I'm asking because I'm pretty sure I don't, but I'm curious as to others' thoughts on it. For me, it has a really distinct character that I can't put into words - something I also feel about Anchor beers in general - that I don't really care for. But on a whim I used it in a pale ale recipe and haven't been particularly impressed. I think I fermented at 66 and ramped up a few degrees after 4 or 5 days. Sulphur was very evident at that point as expected. After a week conditioned in the keg, the slightest bit of sulphur is still present, but not much else. I think for sure it would have benefited from a bigger charge of fruitier hops than I used (I used cascade, centennial, and chinook, which clearly did not complement it at all). Also, though White Labs says it's more flocculent than WLP001, I haven't found that true at all. Two weeks in the keg and it's still pretty hazy, with some...chunks? Not sure what to call those. Anyway, I bet it would have benefited from some more time in primary - but if that's the case, I'll just as soon stick with a number of other yeasts that clean up faster and don't blot out the hops and malt the way this one has. Any big fans of it out there who can stand up for it?