How do you interpret competition feedback?

[dmtaylor]

I guess that's where my struggle is coming from. I read the comments from the judges and honestly, not sure what I would change. Based on the better feedback, seems like an overhaul of the recipe would be in order but there's really not anything called out as a red flag.

Here are the score sheets. What do you guys see as changes? (Just curious...)

(I get a bit defensive of the comment about oxidation from the one judge because I don't think it's there personally. This only saw one fermenter, was not dry hopped, and was bottled using a pressure tip bottle filler right from the fermenter.)

The National judge is the only one who picked out oxidation, acetaldehyde, and astringency. Either these things are present, or they are not. Figure that out. If he's wrong, then throw his score sheet in the trash. Even a National can have a bad day from time to time.

I always figure about 60-70% of all score sheets are recyclable. If you approach your score sheets in this manner, you will be much happier and learn much more from them IMO. Don't focus too much on the negatives, unless they are real. Focus on what is real, and don't focus on what is not real. Judges get it wrong almost as often as they get it right.

 

[Rob2010SS]

The National judge is the only one who picked out oxidation, acetaldehyde, and astringency. Either these things are present, or they are not. Figure that out. If he's wrong, then throw his score sheet in the trash. Even a National can have a bad day from time to time.

I always figure about 60-70% of all score sheets are recyclable. If you approach your score sheets in this manner, you will be much happier and learn much more from them IMO. Don't focus too much on the negatives, unless they are real. Focus on what is real, and don't focus on what is not real. Judges get it wrong almost as often as they get it right.

I like this ! I don’t think the astringency is there. My palate is very susceptible to astringent flavors and I don’t get that at all. Oxidation is another one I’d fight. I don’t think it is there based on my process for this beer. I’ve had several oxidized beers that we’ve made and I don’t think this one has it. I do have a couple of bottles left so I’m going to crank one and see if I can pick out acetaldehyde or not. I’m curious how that goes

 

[Dland]

Glad the only judge I brew for is me. {;

 

[Cyclman]

I have never entered beers in competition, I just don’t think that my process is precise enough, or repeatable enough, that I am ready for that. I just like to brew a variety that I like to drink. But, I have read much and heard much about competitions. To me, if you really want to dial in your recipe on a beer, you should brew it many times, and enter it in many competitions. Any individual batch, any individual score sheet, may not be meaningful. But over a number of batches, and a high number of score sheets, you have a greater opportunity to learn.

I think that is basically one of the major reasons that I don’t enter competitions, variety is my goal, I don’t really care that much about dialing in an individual recipe. With so many styles, Malts, Hops, etc., variety intrigues me. I am probably because of this not the Brewer I could be, but I enjoy the hell out of my hobby. It’s all about what you are in this for.

 

[bwible]

I like variety as well but I do tend to brew the same things over and over. I have recipe logs of every beer I’ve ever brewed and I do go back and look at the last versions of whatever it is I’m brewing. On the back of my recipe logs I have sections where I write in notes. Brewing notes with things like whether I used the Anvil Foundry or my cooler, hop spider or not, mash temp, etc. I have a tasting notes section where I go back and write notes after I’ve tasted a few of the beers. Then the last section is “What I would do differently”.

I have a blonde ale / psuedo-lager that I have been keeping on for about a year. It has gone through 5 iterations now. I’ve brewed it with slightly different grain bills, mostly the same hops, and 4 different yeasts. So now I have plenty of data on it. I just brewed it again.

I do a similiar thing with APA, mostly trying different hops because there are SO many I never tried.

I get ideas from things others post on here sometimes and try those.

I’m always thinking about and tweaking my recipes just a little.

 

[jdauria]

Neither of those sets of scoresheets really give you much feedback on what judge think you can do better. I enter a lot of comps...what I look at first, well second since score is first, is the ranking of judges. Like in first set of sheets, you have a certified judge and a non-ranked "homebrewer"...I would then really focus on what only the certified judge states because is the homebrewer really judging to style guidelines, or to his personal preferences. Then for the second set, the National judge's opinion would matter more to me. For example, a guy in my club in an internal club comp scored every beer 20, because he did not like the style...he did not judge on guidelines, so we had to toss his scores.

I have a national ranked judge in my club, he said what you also need to look at is regional bias...that a beer that scores well in say New England, will not score as well in Midwest, etc. Judging is all subjective too, was your beer early in a flight, late in a flight meaning the judge had palette fatigue. Was it early in the morning where the judges were just starting out, or late in day after they also judges other sides.

I mean a 37.5 average is a great overall score for that beer and it could be some slight tweaks, like using a different base malt, for example being a British Brown, I am making the assumption that there is Maris Otter in it? Then try Crisp's Heritage Chevalier instead. National judge mentions possible fermentation issue...do you have temp control when you ferment? Did the yeast fully attenuate? Maybe try a different yeast.

It's definitely frustrating at times...I have a Czech Dark that does well in comps, the 2019 version averaged 44 (1st place), 37 at NHC regional (2nd place), 41 (2nd place) and then a 27...so obviously, there was something wrong there. Those first 3 scores...all East Coast comps...the last one, in Utah. What the heck did those judges not like that others did? Was that the regionable bias coming into play. Czech Dark is not a common beer in the US, so judges don't get to drink samples to know what it tastes like, was that a factor? Maybe. In fact, I sent 4 beers to that comp that had all medaled previously in other comps and the highest score I got was a 32. By the way, I then took the judges comments from the three good scoring comps and slightly tweaked a rebrew of the Czech Dark for NHC Finals and came this close to medaling...it took a 39 and was at the final table for medal contention.

 

[Rob2010SS]

Neither of those sets of scoresheets really give you much feedback on what judge think you can do better. I enter a lot of comps...what I look at first, well second since score is first, is the ranking of judges. Like in first set of sheets, you have a certified judge and a non-ranked "homebrewer"...I would then really focus on what only the certified judge states because is the homebrewer really judging to style guidelines, or to his personal preferences. Then for the second set, the National judge's opinion would matter more to me. For example, a guy in my club in an internal club comp scored every beer 20, because he did not like the style...he did not judge on guidelines, so we had to toss his scores.

I have a national ranked judge in my club, he said what you also need to look at is regional bias...that a beer that scores well in say New England, will not score as well in Midwest, etc. Judging is all subjective too, was your beer early in a flight, late in a flight meaning the judge had palette fatigue. Was it early in the morning where the judges were just starting out, or late in day after they also judges other sides.

I mean a 37.5 average is a great overall score for that beer and it could be some slight tweaks, like using a different base malt, for example being a British Brown, I am making the assumption that there is Maris Otter in it? Then try Crisp's Heritage Chevalier instead. National judge mentions possible fermentation issue...do you have temp control when you ferment? Did the yeast fully attenuate? Maybe try a different yeast.

It's definitely frustrating at times...I have a Czech Dark that does well in comps, the 2019 version averaged 44 (1st place), 37 at NHC regional (2nd place), 41 (2nd place) and then a 27...so obviously, there was something wrong there. Those first 3 scores...all East Coast comps...the last one, in Utah. What the heck did those judges not like that others did? Was that the regionable bias coming into play. Czech Dark is not a common beer in the US, so judges don't get to drink samples to know what it tastes like, was that a factor? Maybe. In fact, I sent 4 beers to that comp that had all medaled previously in other comps and the highest score I got was a 32. By the way, I then took the judges comments from the three good scoring comps and slightly tweaked a rebrew of the Czech Dark for NHC Finals and came this close to medaling...it took a 39 and was at the final table for medal contention.

Yes, we have temp control on our unitank, both heating as well as glycol. I believe the yeast fully attenuated. It was the same OG/FG I've hit all 4 times I've brewed this beer with the same yeast.

I have thought about changing up the yeast a bit to see what that does. This was fermented with S04 but perhaps a slightly different yeast would do better... Not sure. The positive thing to come out of this is that our beer falls into a good category. If we scored poorly, well, then we better rethink this hobby haha.