I entered beer in a contest at my hometown fair recently (not BJCP). I don't get many chances for impartial critics of my beer. I entered a Belgian Dark Strong Ale from a recipe in Brewing Classic Styles that I had aged for over a year into the Ale lot, which pretty much covers any ale that isn't a porter, stout, or wheat beer, or I guess a braggot. Got some interesting comments that I feel like I can share here, because I may be puzzled but I'm not really whining/complaining. I didn't care about a ribbon or a gift card premium, I just wanted some feedback.
I already know how I feel about this beer, I brewed it again with only slight tweaks.
First, a little reference here On my device it is on page 67 on the PDF, 26D.
One judges comments (not exactly word-for-word):
Now for the judge that has me puzzled. Again, not word-for-word but close. My thoughts in parenthesis:
I'll just sum up the last judge by saying that he or she suspected it was under attenuated. It did finish at 1.021 so I can understand where this person is coming from. But Jamil has that recipe finishing at 1.024 in the book. Besides that, this judge pretty much on par with the others except I don't think that he or she was expecting it to be as hoppy/bitter as the judge that puzzled me thought it would be.
So I learned something. I've known that I don't care for the extremely bitter styles, but I always thought of my preferences in the malty-to-bitter spectrum as being around balanced and leaning towards malty. Now I think I might be in the somewhat-to-moderately malty portion of that spectrum.
I already know how I feel about this beer, I brewed it again with only slight tweaks.
First, a little reference here On my device it is on page 67 on the PDF, 26D.
One judges comments (not exactly word-for-word):
- Aroma: Slightly phenolic... dark fruit after some warming
- Flavor: well balanced, some alcohol warmth, sweetness is just right
- Overall impression: Very nice - good balance of dry and sweet, not syrupy
- I'm just going to sum this up, this judge gave me good scores in appearance and mouthfeel. My bottle carbonation wasn't as good as it should have been.
Now for the judge that has me puzzled. Again, not word-for-word but close. My thoughts in parenthesis:
- Appearance: Looks a little cloudy. (the other two judges said it looked ok, style says that it can be a little hazy)
- Flavor: ... needs more hops, not fully balanced (I like my beers a little malty, style calls for medium-low to moderate bitterness. I will concede that the FG was on the higher end of the style's spectrum but according to brewersfriend the IBUs should have been above 30)
- Overall impression: ... I expected more IBUs in a beer like this... (style says that it should be between 20-35, and I was shooting for slightly over 30. Maybe the age has mellowed out the bitterness?)
I'll just sum up the last judge by saying that he or she suspected it was under attenuated. It did finish at 1.021 so I can understand where this person is coming from. But Jamil has that recipe finishing at 1.024 in the book. Besides that, this judge pretty much on par with the others except I don't think that he or she was expecting it to be as hoppy/bitter as the judge that puzzled me thought it would be.
So I learned something. I've known that I don't care for the extremely bitter styles, but I always thought of my preferences in the malty-to-bitter spectrum as being around balanced and leaning towards malty. Now I think I might be in the somewhat-to-moderately malty portion of that spectrum.