Blended Beer. Cheating or not?

[McKBrew]

I see no issues with it, except the example of blending with commercial beers (sorry that just doesn't cut it).

Me personally, I have never blended beers (except in my glass ). I don't think I possess the talent to do that on a batch level. But, I've also never entered competitions either.

My thought is that if you are doctoring and messing around with a beer to enter it into a competition, that you might need to work on your process more. If the base beer isn't worthy of entering or doesn't meet a specific style guideline then it's not the beer you should be putting up for competition.

 

[david_42]

For a competition it doesn't matter how you got there, kit, extract, AG, blend. It's about hitting the style guide. I'd draw the line at rebottling a commercial beer.

 

[Bobby_M]

No offense meant, but this sounds like a topic losers whine about.

Here here. Everyone thinks their process is most righteous. We all have to acknowledge self interest and bias. Once we do, we can move on and have an open discussion.

It was asked which categories carry an expectation of blending. The ones that come to mind are Flanders Brown and Geuze. Gueze, by definition, is a blend of several different vintages of lambic. Here's a bender for ya.. what if you enter an actual single batch lambic in the Gueze category and win. Did you cheat?

Flanders Brown is likely blended to make the finished product more sweet and sour, but you COULD pull off the end result in other ways.

 

[sp1365]

To be a brewer is to work both the hot side and the cold side.

Exactly.

The way I see it is that the beer we brew is all based on various hot and cold side methods or techniques.

Hot Side:
Infusion Mash or Decoction? Batch or Fly Sparge? FHW, Hop Bursting? etc.

Cold Side:
Fruit or flavorings? Cold Crash? Gelatin? Dry-Hop? etc.

Blending to me is just another technique that can be used to brew a beer. No different that any of the other choices that we all make while designing and brewing.

Hypothetical question: If a person brews a 10 gallon batch, ferments it is 2 different vessels, but combines it when they go to bottle then don't they have a blended beer? Would it be unethical for them then to then send that to a competition?

 

[DRoyLenz]

Hypothetical question: If a person brews a 10 gallon batch, ferments it is 2 different vessels, but combines it when they go to bottle then don't they have a blended beer? Would it be unethical for them then to then send that to a competition?

I think this becomes a little more interesting if you ferment them in slightly different ways. Maybe one is fermented at a slightly warmer temperature, with an intentional bacterial addition for a bit of souring. I think this would actually be a great way to fine-tune and adjust your brew to match the desired flavor profile.

 

[remilard]

I think this conversation probably all stems from Gordon Strong's article in Zymurgy and the subsequent letter blasting it.

So I guess the question is, do people really think Gordon Strong is a hack brewer who cheats his way to competition success?

If so, like others have said, blend up some beers and beat him at NHC to prove a point.

You aren't going to win at big competitions with blended beers unless what is going into the blend is very well made.

Strong won at the NHC with a baltic porter blended with a blackberry melomel, that melomel had won silver the year before. I'll betcha he has had some success with the porter that went into it too.

If Strong has an advantage it is that he has judged umpteen million competitions and knows exactly what will score well. This is an advantage he has earned and I'm sure it helps him just as much on brew day as on blending day. Also, my belief is that the majority of beers he enters are not blended or touched up in any way, other than for carbonation.

 

[user 22118]

Blending isn't against the rules and therefore isn't cheating.

Try this one on for size. Brew a Stout and age it for six months and then brew a stout at six months and blend the two together to get that smoothness from the aged one and the vibrancy from the young stout.

That sounds like a delicious idea

 

[Edcculus]

I just thought of a great idea for blending. lets say you brew a very hoppy IPA and a rather toned down maltier mild. You obviously have those two beers. Then, you could theoretically blend them to make a Pale Ale. You could blend the mild into the IPA to make slightly maltier IPA. You could blend the IPA in to the mild to make a bitter. Obviously, the two base recipes would take some forethought, but it would be entirely possible.

 

[Bobby_M]

I don't see it as any different than making your own fruit or vanilla "extract" by soaking in everclear or whatever. In any case, I think you can see that the varied opinions on blending would make it impossible to lobby for strict rules against it in competition. Frankly all it would serve to do is make brewers less likely to publish their actual recipe and/or process. Screw that.

 

[Willie3]

I really don't have any hookups with blending, I am more curious to understand both sides of the argument. I drink Whisky both single malts and blends and have no issues with the end results.

What egged this question on was Gordon Strong's winner and his article on how to be a better brewer by blending. BobbyM you are right, there are those that will stand strong and say that bleding is cheating and others that stand strong that blending is a process alotted to HBers to produce better beer.

Me, I have yet to learn more on the process before I venture in blending. I would rather not blend batches but glasses, since I am not skilled at the blending process currently. I am more reluctant to "experiment" with blending and potentially wasting a 10 gal. I am trying to learn more on that "art". Brewing is just that, whether or not it is on the hot or cold side - ultimately an art.

WW

 

[hammacks]

I just thought of a great idea for blending. lets say you brew a very hoppy IPA and a rather toned down maltier mild. You obviously have those two beers. Then, you could theoretically blend them to make a Pale Ale. You could blend the mild into the IPA to make slightly maltier IPA. You could blend the IPA in to the mild to make a bitter. Obviously, the two base recipes would take some forethought, but it would be entirely possible.

That sounds very interesting. I may have to start thinking about blend-friendly batches as I only have two taps. Would allow for some more variety.

I do have an old Irish Red that was infected. Tastes OK, kinda thin and a bit funky for a Red, but may be an interesting addition to a stout or porter.

 

[babalu87]

If you can't brew really good beer, theres no way you could create a great one by blending. Blending successfully is probably tougher than brewing successfully.

I already have the first part covered

How can blending be more difficult?
The article in Zymurgy stated that if you had a beer that wasnt bitter enough, blend in some bitter beer VOILA'

A decent palate is all that is required for blending
That and some good beers

 

[Jipper]

If you look at the beer you are going to blend into your base beer as an ingredient, akin to malt extract or hops or oak cubes, I don't see the issue. Large and small breweries blend their beers all the time. Wineries do as well - and not only because of barrel characteristics, terroir, lot numbers, etc - they also do it to gain qualities of different yeasts.

We understand that you can't really predict a beer's flavors that has been fermented with a yeast blend - one strain will dominate the other. And over time, one yeast will dominate the culture, creating some hybrid weirdness. so what's wrong with taking a Trappist and an abbey strain, fermenting two separate beers, and then blending the two, especially if that was your intended outcome in the first place?

Is a beer made with oak cubes different than one aged in a barrel? Is the cube user cheating? If your IPA doesn't have enough hop aroma and you add some pellets for a week, are you cheating because you could not properly make an aromatic IPA the first time around? More to the point, why should I punish myself by keeping a sub-par beer around, when all I have to do is to add 25% of another beer to it to make it a really good beer? And if that blend tastes so good, why don't I have the right to enter it into a competiton? I brewed both. I had the taste buds and light hand to create that final flavor. Is that not a valid part of brewing beer?

 

[AnOldUR]

To be a brewer is to work both the hot side and the cold side. . .

The debate isn't about hot side / cold side. We’re obviously talking about the entire brewing process, which includes cold side additions. The discussion is if blending two different beers to make a third should be part of that process like dry hopping or wood aging.

I agree that blending is a challenging art / science and that if that beer wins its category, it deserves it. I would have no issues being beaten by a blended beer. Just like they don’t separate extract brewers from AG brewers, they don’t discriminate against blenders.

In the end, it depends on the brewer. If you’re entering the competition to see if you’ve mastered a particular brewing style, you won’t blend. If you’ve mastered the styles and are looking for new challenges, blending may be the next step in your growth as a brewer.

But what if you’re a noob who can’t brew to style, but lucks out with a blend that you’ll never be able to reproduce, do you deserve it? Yes! Do I respect you as a brewer? No!

The trouble is you can't tell by tasting the beer.

 

[Trevor57]

People making good tasting, contest winning beers probably don't give a **** if you respect them or not, regardless of their chosen process.

 

[olllllo]

Well as mentioned before, these are Beer Judge Certification Program sponsored contests not Brewer Judge Certification Program contests.

 

[Synovia]

People making good tasting, contest winning beers probably don't give a **** if you respect them or not, regardless of their chosen process.

QFT.


Blending is every bit as much a legitimate process as anything else. Plenty of guys luck out in other aspects. Plenty of crappy brewers win an award now and then.

 

[Jipper]

QFT.


Blending is every bit as much a legitimate process as anything else. Plenty of guys luck out in other aspects. Plenty of crappy brewers win an award now and then.

That's right - I won one once

 

[olllllo]

If this kind of stuff bothers you, you realize that you can write down anyone's name as the assistant brewer and they give that person credit... no questions asked.

Should they eliminate that or audit that you had an assistant brewer???
No.

 

[JayInJersey]

Devil's Advocate here...(and admitting I haven't read all the pages)

Would taking two, three or more commercial brews and blending them together all mad scientist-like to make a new better brew be acceptable?
Or would that be cheating?

 

[Edcculus]

Devil's Advocate here...(and admitting I haven't read all the pages)

Would taking two, three or more commercial brews and blending them together all mad scientist-like to make a new better brew be acceptable?
Or would that be cheating?

You can do it, but it can't be entered into a competition. I hold ground that blending is ok as long its with other homebrew. That homebrew doesn't even have to be brewed by you! See olllllo's post on assistant brewers.

A commercial brewery could arguably enter a blends of other commercial beer into the GABF compeition. Just like wines or blended whisky.

 

[Bobby_M]

I'm pretty sure everyone who has weighed in on this thread would agree that any commercial beer blended in to a homebrew would not be valid gamesmanship. Could you get away with it in comp? Of course. You could literally take the label off a commercial bottle and submit it directly.

 

[AnOldUR]

People making good tasting, contest winning beers probably don't give a **** if you respect them or not, regardless of their chosen process.

If they didn't care what people thought, they wouldn't be entering competitions.



Oh, you're talking about ME. You're right.

 

[BigB]

IMHO I consider blending to win a competition to be unsportsman. I think that the purpose of the competition is to show how well you can brew a beer. When you start blending, all you show is how well you can mix beers to get a particular flavor. You may have brewed all of the individual beers, but you did not "brew" the concoction you entered.

 

[JayInJersey]

I'm pretty sure everyone who has weighed in on this thread would agree that any commercial beer blended in to a homebrew would not be valid gamesmanship. Could you get away with it in comp? Of course. You could literally take the label off a commercial bottle and submit it directly.

Ah but isn't that the HEART of the matter?

Is doing something to compete in a competition that isn't DIRECTLY against the rules for the sake of winning said competition cheating?

 

[Edcculus]

IMHO I consider blending to win a competition to be unsportsman. I think that the purpose of the competition is to show how well you can brew a beer. When you start blending, all you show is how well you can mix beers to get a particular flavor. You may have brewed all of the individual beers, but you did not "brew" the concoction you entered.

I think we have already come to the consensus that a beer is not created hot side only. Lets say one specific practice in the mashing process will get the same result as blending the original beer with X amount of a certain other beer. Which one is right? They are just both different ways to get the same end result.

 

[remilard]

Devil's Advocate here...(and admitting I haven't read all the pages)

Would taking two, three or more commercial brews and blending them together all mad scientist-like to make a new better brew be acceptable?
Or would that be cheating?

Here are two of the rules for the Upper Mississippi Mashout being held later this week.

Beers must be entered under the name of all brewers who helped.
Beers brewed in commercial facilities are ineligible.

I think any reasonable person would interpret the second rule as including any blended beer must contain beers complying with the rule.

Also if you used a commercial beer, say from Rogue, you would have to include John Maier's name and probably 10 or 15 other people and that would raise eyebrows both when you called the brewery to ask who participated in making the beer and when you sent in the entry form.

ETA: So I guess its clear that using commercial beer violates rules, at least in spirit, and it would be easy to rewrite the rules to bring the letter and spirit closer together if anyone tried to bend the rules (and listing all brewers would make it clear if someone used commercial beer in a blend). There is no rule in any competition I am aware of that remotely prohibits in letter or spirit a home brewer blending two of his own beers.

 

[Trevor57]

IMHO I consider blending to win a competition to be unsportsman. I think that the purpose of the competition is to show how well you can brew a beer. When you start blending, all you show is how well you can mix beers to get a particular flavor. You may have brewed all of the individual beers, but you did not "brew" the concoction you entered.

Who exactly brewed the beer then?

 

[AnOldUR]

Well as mentioned before, these are Beer Judge Certification Program sponsored contests not Brewer Judge Certification Program contests.

Gotta agree with BigB. It a HomeBREW competition, not a HomeBLEND competition.

You may have brewed the individual beers, but you blended your entry into the competition.

 

[remilard]

Who exactly brewed the beer then?

+1

Is it appropriate to say that you can't buy a bottle of Consecration that was brewed at Russian River?