Hilarious Misinformation

[brewmonk]

Yes a decoction is removing a portion of mash, not wort

If this is for a gahDANGDED pencil pushing test, you are ALL WRONG, because no one has mentioned that you have to POUR IT BACK **IN**!!!!!

people have failed drivers tests for less than that!

*(ah, hell, lighten up, it was a JOKE.)

*all except for the drivers test part.

 

[VTDuffman]

Ding ding ding... we have a winner.

Is it weird that, because of your avatar, I read all of your posts in my head In Alan Rickman's voice?

 

[IffyG]

Is it weird that, because of your avatar, I read all of your posts in my head In Alan Rickman's voice?

That made my morning.

 

[dougdecinces]

And my favorite "Dark beer will always be stronger than light beer".

This is my favorite, too. I get this all the time from friends and family. I also get, "an ale is dark and a lager is light." Which is 100% true, of course. Which is why my Baltic Porter is...oh wait.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

This point would be more valid if stout was the only dark beer. A Dark American Lager has virtually no flavor compared to an American Pale Ale.

Which was addressed by the second half of my post.

 

[BrewKnurd]

I don't necessarily agree with all of that. It's not as if removing the grain is the point, the point is getting enough liquid to boil to be able to raise the temperature of the mash. Either way, the fact that arguably reasonable people can differ on the meaning, which is likely enough to take that particular fact out of the "hilarious misinformation" category.

The temperature part is one part of it, but another benefit of decoction mash in the days of undermodified malts was that it broke up the starch and ruptured the cell walls, making more starch available for conversion. That obviously requires pulling grain, not just liquid. Additionally, you're killing any enzymes that you pull in the decoction, so you're usually better off pulling a thick mash, and leaving as many enzymes behind in the liquid as you can.

But yes, if your only purpose is to raise temps in a consistent manner, then pulling all liquid is fine. Its just that brewers are frequently trying to accomplish more than just increasing the temp with their decoctions.

 

[weirdboy]

Which was addressed by the second half of my post.

So you are saying "dark beer is stronger" is not wrong, just oversimplified?


The problem is that as a blanket statement, it is wrong on every level. There is no definition of "stronger" (except color I suppose) where that is a factually correct statement unless you cherry-pick certain beers. Even if you assume that "dark beer" means "stout" that is not necessarily true. Black & tans use Guinness and Bass because Bass Ale is heavier than Guinness. It is higher ABV and has a higher finishing gravity, allowing the Guinness to "float" on top. Most of the American lagers are at the same or higher ABV than Guinness.

It is more than just oversimplification, IMO.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

So you are saying "dark beer is stronger" is not wrong, just oversimplified?

It is more than just oversimplification, IMO.

Dark beer "usually" refers to beer that employ the use of chocolate, or black patent, etc... there are exceptions.

Which generally bring along some very strong flavors by themselves. The general public couldn't give a feck about specifics like ABV, SG, or viscosity.

Dark beer = stronger is analgous to spicy = hot.

Strong doesn't have to mean alcoholic wheras Spicy doesn't have to refer to Scovill units.

 

[weirdboy]

Dark beer "usually" refers to beer that employ the use of chocolate, or black patent, etc... there are exceptions.

Which generally bring along some very strong flavors by themselves. The general public couldn't give a feck about specifics like ABV, SG, or viscosity.

Dark beer = stronger is analgous to spicy = hot.

Strong doesn't have to mean alcoholic wheras Spicy doesn't have to refer to Scovill units.

So how would you compare a stout vs an IIPA? Which one is "stronger"?

 

[xjmox14x]

Or a beer with 99% pilsen and 1% debittered black?

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

So how would you compare a stout vs an IIPA? Which one is "stronger"?

I would compare a stout as generally acrid and a IIPA as generally bitter but then again, I know what went into them wheras much of the beer drinking public couldn't give a sh!t.

Question is, why does it matter so much to you?

How is it going to change YOUR life that WSET stops using generalities and vague descriptions?

 

[Pilgarlic]

Just another tempest in a brewkettle.

 

[weirdboy]

I would compare a stout as generally acrid and a IIPA as generally bitter but then again, I know what went into them wheras much of the beer drinking public couldn't give a sh!t.

Yeah but which one is stronger? That was my question. The whole point of saying "dark beers are stronger" as a rule of thumb (even discarding, say Dark American Lager) is that it should be true most of the time. But this statement isn't true unless you go to extraneous lengths to omit the many cases where it isn't.

Question is, why does it matter so much to you?

How is it going to change YOUR life that WSET stops using generalities and vague descriptions?

If that is your feeling, the question is why you ever bothered to argue the point at all, then. I am sick of this cop-out BS that people use to get out of debates. "Why do you care about this when there are children starving in Africa?" Because people choose to argue about other topics, that's why. If you didn't care about it you probably shouldn't have read the thread to begin with.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

Or a beer with 99% pilsen and 1% debittered black?

I'd say you are using 1lb test to fish for Tuna.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

If that is your feeling, the question is why you ever bothered to argue the point at all, then. I am sick of this cop-out BS that people use to get out of debates. "Why do you care about this when there are children starving in Africa?" Because people choose to argue about other topics, that's why. If you didn't care about it you probably shouldn't have read the thread to begin with.

I didn't "bother" to argue anything. I merely stated that Strong is not always about ABV and that "Dark beer is stronger" is not deliberately wrong but is oversimplified and vague.

Yeah but which one is stronger? That was my question. The whole point of saying "dark beers are stronger" as a rule of thumb (even discarding, say Dark American Lager) is that it should be true most of the time. But this statement isn't true unless you go to extraneous lengths to omit the many cases where it isn't.

Much of the general beer drinking public does not know what beer is beyond a rice or corn lager. And where you may get off knowing that your continuously hopped 780 minute quadrophonic IPA has 20k IBU's and a SRM of 1.2L, those drinkers will say it taste like Turpentine (as if they really know what turpentine tastes like).

Yes. Both Stout (especially dry) and IIPA can be considered as having strong flavors but, that is a specific comparision to argue against a vague and genaralized statement. Especially considering the source. The WSET web page I found doesn't even make reference to beer at all.

 

[Homercidal]

Color does not determine strength, either defined as ABV, or as assertion of flavor.

The statement that darker beers are always stronger is wrong (unless limited by the offerings of a particular establishments. The dark beers they sell may in fact always be "stronger" than the light beers.)

 

[BierMuncher]

"Potato"

 

[BrewKnurd]

"Potato"

Po-tah-to. Jeez. Some people.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

... (unless limited by the offerings of a particular establishments. The dark beers they sell may in fact always be "stronger" than the light beers.)

Thank you. As is often the situation.

 

[weirdboy]

Yes. Both Stout (especially dry) and IIPA can be considered as having strong flavors but, that is a specific comparision to argue against a vague and genaralized statement. Especially considering the source. The WSET web page I found doesn't even make reference to beer at all.

If they don't care about it on the exam, then the question shouldn't be in the study materials, along with other, even more specific beer-related questions like what a decoction is, or what a lambic is. I would say if they expect you to know about lambics, even cursorily, then you ought to know about other styles besides stouts and american lagers, and by extension ought to know that dark beers aren't necessarily "stronger" regardless of what you choose "stronger" to mean. I would also point out that at least here in CA, if you walk into a place that has XYZ Light, Guinness Stout, and one "craft" beer, that craft beer is going to be Sierra Nevada Pale Ale, which easily has as strong a flavor as Guinness in addition to being higher ABV.

Thank you. As is often the situation.

So what? Do those places sell lambics, too? I haven't seen any in those types of establishments.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

"Potato"

We are arguing craft against mass-marketing. Shetland Black vs Idaho.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

If they don't care about it on the exam, then the question shouldn't be in the study materials, along with other, even more specific beer-related questions like what a decoction is, or what a lambic is. I would say if they expect you to know about lambics, even cursorily, then you ought to know about other styles besides stouts and american lagers, and by extension ought to know that dark beers aren't necessarily "stronger" regardless of what you choose "stronger" to mean.

And I would say you need to find a better organization to certify with. Expecting a wine and spirits organization to know anything specific about beer is like expecting Seattle Barista to certify knowledge about Coffee Porter.

 

[IffyG]

And I would say you need to find a better organization to certify with. Expecting a wine and spirits organization to know anything specific about beer is like expecting Seattle Barista to certify about tea.

I suppose that's what I mean when I said the statements met the needs of the WSET examination...

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

I suppose that's what I mean when I said the statements met the needs of the WSET examination...

Ayup.

I just don't understand what there is to "debate" really. It's a vague statement about beer made by an certification organization founded on wine and Spirits (says so on the doormat). What else would you expect?

 

[xjmox14x]

Ayup.

I just don't understand what there is to "debate" really. It's a vague statement about beer made by an certification organization founded on wine and Spirits (says so on the doormat). What else would you expect?

I'd expect an organization testing on the characteristics of a lambic and decoction mashes to not make the general (and often wrong) assumption that dark beers are "stronger" than light beers, in any sense of the word. You are bringing up many points where it is, in fact, true. Like your statement about mass-marketed beers to the general public. Does the general public care about lambics or decoction mashing? There have been many examples of this statement being completely false as well. In other words, this is an essentially useless statement.

That's like me saying Whites are taller than Asians. Are there white people who are taller than Asians? Sure. Are there Asians taller than White people? Sure. So what is the purpose of issuing a completely useless statement? Hell, in mathematical conditionals, if something is not correct 100% of the time, then it is flat out wrong. Period.

I could even understand similar wording, such as "Most dark beers are stronger than" or "In general, dark beers are stronger than". Although that may or may not be the case, it's a generalization I can understand. To issue a statement that says "dark beers are stronger than light beers" is a different animal. By this wording, it is assumed, by the English language, there is the word "ALL" sitting in front of "dark", unless specified otherwise.

 

[weirdboy]

And I would say you need to find a better organization to certify with. Expecting a wine and spirits organization to know anything specific about beer is like expecting Seattle Barista to certify knowledge about Coffee Porter.

Then why bother with any questions about beer? That is the whole gist of this thread. They should either get it right, or leave it out of the test.

 

[xjmox14x]

Ayup.

I just don't understand what there is to "debate" really. It's a vague statement about beer made by an certification organization founded on wine and Spirits (says so on the doormat). What else would you expect?

And you hit the nail on the head with that. They are an organization founded around wine and spirits, so what would we expect? They should not offer misinformation on topics they are not proficient in. Which is the point of the OP.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

Then why bother with any questions about beer? That is the whole gist of this thread. They should either get it right, or leave it out of the test.

Because the employers of the world want a "one size fits all" solution. they want to market the certification and really don't give a sh!t about the facts of the information to get it.

 

[weirdboy]

Because the employers of the world want a "one size fits all" solution. they want to market the certification and really don't give a sh!t about the facts of the information to get it.

So just to be clear here, your argument has evolved from "it's not misinformation" to "it may be misinformation, but they don't really care"?

 

[BrewKnurd]

"Dark beer will always be stronger than light beer."

The reason for me that is wrong, and not just an oversimplification, is simply the fact that they said "always." Its just not true that dark beer is *always* stronger by any reasonable measurement of strength.

If they had said "dark beer is typically stronger," then maybe its just an oversimplification. But saying always makes it just straight up false.