly, as you'll pay more attention to details that matter on brew day!
A LOWEST score of 42 sounds unreasonable to me. If that's your lowest, I'd assume every single beer you've ever entered has been a gold medal winner, either that or you're entering comps with unqualified judges who aren't being strict enough and you finally got a comp with judges in line with everyone else. My HIGHEST score ever was a 41, and I've taken home my share of medals.
Generally I'm relatively pleased with scores in the 30s (most beers I enter seem to average in the 30-35 range), and very happy with scores above 35. If I get a 25-30 I'm usually not happy with it (although I've also medaled with beers in the 20's). Sometimes I knew there was a something off (even if just "not to style"), so I anticipate it, but I've had a few that downright upset me. Below 25 usually makes me mad. The one exception was when I entered a peated 90 shilling I aged on oak soaked in Laphroaig (in other words, this thing was a peat bomb). I loved it, everyone who tried it loved it (with the caveat that they're all smoky single malt drinkers). The judges gave me a 19, my lowest ever. However, that didn't surprise me, since I knew it was going to be a love it or hate it kind of beer, and I just lost the coin toss.
Generally I'm relatively pleased with scores in the 30s (most beers I enter seem to average in the 30-35 range), and very happy with scores above 35. If I get a 25-30 I'm usually not happy with it (although I've also medaled with beers in the 20's). Sometimes I knew there was a something off (even if just "not to style"), so I anticipate it, but I've had a few that downright upset me. Below 25 usually makes me mad. The one exception was when I entered a peated 90 shilling I aged on oak soaked in Laphroaig (in other words, this thing was a peat bomb). I loved it, everyone who tried it loved it (with the caveat that they're all smoky single malt drinkers). The judges gave me a 19, my lowest ever. However, that didn't surprise me, since I knew it was going to be a love it or hate it kind of beer, and I just lost the coin toss.
Well I certainly didn't indicate I enter contest after contest and get 40+. I have entered exactly three beers in my lifetime and received the below,and now a 33. I hope you didn't take it that I was upset with the 33. I was hoping for a 35-37, but the score I got seems ok. I just wanted to know how much variation there was in the scores usually, and apparently there is more than a little. I have no doubt my beers have been over rated, I just stated what I got, actually understated, as I knew they would draw a lot of criticism. It certainly is not my fault they scored this highly, and though I got medals, I understand it was over rated. Did not mean to be 'unreasonable'.
Darwin18
Well-Known Member
The top score sheet with a 47 is a prime example of how to not fill out a score sheet. I know you're happy with the score but that's not the point of the competition, if it was a BJCP competition. You paid money to have that person evaluate your beer.
BreezyBrew
IPA is my spirit animal
That person shouldn't be a judge if they care so little about what they are doing. Talk about the bare minimum.
I wasn't referring to you, just the judging as being unreasonable, and you're entirely right it's not your fault. If you'd only entered a few competitions, with scoring like that, and you enter a more realistic competition, I could understand being shocked or confused by a 33, when in reality 33 is a respectable score in BJCP competitions. Sounds like you knew those high scores were inflated.
Edit: And regardless of the score, I would be furious and emailing the competition director if I got that top score sheet. I'd rather have a mediocre score with honest helpful feedback than a very high score that is useless to me.
BreezyBrew
IPA is my spirit animal
I am pretty sure I would be too. Writing "Big time" for mouthfeel is just laughable. No offense to your beer, and I'm sure it's luscious, but how can you take that seriously. The judge needs a talking to by whoever the organizer is.
Similar threads
