Enhancing My Munich Dunkel: Feedback and Future Brews - Gold Winning Recipe

[wildturkey]

I’m absolutely thrilled to share the fantastic feedback on my Munich Dunkel! Pending BJCP scorecard and notes, scoring a 40 and earning a gold medal has truly made me one of the happiest brewers out there. It’s such a rewarding feeling to have my passion and technical brewing practice recognized by the judges who set the standards for what makes great beer. Thirteen years ago, I never would have imagined winning—especially not a gold medal! I’m so grateful and appreciative to everyone who put on the event.

This is one of the highest scores I’ve ever seen, which naturally comes with a bit of quiet skepticism.

This beer is incredibly quaffable, and I genuinely enjoy it. It has beautiful ruby and garnet hues, topped with a creamy off-white head that lingers, showcasing small beads of carbonation. The flavor is medium body with notes of dark chocolate and bread crust, accompanied by a faint caramel sweetness that is not cloying. The hops provide just enough balance for a clean character, leaving you thirsty for more.

Interestingly, this same Munich Dunkel received a score of 29 just a few months ago due to "lack of body and malt". This highlights the fact that competition results vary, and it’s a reminder to all of us to enter as many competitions as we can to gather valuable feedback. Both competitions had ~200 entries.

Thank you to all the brewers here who inspire and support each other, as well as the quiet readers who follow along. I hope this post contributes to our ongoing conversation about competitions to help maintain continuity and a vibrant competition world.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on creating a delicious Munich Dunkel! Cheers to brewing better beers!

2024 Pacific Brewers Cup

Award: Gold, 1st Place

Table: Darker German Lagers

Overall Score: 40

Recipe - 5 Gallons

Water: soft spring water

Fermentation
Bavarian Lager 2206 - 1.5L starter 1.038

 

[ba-brewer]

Congratulations on the first place ribbon and thanks for sharing your recipe.

 

[wildturkey]

Congratulations on the first place ribbon and thanks for sharing your recipe.

Thank you!

 

[dmtaylor]

Interestingly, this same Munich Dunkel received a score of 29 just a few months ago due to "lack of body and malt". This highlights the fact that competition results vary, and it’s a reminder to all of us to enter as many competitions as we can to gather valuable feedback. Both competitions had ~200 entries.

That looks like a gorgeous beer! Congrats!

When you pointed out that a judge had said "lack of body and malt", my thoughts were immediately "hmm, I wonder if he did a protein rest".

Yep.

Get rid of the protein rest step, and your dunkel will go to the next level. Protein rests are notorious for killing body. I'm not saying that this judge was correct. I would have to taste the beer myself to know for certain. But just know that, at least in MY experience... he may be onto something. I myself have experienced watery lifeless body in beers where I did a protein rest step. It also killed the head, which I see for you is not an issue at all, so you're lucky on that part of it. But maybe in future, consider skipping a protein rest, which is useful for old 18th or 19th century malts, but in the 21st century it is often actually a detrimental step with the well modified malts of today. Not everyone knows this yet or shares this experience, but there are those among us who think so. Maybe jury is still out. Try it yourself and see what you think.

Cheers! And if I have not yet welcomed you to the forum, then... welcome! It is good to have people like you bringing discussions like these, so thank you.

 

[wildturkey]

That looks like a gorgeous beer! Congrats!

When you pointed out that a judge had said "lack of body and malt", my thoughts were immediately "hmm, I wonder if he did a protein rest".

Yep.

Get rid of the protein rest step, and your dunkel will go to the next level. Protein rests are notorious for killing body. I'm not saying that this judge was correct. I would have to taste the beer myself to know for certain. But just know that, at least in MY experience... he may be onto something. I myself have experienced watery lifeless body in beers where I did a protein rest step. It also killed the head, which I see for you is not an issue at all, so you're lucky on that part of it. But maybe in future, consider skipping a protein rest, which is useful for old 18th or 19th century malts, but in the 21st century it is often actually a detrimental step with the well modified malts of today. Not everyone knows this yet or shares this experience, but there are those among us who think so. Maybe jury is still out. Try it yourself and see what you think.

Cheers! And if I have not yet welcomed you to the forum, then... welcome! It is good to have people like you bringing discussions like these, so thank you.

Thank you! That means a lot. After years of following the forum from the sidelines, it’s great to finally join the conversation!

For me, incorporating a protein rest is my way of paying homage to traditional brewing methods. Nostalgia, at the expense of practicality and potential quality. I think it’s time to hunt down some undermodified Moravian malt or something similar to really connect with that classic approach!

I had a recent mash profile that contained a protein rest but also followed a very high end 157-158F alpha amylase sacch. rest. The water chemistry had chalk additions and eventually a lactic acid (88%) addition to balance the mash to 5.18-5.2ph down from 5.5. Usually the malt and spring water settle into an acceptable ph range, depending on roast in mash or SRM. It was a great day calibrating ph units and testing wort! Hopefully it was worth the effort. The complexities of water chemistry are dynamic and intimidating. I’m adjusting 1-2 variables on the hot side to create a richer beer profile.

I will be planning a non-protein rest, single infusion beer for the future. Keep you posted!

 

[monkeymath]

Congratulations!

20 minutes of protein rest is indeed a bit long... I'd at least cut that down to 10 minutes, if not get rid of it entirely. Those are all well-modified grains.

I don't think any "traditional" Munich Dunkel has a late hop addition, so if you wanted to mimic the classic examples in the hopes of scoring well, I'd eliminate that as well. Of course that doesn't apply if you're brewing to your own taste.

BJCP scorecard and notes [...] the judges who set the standards for what makes great beer.

I'm not sure if I'm willing to accept them as a global authority on that

 

[Drinking Sensibly]

Not sure there's much more you could do. I just made a Dunkel myself, which not ready to drink yet. The recipe isn't much different to yours.
I found this blog post and based the recipe on that.
https://dafteejit.com/2022/02/interpreting-a-1960s-bavarian-dunkel-recipe/
I'm not interested in others appraising my beers, I prefer to sample some of the commercial versions and compare with them. I don't much trust BJCP guidlines either.

 

[Bobby_M]

Thank you! That means a lot. After years of following the forum from the sidelines, it’s great to finally join the conversation!

For me, incorporating a protein rest is my way of paying homage to traditional brewing methods. Nostalgia, at the expense of practicality and potential quality. I think it’s time to hunt down some undermodified Moravian malt or something similar to really connect with that classic approach!

That's all understandable, but it's not easy to get your hands on undermodified Munich malt. The only malts I'm aware of in that realm are Bohemian Floor Malted Pilsner via Weyermann. I'm sure there are some others out there, but I'm talking about widely available. Nostalgia is good, but the beer in the glass is what's more important.

I will be planning a non-protein rest, single infusion beer for the future. Keep you posted!

A bit of a cheat code. Replace the Munich and Pilsner with the Weyermann BARKE versions of the same. Highly modified and very malty in character.

 

[jdauria]

Congrats on the gold! Beautiful looking beer! And don't sweat when another judge in another comp rips it, judging is so subjective! I recently had a Helles Bock score a 45 and take Best in Show in a comp, next two comps it scored 30 and 29. Bad judging? is shipping beers across country hurting them that much? Who knows, but I will remember the 45 and BOS much longer than the low scores. Another example, several years ago Czech Dark scored from 38-43 in 4 East Coast comps, then I shipped it cross country to Utah...it scored a 25.

As for improving the beer, a 40 is nothing to sneeze at, especially when judges are very reluctant to give a perfect 50 score. In fact many judges have publicly said they would never score a beer above 45. But as others have suggested, I would nix the protein rest. You could try using Weyermann Barke Munich and Barke Pils in place of their regular malts. Barke is a heirloom malt that they brought back and has a little more depth of flavor then their regular line. Lastly, and this is just a suggestion, looks like your receipe stats are all at the low end of the style guideline. There is nothing wrong with that at all, but I do know that many times in comps, the beers that score well are at the high end of the style guideline or even above the high end.

 

[Witherby]

How does this beer relate to the Franconian Dunkel you mentioned in a different thread? Your recipes look pretty similar to a Franconian Dunkel that I brew. The BJCP starting in 2015 added a note that "Franconian versions are often darker and more bitter." I would add that they are also drier than the southern Bavarian versions. I do either a Hochkurz or decoction on mine with a step at 145 to make sure it is well attenuated but still has body (which 80-90% Munich malt will get you). So depending on whether this is a Munich Dunkel or a Franconian Dunkel, I would consider whether a single infusion is getting you where you want to be. I would not use the Barke malt for a Franconian Dunkel. In Dark Lagers by Thomas Kraus-Weyermann and Horst Dornbusch they show the standard Weyermann malt wheels, but with the added note that the Barke Munich malt is best as a base malt for "non-dry dark lagers."

I also use Carafa Special in mine added at vorlauf because I really don't like the roastiness of regular Carafa. But I think your recipe looks like a beer I would enjoy drinking.

And maybe you are brewing both Franconian and Munich Dunkels. That's some serious commitment to brewing Dunkel!

 

[kmarkstevens]

that looks great! Is it in the same ballpark as Erdinger Dark?

 

[Miraculix]

That looks like a gorgeous beer! Congrats!

When you pointed out that a judge had said "lack of body and malt", my thoughts were immediately "hmm, I wonder if he did a protein rest".

Yep.

Get rid of the protein rest step, and your dunkel will go to the next level. Protein rests are notorious for killing body. I'm not saying that this judge was correct. I would have to taste the beer myself to know for certain. But just know that, at least in MY experience... he may be onto something. I myself have experienced watery lifeless body in beers where I did a protein rest step. It also killed the head, which I see for you is not an issue at all, so you're lucky on that part of it. But maybe in future, consider skipping a protein rest, which is useful for old 18th or 19th century malts, but in the 21st century it is often actually a detrimental step with the well modified malts of today. Not everyone knows this yet or shares this experience, but there are those among us who think so. Maybe jury is still out. Try it yourself and see what you think.

Cheers! And if I have not yet welcomed you to the forum, then... welcome! It is good to have people like you bringing discussions like these, so thank you.

It really depends on the specific type and length of the protein rest. If I remember correctly, there are two type of enzymes working during the protein rest. One is chopping the proteins in really small pieces and one is chopping the proteins into medium sized pieces. You don't want too much activity from the first, because this can destroy the head and body of the beer if taken too far. But the second one can actually enhance the head retention while leaving the body mostly alone. If memory serves me correctly, this means that you should not go below 55c during the protein rest and that you should keep it short, around 15 minutes. When this is combined with a higher temperature step at the end of the mash, the head is increased in my experience, while the body stays what it is.

Regarding the recipe, looks solid to me regarding the ingredients!

 

[Broothru]

Thank you! That means a lot. After years of following the forum from the sidelines, it’s great to finally join the conversation!

For me, incorporating a protein rest is my way of paying homage to traditional brewing methods. Nostalgia, at the expense of practicality and potential quality. I think it’s time to hunt down some undermodified Moravian malt or something similar to really connect with that classic approach!

I had a recent mash profile that contained a protein rest but also followed a very high end 157-158F alpha amylase sacch. rest. The water chemistry had chalk additions and eventually a lactic acid (88%) addition to balance the mash to 5.18-5.2ph down from 5.5. Usually the malt and spring water settle into an acceptable ph range, depending on roast in mash or SRM. It was a great day calibrating ph units and testing wort! Hopefully it was worth the effort. The complexities of water chemistry are dynamic and intimidating. I’m adjusting 1-2 variables on the hot side to create a richer beer profile.

I will be planning a non-protein rest, single infusion beer for the future. Keep you posted!

A modern Hoch-Kurz mash profile has served me quite well. I dough-in at 60C-62C/140F-144F (takes about :10 minutes with gentle stirring while I add grains). Then I do :30 minutes at 62C/144F B-amylase sacc. rest. Since I'm mashing in at ~62C for :10-:15 minutes, it's like doing a :45 minute Beta rest. Then I increase temperature to 70C/158F for :45 minutes A-amylase dextrin rest, where A-amylase is most active (70C). I finish up with a :15 minute mashout at 78C/172F which denatures most of the enzymatic activity resulting in better mouthfeel and body in the finished beer.

Some people believe it's unnecessary overkill with modern modified grains, and maybe it is, but I believe the result maximizes fermentables and body without sacrificing anything but a half-hour of my time on brew day. The success is shown in the compliments and ribbons, not to mention satisfaction, I receive, by mashing with a 60C-62C-70C-78C profile that captures all the optimum temperatures of the Brewer's Window.

 

[Miraculix]

A modern Hoch-Kurz mash profile has served me quite well. I dough-in at 60C-62C/140F-144F (takes about :10 minutes with gentle stirring while I add grains). Then I do :30 minutes at 62C/144F B-amylase sacc. rest. Since I'm mashing in at ~62C for :10-:15 minutes, it's like doing a :45 minute Beta rest. Then I increase temperature to 70C/158F for :45 minutes A-amylase dextrin rest, where A-amylase is most active (70C). I finish up with a :15 minute mashout at 78C/172F which denatures most of the enzymatic activity resulting in better mouthfeel and body in the finished beer.

Some people believe it's unnecessary overkill with modern modified grains, and maybe it is, but I believe the result maximizes fermentables and body without sacrificing anything but a half-hour of my time on brew day. The success is shown in the compliments and ribbons, not to mention satisfaction, I receive, by mashing with a 60C-62C-70C-78C profile that captures all the optimum temperatures of the Brewer's Window.

View attachment 860702

I'm also trying other mash approaches from time to time but I always keep coming back to a similar schedule as the one you are describing. Only difference is that I usually do 30 minute steps and my second step is at 72 c. But this gives me constantly the best results in terms of fermentability, head retention and perceived body. Even the 77 c step seems to contribute to it. My personal guess is that glycoproteins are formed at that step which enhance head and body.

 

[Drinking Sensibly]

A modern Hoch-Kurz mash profile has served me quite well.

Agreed. I also use it for many of my British beers.

 

[Broothru]

I'm also trying other mash approaches from time to time but I always keep coming back to a similar schedule as the one you are describing. Only difference is that I usually do 30 minute steps and my second step is at 72 c. But this gives me constantly the best results in terms of fermentability, head retention and perceived body. Even the 77 c step seems to contribute to it. My personal guess is that glycoproteins are formed at that step which enhance head and body.

That's quite true, as you can see from the graph's plot. A-amylase activity begins to increase rapidly at/above 148F/65C, going nearly asymptote, up to 158F/70C where activity peaks for that enzyme. The crossover point for single infusion brewers where enzymatic activity for both A- and B- enzymes are equally active occurs at 153F/67C, but by having rests at the optimum peak for both individual enzymes increases both the fermentability and the mouthfeel of the finished beer. The off-peak rests for A- and B- do not detract from their ability to produce their desired functions. In fact, it likely enhances them, since both enzymes are indeed active during the other one's rest {B- between 122F/50C to 172F/77C; A- between 142F/61C to 174F/79C}. Mashout at 174F/79C effectively denatures both enzymes.

 

[mashdar]

OP: What munich malt do you use?

Seconding Bobby that the Weyermann Barke is really nice.

Also, Carafa 3, not Carafa Special 3? In for whole mash?

 

[Colindo]

Great recipe and congrats for the medal. My knowledge about beer styles from my own country is somewhat limited, but I see that both grain bill and hopping scheme are according to style. I personally would have done a decoction with 100% Munich Malt II, but that is personal preference.

Regarding the protein rest it is definitely too long and at a too low temperature. Among German homebrewers the most common approach is to mash in so that the mash starts at 57°C/135°F temperature and to immediately heat up to your preferred saccharification temperature by 1°C per minute. That way you have a little chop up of longer protein chains but no drawback in mouthfeel or foam.

@Broothru While the graph shows the enzyme maxima correctly, it is notoriously incorrect regarding the fermentability and dextrins. The highest fermentability is achieved at 66-67°C/150°F when both enzymes are active at the same time, which makes the beta-amylase work faster than it could on its own. In Germany many brewers do a Narziss rest at 67°C to increase fermentability even when doing step mashes, especially for Bockbier, because it gets drier than just combining 62°C and 72°C steps. There are recent papers supporting this for single saccharification rests as well.

 

[mashdar]

There are recent papers supporting this for single saccharification rests as well.

Any info on where to find these? : )

 

[Broothru]

Great recipe and congrats for the medal. My knowledge about beer styles from my own country is somewhat limited, but I see that both grain bill and hopping scheme are according to style. I personally would have done a decoction with 100% Munich Malt II, but that is personal preference.

Regarding the protein rest it is definitely too long and at a too low temperature. Among German homebrewers the most common approach is to mash in so that the mash starts at 57°C/135°F temperature and to immediately heat up to your preferred saccharification temperature by 1°C per minute. That way you have a little chop up of longer protein chains but no drawback in mouthfeel or foam.

@Broothru While the graph shows the enzyme maxima correctly, it is notoriously incorrect regarding the fermentability and dextrins. The highest fermentability is achieved at 66-67°C/150°F when both enzymes are active at the same time, which makes the beta-amylase work faster than it could on its own. In Germany many brewers do a Narziss rest at 67°C to increase fermentability even when doing step mashes, especially for Bockbier, because it gets drier than just combining 62°C and 72°C steps. There are recent papers supporting this for single saccharification rests as well.

Very helpful data.

Danke!

 

[Colindo]

Any info on where to find these? : )

Good call. Took me a while to find it again because for whatever reason I did not save that one. The paper is here and they show this graph:

Edit: On second reading I noticed that the barley's gelatinisation temperature was at 64.9°C, while the highest attenuation is shown for 65°C (149°F). So this might be more a factor of gelatinisation and less of both enzymes working together. This high gelatinisation temperature has become common nowadays and renders the first rest at 143°F/62°C moot when doing step mashes.

 

[Miraculix]

Good call. Took me a while to find it again because for whatever reason I did not save that one. The paper is here and they show this graph:
View attachment 862366


Edit: On second reading I noticed that the barley's gelatinisation temperature was at 64.9°C, while the highest attenuation is shown for 65°C (149°F). So this might be more a factor of gelatinisation and less of both enzymes working together. This high gelatinisation temperature has become common nowadays and renders the first rest at 143°F/62°C moot when doing step mashes.

Thanks! I think it is important to remember that the gelatinisation temperature is not a switch that turns all of the starch accessible at the same time. It's more off a midrange-ish thing. A lot of the starchess will be accessible before and some will remain inaccessible even after this temperature has been reached.

 

[mashdar]

Took me a while to find it again

Very much appreciated!

 

[Broothru]

Very much appreciated!

Excellent info and references. Many thanks to @Colindo and @Miraculix for the data points. I’ll be modifying my step mash profiles to maximize what I’ve learned from you guys .

 

[JohnDBrewer]

I personally would have done a decoction with 100% Munich Malt II, but that is personal preference.

At what step would you do the decoction and for how long? I like doing decoction too and have been adding a single decoction after the last step before sparge for my Czech and German lagers. Not sure if that's the best place, but have had great success with it.

Great information and references, thank you.

 

[Colindo]

@JohnDBrewer I have only ever done two-step decoctions, because it is easy to calculate and works with the size of my pots. You mash in 3:1 at 35°C into the pot where you want to do your boiling and wait for 15 min until the enzymes moved to the liquid. Then you take half the mass as liquid, put it in your mash tun and boil the remaining very thick mash until you get the desired colour. Recombining everything in the mash tun will yield 65°C, where you do the saccharification. Afterwards you take one third of the mass as liquid into your boiling pot and boil again for some time. Recombining everything again yields 75°C and you can mash off.

There are even easier processes nowadays. One is called after the German homebrewer Earl, where you mash in and boil 80% of the grist and then add the rest and more water to reach 65°C and wait for saccharification. This combines both the boiling of a large amount of your grist and a simple one-step process.

By the way, to maximise the work of decoction, it is useful to have a mash-pH of 6.0 (Budvar does this) and do your water adjustment during the boil. Maillard reactions depend heavily on the pH and that way you maximise the effect of the boil.

 

[bwible]

Very nice. Love me some 2206. I have a Vienna Lager and a Doppelbock now brewed with it. Munich Dunkel is a fun style to brew, too - and something different enough to have on tap, at least for me. I brewed one that I had on tap around Christmas time last year.

Some recipes include a small amount of Melanoidin malt, maybe 1/4 pound as a cheat for those like me who don’t decoction mash. I have a little electric system and I do step mash these beers though.

 

[JohnDBrewer]

By the way, to maximise the work of decoction, it is useful to have a mash-pH of 6.0 (Budvar does this) and do your water adjustment during the boil. Maillard reactions depend heavily on the pH and that way you maximise the effect of the boil.

Never thought about the ph level when doing a decoction. Always focused on the mash ph. Do you run your mash at 6 when decorating and then adjust your ph at the end of the mash or in the boil?

 

[Colindo]

Never thought about the ph level when doing a decoction. Always focused on the mash ph. Do you run your mash at 6 when decorating and then adjust your ph at the end of the mash or in the boil?

I learned that after my last decoction, so have not tried it like that yet. But either end of mash or beginning of boil would work. When you decoct a wheat beer mash, you can keep it at 6.0, since for wheat beers high pH is recommended to counter the stronger pH drop. And with Kveik a high mash pH and thus high beer pH can work wonders to keep the sourness at bay.

By the way, if anyone wants to hear how Budvar does it, I can recommend the talk:

 

[CodyRonan]

Interestingly, this same Munich Dunkel received a score of 29 just a few months ago due to "lack of body and malt". This highlights the fact that competition results vary, and it’s a reminder to all of us to enter as many competitions as we can to gather valuable feedback. Both competitions had ~200 entries.

Congratulations. Without taking away from your win and delicious beer, the fact it got 29 in one competition and 40 in another shows what a load of ***** competitions are generally. I know loads of so-called judges and to be honest many don't know their arse from their elbow. Perhaps at the top end of town you couldn't argue with the results, but at least locally you'd be better off asking your grandmother what she thinks.

 

[bwible]

Congratulations. Without taking away from your win and delicious beer, the fact it got 29 in one competition and 40 in another shows what a load of ***** competitions are generally. I know loads of so-called judges and to be honest many don't know their arse from their elbow. Perhaps at the top end of town you couldn't argue with the results, but at least locally you'd be better off asking your grandmother what she thinks.

I used to think like this. Then I became a judge years ago. I judged for probably 7 or 8 years. Then life got in the way. I wound up in a job where I pretty much had to work every Saturday. As most competitions are on Saturdays I stopped being able to judge. I was in that job for 19 years.

During the time I judged, I found most of the guys doing it to be honest guys who tried hard. The exam is not easy to pass and requires alot of study. I studied with a bunch of guys twice a week for 4 or 5 months before I took it. And I still only got a 70. Thats when it was 10 essay questions.

A few things can happen. The order of entries is one. Palate fatigue is real. The first few entries are always going to taste the best. Its totally random whether the judges get your beer first, fifth, or seventeenth. Sometimes judges will latch on to one of the good early entries and compare everything to that and hold that one up. Of course, you can always get a bad bottle too. Sometimes a bottle is not ready and does better in a later competition.

Its not that judges are idiots who don’t know stuff or don’t try. They study, they pass an exam, and they don’t get paid to judge. Its all volunteer. And yes, sometimes **** happens.

 

[CodyRonan]

During the time I judged, I found most of the guys doing it to be honest guys who tried hard. The exam is not easy to pass and requires alot of study. I studied with a bunch of guys twice a week for 4 or 5 months before I took it. And I still only got a 70. Thats when it was 10 essay questions.

A few things can happen. The order of entries is one. Palate fatigue is real. The first few entries are always going to taste the best. Its totally random whether the judges get your beer first, fifth, or seventeenth. Sometimes judges will latch on to one of the good early entries and compare everything to that and hold that one up. Of course, you can always get a bad bottle too. Sometimes a bottle is not ready and does better in a later competition.

Its not that judges are idiots who don’t know stuff or don’t try. They study, they pass an exam, and they don’t get paid to judge. Its all volunteer. And yes, sometimes **** happens.

I don't doubt you, and even those I know, try hard. They (I can't speak for you) are so serious !!! But yeah most I know aren't that good. Of course some are. No doubt at the top end of town almost all are. I don't mean to slight all judges. But, at least where I am, don't take the results personally from a local competition - good or bad, as in many cases they don't have a clue as it turns out.

One guy I know who thinks he is an absolute ******* legend can't, as far as I can tell, even determine if a beer is badly infected. I mean, normal drinkers let alone brewers can tell with a whiff of the damn thing. Every beer he drinks "needs more hops". He's just an example, but he's been "Head Judge" at some competitions I've seen.

The quality may be better in your neck of the woods.

It reminds of Kipling's If....

If you can take the praise and the criticism of your beer,
And treat those two impostors just the same,
If you can handle those who say it’s 'the best' and 'the worst' with cheer,
And keep brewing on, without letting either affect your game,
If you can take a sip from your brew, and know when it’s right,
But not let a bad comment spoil your delight,
If you can keep your focus through each brew, trial, and tweak,
And never let praise or complaints make you weak,
Then, which is more, you’ll be a true brewer, my friend.

 

[bwible]

I haven’t entered any of my beers in any competitions for years. But i have different issues than individual judges.

First, I’m not out to prove anything.

Second, its always certain styles vs other styles and the idea that the whole thing is biased and inherently unfair.

How many times does somebody ever win a best of show with a cream ale, a blonde ale, a pre-prohibition lager, etc vs how many times does the shiny new toy win - New England IPA, “kellerbier” submitted with a fancy little description booklet, or whatever the latest fad is? Whatever shiny new thing they wave in front of judges. It all comes down to personal preference and individual preference and everybody has them. I won first place with mild ale many times in its category but it was just about always one of the first 3 eliminated from the best of show round every single time.

I don’t brew New England IPA, Belgians, or sours and those win ALL the time.

There doesn’t seem to be any rhyme, reason, or fairness to any best of show round I ever watched - its whatever preferences the individuals doing it that day have.

 

[dmtaylor]

I haven’t entered any of my beers in any competitions for years. But i have different issues than individual judges.

First, I’m not out to prove anything.

Second, its always certain styles vs other styles and the idea that the whole thing is biased and inherently unfair.

How many times does somebody ever win a best of show with a cream ale, a blonde ale, a pre-prohibition lager, etc vs how many times does the shiny new toy win - New England IPA, “kellerbier” submitted with a fancy little description booklet, or whatever the latest fad is? Whatever shiny new thing they wave in front of judges. It all comes down to personal preference and individual preference and everybody has them. I won first place with mild ale many times in its category but it was just about always one of the first 3 eliminated from the best of show round every single time.

I don’t brew New England IPA, Belgians, or sours and those win ALL the time.

There doesn’t seem to be any rhyme, reason, or fairness to any best of show round I ever watched - its whatever preferences the individuals doing it that day have.

As a Certified judge myself, I will say... There is some truth to all this... but it's not all the time, not every competition. In the end, it really does depend on whether you get a$$hat judges with chips on shoulders or strong preferences, versus a good group of judges not afraid to speak their minds, challenge one another, and reward those who make stellar beers, even if the style is not a popular one. I myself have been part of all of these over the years, and I tend to be the advocate for the underdog so to speak. A few months ago I judged a BOS round where a judge tried to throw out a beer at the beginning of BOS and I said no wait a minute, there are worse beers on the table, and this beer I am speaking about ended up taking 3rd BOS or runner-up to the runner-up or whatever... and the number one BOS ended up being a German helles or some such thing, it was stellar and no one brought it up until the top 4 or 5 because it was a lovely beer with zero flaws, no one had anything bad to say about it. We actually declared it the BOS before figuring out who should take 2nd and 3rd, it was far and above. And it was not the Hazy IPA. The Hazy did take 2nd or 3rd even though I didn't think it deserved it. So.... there is some give and take, every set of judges is going to be different, and in the end it does depend a bit on who is willing to speak up or speak the loudest or whatever, which is kind of crappy but also just the way it is. And is it possible to get an entire panel of a$$hats? Sure it is. I recall another BOS round once where a National judge was advocating for the Hazy IPA to win BOS and the rest of us were all like "no way, it's got diacetyl, a serious flaw" to which the National reluctantly admitted he was blind to diacetyl. So we voted 3 to 1 or whatever to toss it out as a contender for even 2nd or 3rd BOS and this National guy went home ranting or crying or whatever and the rest of us just shrugged and said too bad so sad, just because you're a National doesn't mean you're a god, get over yourself. And I don't think he did get over it either. Yes, there are judges like this. A lot of them, unfortunately. But meanwhile there are also a lot of great judges with negligible biases who will give you meaningful feedback, regardless of whether or not they love the style they are judging. And a lot of these people are Recognized or not even ranked but helpers! I've seen some non-judges out there who I would rank better than a Certified or National guy any day. Just because you're not trained doesn't mean you're not helpful, as long as you're not timid and able to describe in detail what you are tasting. Judges run the gamut. I know I'm not perfect either, much as I try, but I like to think I'm able to describe my perceptions honestly and no I don't pull punches -- if your beer sucks I'm going to tell you, but if it's stellar then I'm not afraid to score it a 45 (but that's about my limit, 50 is like from heaven). So anyway... if you are still reading this then I'm sorry for the rambling, and you must be even more of an idiot than I am, or maybe I am more interesting than I should be, or something. Probably not.

 

[Broothru]

I haven’t entered any of my beers in any competitions for years. But i have different issues than individual judges.

First, I’m not out to prove anything.

Second, its always certain styles vs other styles and the idea that the whole thing is biased and inherently unfair.

How many times does somebody ever win a best of show with a cream ale, a blonde ale, a pre-prohibition lager, etc vs how many times does the shiny new toy win - New England IPA, “kellerbier” submitted with a fancy little description booklet, or whatever the latest fad is? Whatever shiny new thing they wave in front of judges. It all comes down to personal preference and individual preference and everybody has them. I won first place with mild ale many times in its category but it was just about always one of the first 3 eliminated from the best of show round every single time.

I don’t brew New England IPA, Belgians, or sours and those win ALL the time.

There doesn’t seem to be any rhyme, reason, or fairness to any best of show round I ever watched - its whatever preferences the individuals doing it that day have.

Actually, I did win a Best of Show six years ago with a Pre-Prohibition lager. But what chaps my saddle sores is the fact that I’ve never won anything in IPAs. The goal posts keep getting moved. Just as soon as I think I have it dialed in, some new kid in town takes all the ribbons.

How many sub-categories are there now that have the term “IPA” in them? Thirty-seven or some such?

 

[kmarkstevens]

As a Certified judge myself, I will say... There is some truth to all this... but it's not all the time, not every competition. In the end, it really does depend on whether you get a$$hat judges with chips on shoulders or strong preferences, versus a good group of judges not afraid to speak their minds, challenge one another, and reward those who make stellar beers, even if the style is not a popular one. I myself have been part of all of these over the years, and I tend to be the advocate for the underdog so to speak. A few months ago I judged a BOS round where a judge tried to throw out a beer at the beginning of BOS and I said no wait a minute, there are worse beers on the table, and this beer I am speaking about ended up taking 3rd BOS or runner-up to the runner-up or whatever... and the number one BOS ended up being a German helles or some such thing, it was stellar and no one brought it up until the top 4 or 5 because it was a lovely beer with zero flaws, no one had anything bad to say about it. We actually declared it the BOS before figuring out who should take 2nd and 3rd, it was far and above. And it was not the Hazy IPA. The Hazy did take 2nd or 3rd even though I didn't think it deserved it. So.... there is some give and take, every set of judges is going to be different, and in the end it does depend a bit on who is willing to speak up or speak the loudest or whatever, which is kind of crappy but also just the way it is. And is it possible to get an entire panel of a$$hats? Sure it is. I recall another BOS round once where a National judge was advocating for the Hazy IPA to win BOS and the rest of us were all like "no way, it's got diacetyl, a serious flaw" to which the National reluctantly admitted he was blind to diacetyl. So we voted 3 to 1 or whatever to toss it out as a contender for even 2nd or 3rd BOS and this National guy went home ranting or crying or whatever and the rest of us just shrugged and said too bad so sad, just because you're a National doesn't mean you're a god, get over yourself. And I don't think he did get over it either. Yes, there are judges like this. A lot of them, unfortunately. But meanwhile there are also a lot of great judges with negligible biases who will give you meaningful feedback, regardless of whether or not they love the style they are judging. And a lot of these people are Recognized or not even ranked but helpers! I've seen some non-judges out there who I would rank better than a Certified or National guy any day. Just because you're not trained doesn't mean you're not helpful, as long as you're not timid and able to describe in detail what you are tasting. Judges run the gamut. I know I'm not perfect either, much as I try, but I like to think I'm able to describe my perceptions honestly and no I don't pull punches -- if your beer sucks I'm going to tell you, but if it's stellar then I'm not afraid to score it a 45 (but that's about my limit, 50 is like from heaven). So anyway... if you are still reading this then I'm sorry for the rambling, and you must be even more of an idiot than I am, or maybe I am more interesting than I should be, or something. Probably not.

Pretty great stream of consciousness, minimal punctuation, semi-rant that is also informative and amusing to read. Well done, Sir!!!