Homebrewing myths that need to die

[PseudoChef]

Suddenly it got all Led Zeppelin up in here.

 

[gbx]

1) I would say that another myth is that beer contests and "professional" beer tasters know what they are talking about.

If they don't the same beer palate that you do, their advice is useless. The wine industry suffers from this one a low.

2) Also, a gold winning beer is good

Same as above, however it may have also been the best of the three beers in their category...and they all could have sucked!

3) Opening up a microbrewery is a good way to make $

lol...

4) People who like to drink your home brew are really good friends!

lol...

Yeah, I'll somewhat agree with 1. Every single person who has entered a contest has had at least one score sheet with something completely stupid written on it. ...and the BJCP guidelines are far from perfect. ie "classic american pilsner" (if you don't have a single commercial example, it is not a real beer style). I guess they work fine for competitions, but so many people try use the guidelines when discussing commercial beers or beer history.

...and 2. I have issues with the way some beers are judged. A 2oz pour is not appropriate for session styles. There are lots of beers I've had that are incredible the first few sips but they fail as session beers because they are so rich you just don't want a second pint. I don't think you can accurately judge a session beer until you've actually sessioned it - drink at least a 20oz pint and then assess how you feel about drinking a second pint. ...and how much more fun would it be to judge if you had to drink 20+ oz of each sample?

 

[AnOldUR]

...and the BJCP guidelines are far from perfect. ie "classic american pilsner" (if you don't have a single commercial example, it is not a real beer style).

From BJCP guideline for Classic American Pilsner:

History: . . . This style died out after Prohibition but was resurrected as a home-brewed style by advocates of the hobby.

How do you expect there to be a commercial example of a style that is no longer made commercially? Or is it your opinion that if it's no longer made commercially it's not a real style anymore?

 

[cfonnes]

drink at least a 20oz pint

 

[jeffjm]

The style guidelines are about five years old. Avery makes a CAP that is quite enjoyable, and is easy to find in these parts.

 

[AnOldUR]

Avery makes a CAP that is quite enjoyable, and is easy to find in these parts.

hmmmm . . . never saw that one.

But by their own description, it is a contemporary rendition of a classic style. Not a true Classic American Pilsner. The specs don't fit the guidelines, OG too low and IBU's too high. It could never be used as an example of the style.

That said, sounds like a tasty beer. One I'll be looking for. Thanks for pointing it out.

Joe's Premium American Pilsner
Avery Brewing Co. Boulder, CO

Beer Style: Premium American Pilsner
Hop Variety: Bravo, Hersbrucker
Malt Variety: Two-row barley
OG: 1.041
ABV: 4.7%
IBUs: 50
Color: Light Golden

A contemporary rendition of a classic style, Joe's is hopped with purpose: beautifully bitter and dry with an abundance of floral, Noble German hops.

 

[homebrewdad]

...and 2. I have issues with the way some beers are judged. A 2oz pour is not appropriate for session styles. There are lots of beers I've had that are incredible the first few sips but they fail as session beers because they are so rich you just don't want a second pint. I don't think you can accurately judge a session beer until you've actually sessioned it - drink at least a 20oz pint and then assess how you feel about drinking a second pint. ...and how much more fun would it be to judge if you had to drink 20+ oz of each sample?

I must have missed the section on the scoresheet that speaks to how many pints you desire of the given beer.

Ugh, if you think the feedback is poor now, how would you feel if you were the 8th beer to be judged after the judge judge imbibed a fuzz under a standard 12 pack of beer? I rather doubt that the scoring would be particularly useful.

Finally, aren't pints 16 ounces?

 

[thadius856]

I must have missed the section on the scoresheet that speaks to how many pints you desire of the given beer.

Ugh, if you think the feedback is poor now, how would you feel if you were the 8th beer to be judged after the judge judge imbibed a fuzz under a standard 12 pack of beer? I rather doubt that the scoring would be particularly useful.

Finally, aren't pints 16 ounces?

Pints are 1/8th of a gallon.

In the US, that's 16 fl oz.

In the UK, that's 19.2 fl oz because the UK gallon is 20% larger.

 

[StoneHands]

Finally, aren't pints 16 ounces?

Not in all countries.

Hey man, need to get in touch with you again soon....

 

[homebrewdad]

Fair enough on the pint size feedback... though my comment to the hammered judge still applies.

Good to hear from ya, Stonehands!

 

[weirdboy]

Having to judge a "session" beer by drinking 20oz is the dumbest BJCP criticism I've ever heard.


If you think the score revolves around the sample size, you have no idea how judging works.

 

[bob1852]

Having to judge a "session" beer by drinking 20oz is the dumbest BJCP criticism I've ever heard.


If you think the score revolves around the sample size, you have no idea how judging works.

I dunno, the "if a sh!tty beer tastes better than two other sh!tty beers, it will win gold" was pretty bad, too.

 

[progmac]

Having to judge a "session" beer by drinking 20oz is the dumbest BJCP criticism I've ever heard.


If you think the score revolves around the sample size, you have no idea how judging works.

I would think a judge good at determining mouthfeel would know if a beer would start to get old after the third drink.

 

[gbx]

From BJCP guideline for Classic American Pilsner:

How do you expect there to be a commercial example of a style that is no longer made commercially? Or is it your opinion that if it's no longer made commercially it's not a real style anymore?

My opinion is that its not a relevant style anymore so why bother? I also doubt its authenticity of CAP as I've never seen anything written about it that suggests any actual research was ever done into how it was actually brewed. It seems more like someone read a general description of preprohibition beer and made up the details. Even if it was a style, there are other dead styles of beer that are far more important to beer history that are not included in the guidelines (eg. burton ale, pale mild, brown stout, vatted porter, etc).

I must have missed the section on the scoresheet that speaks to how many pints you desire of the given beer.

Ugh, if you think the feedback is poor now, how would you feel if you were the 8th beer to be judged after the judge judge imbibed a fuzz under a standard 12 pack of beer? I rather doubt that the scoring would be particularly useful.

Finally, aren't pints 16 ounces?

The checklist style score sheets have a section that says "I would finish this sample, I would drink a pint of this beer, I would pay money for this beer". and yes, not at all practical. My point was the judging format runs counter to the entire idea of a session beer.

 

[BigJack]

As an uncertified person who likes writing up reviews and notes on beer, I've gotta say 12 ounces is a big damn sample. Granted, since I don't judge contests, I usually do drink a whole beer when I'm writing a review- but thats because I'm not going to review a bunch of beers at one sitting. Honestly, I know all I need to know in the first 2-3 ounces. If a self-taught taster like me can figure it out that quick, then certainly well trained and certified judges can too. Easily.

 

[jeffjm]

hmmmm . . . never saw that one.

But by their own description, it is a contemporary rendition of a classic style. Not a true Classic American Pilsner. The specs don't fit the guidelines, OG too low and IBU's too high. It could never be used as an example of the style.

True enough, for the 2008 version...but who's to say that the next revision of the guidelines won't better reflect what brewers are doing now? Styles evolve. Maybe CAP will get redefined a bit to reflect a common example, like Avery's.

 

[TNGabe]

Here's a great myth: Every homebrewer knows how to fix the BJCP and comps

 

[Billy-Klubb]

Here's a great myth: Every homebrewer knows how to fix the BJCP and comps

most people don't realize it takes a string 14" long, a paper clip, and some duct tape.

 

[AnOldUR]

BrewGyver?

 

[tdhickey]

Wow! Way to insult the BJCP and just about everyone who has a passion for crafting their own beer.

never been a fan of anyone who has decided to come up with a list of criteria of what good beer tastes like, this applies to wine, spirits, as well as what makes a good movie and many other things.

 

[Billy-Klubb]

BrewGyver?

all I need is a mullet.:rockin:

 

[msa8967]

Lookin through many of these pages I was suprised to not see anything about bottling with corn sugar versus cane sugar.

 

[TahoeRy]

vs DME

 

[homebrewdad]

Lookin through many of these pages I was suprised to not see anything about bottling with corn sugar versus cane sugar.

That's actually a good topic. "You should bottle with corn sugar... after all, there must be a reason that it's included with so many kits!"

 

[homebrewdad]

never been a fan of anyone who has decided to come up with a list of criteria of what good beer tastes like, this applies to wine, spirits, as well as what makes a good movie and many other things.

I submit that you're missing the point. The BJCP guidelines are not there to define what is good beer; they are there to define that style A should have XYZ characteristics, while style B should have X, Z, and C. You're judged off of how well you follow a given style, not whether or not the judge thinks your beer is subjectively good.

A good beer is a beer you enjoy, regardless of stye or lack thereof.

 

[jeffjm]

That's actually a good topic. "You should bottle with corn sugar... after all, there must be a reason that it's included with so many kits!"

I believe - but could be wrong - it's because corn sugar is 100% fermentable, giving you more consistent results from batch to batch. Different brands of DME have varying levels of fermentability.

 

[thadius856]

I believe - but could be wrong - it's because corn sugar is 100% fermentable, giving you more consistent results from batch to batch. Different brands of DME have varying levels of fermentability.

The counter-point there is that there's not enough non-fermantables introduced when priming to make a noticeable difference in flavor.

If you want to use table sugar but want it to ferment perfectly clean like corn sugar, invert it on the stove (or buy it pre-inverted as "Invertase" or "Invert Syrup" or "Trimoline" at a baking supply store).

 

[CreamyGoodness]

This is something I didnt know, thank you. To clarify, I can save my corn sugar for other purposes and invert table sugar with a little lemon and get the same effect? Will this effect the taste of the finished product?

 

[TNGabe]

This is something I didnt know, thank you. To clarify, I can save my corn sugar for other purposes and invert table sugar with a little lemon and get the same effect? Will this effect the taste of the finished product?

Invert schminvert. Plain old table sugar is fine for priming.

 

[homebrewdad]

I believe - but could be wrong - it's because corn sugar is 100% fermentable, giving you more consistent results from batch to batch. Different brands of DME have varying levels of fermentability.

Table sugar is also 100% fermentable. Zero flavor contribution. Zero reason to spend the same on five ounces of corn sugar as you spend on five pounds of table sugar.

Also, DME is very easy to calculate (not enough variation to matter). No reason at all to not use it, save the fact that it's more expensive than table sugar. It does add a slight flavor contribution.