I have always been interested in the BJCP program. I love the concept of brewing to a style, and I've spent countless hours listening to Jamil's style shows during my commutes. I have listened to each style at least twice, and the ones I brew as many as a dozen times. Even styles I had no interest in brewing were worth listening to for education's sake. I own and have read Designing Great Beers, Brewing Classic styles, and Jamil's yeast book. For kicks I picked up Radical Brewing and the Complete Joy[....] but I find they are more for interest than reference. In other words, I am familar with styles. Jamil is an active supporter of the BJCP and what it stands for. I am quite a Ja-ciple, so usually if Jamil says it, it's right, so I'll listen. I just read through the study guide and it raised some questions.
Here it is.
http://www.kroc.org/BJCP Exam Info and Study Guides/BJCP_Interim_Study_Guide.pdf
First, I know I should probably put my money where my mouth is, but as it reads, I am pretty sure I can sit down and take this test today, and come out with a reasonably good result. Brewing process and style questions are pretty straight forward, allow you some freedom, and they account for 90% of your score. Another 5% is True/False. I find that a little discouraging. More discouraging is the minimal requirements to be a BJCP "recognized" judge. I could be wrong about 40% of the information I put on paper, have no experience in judging, and write down on a scoresheet that I am BJCP recognized as I pick through your beer (with 40% of my comments being officially wrong). A "novice" may judge your beer after officially failing the test. Should a "D" student be teaching the class? That is a little screwed up.
There are several style questions. You are given (and you can sometimes choose) a style, and asked to describe as follows.
6 points- Describe the aroma, appearance, flavor, and mouthfeel of each sub-style as in the BJCP Style Guidelines.
2 points- Identify at least one aspect of the ingredients (malts, hops, water chemistry) or background information (history, fermentation techniques and conditions, or serving methods) that distinguishes each sub-style.
1 point For each of the sub-styles, name at least one classic commercial example as listed in the BJCP Style Guidelines.
1 point Describe the similarities and differences between the three sub-styles.
Are you telling me you can average missing 40% of this information for each style you discuss and still be a recognized judge? Lets do an example. American Ale.
Naming 1 aspect of ingredients/history correctly gets you to 20%! Citrus hops, often Cascade, Light crystals, clean american yeast. No diacetyl. Off-shoot of British Pale Ales, popularized on the West Coast and are usually higher in alcohol and bitterness, should be made with domestic ingredients, and fermented with less esters than their British counter parts. That was easy.
Naming 1 commercial example gets you another 10%! SNPA, Lagunitas Censored, Big Sky Moose Drool.
Given those two things, you would have to correctly describe less than half of the sub-styles in the biggest point catagory to come up with a 60% overall score. So a Pale Ale should be jet black, no more than 15 IBU's, with an OG of around 1.053 and a FG of 1.012, and finish with a pleasant, citrus-y late hop character. I just got 60%! Come on.
"Certified" is a little more in line, missing 30% of the information the test was looking for, but at least carries a minimum experience of sitting in on 5 panels (for 2.5 points). I think I would accept notes from a Certified judge as being pretty helpful, but what % of judges are at least certified, let alone a "Nationally Recognized" or "Master"?
I am at a point I would really like to start entering some beers to get credited feedback, and get things to a new level, but I just want to know if other people have done this and in the end found it to be a waste of money. I appreciate that judges are volunteers, and it is like yelling at an umpire during a little league game, but if I am only paying real $ to enter a beer for feedback, and that feedback sucks, I think I have a right to be a little pissed. It is the honest feedback I am after, not a ribbon. Jamil himself has expressed some distain in past events. He noted that his Irish Red was perfect for the style, but constantly lost and scored poorly. He finally caved, entered a Scottish 80 as an Irish Red (the two are not really close), and won a gold medal. He admitted a flaw in the system, but attributed it more to when you see one bad driver on the road, get to work and say, "no one knows how to drive anymore". I hope that is the case.
I'd like to hear the test is harder than the study guide makes it seem. I want to be clear; I am not saying I would be a great judge, I am just saying I think I could crush the test. Now if I could sit down with my wife, who has a far better pallet than me, and she described what she is tasting and let me write it down, that would make a great judge.
Thoughts? Experiences?
Joe
Here it is.
http://www.kroc.org/BJCP Exam Info and Study Guides/BJCP_Interim_Study_Guide.pdf
First, I know I should probably put my money where my mouth is, but as it reads, I am pretty sure I can sit down and take this test today, and come out with a reasonably good result. Brewing process and style questions are pretty straight forward, allow you some freedom, and they account for 90% of your score. Another 5% is True/False. I find that a little discouraging. More discouraging is the minimal requirements to be a BJCP "recognized" judge. I could be wrong about 40% of the information I put on paper, have no experience in judging, and write down on a scoresheet that I am BJCP recognized as I pick through your beer (with 40% of my comments being officially wrong). A "novice" may judge your beer after officially failing the test. Should a "D" student be teaching the class? That is a little screwed up.
There are several style questions. You are given (and you can sometimes choose) a style, and asked to describe as follows.
6 points- Describe the aroma, appearance, flavor, and mouthfeel of each sub-style as in the BJCP Style Guidelines.
2 points- Identify at least one aspect of the ingredients (malts, hops, water chemistry) or background information (history, fermentation techniques and conditions, or serving methods) that distinguishes each sub-style.
1 point For each of the sub-styles, name at least one classic commercial example as listed in the BJCP Style Guidelines.
1 point Describe the similarities and differences between the three sub-styles.
Are you telling me you can average missing 40% of this information for each style you discuss and still be a recognized judge? Lets do an example. American Ale.
Naming 1 aspect of ingredients/history correctly gets you to 20%! Citrus hops, often Cascade, Light crystals, clean american yeast. No diacetyl. Off-shoot of British Pale Ales, popularized on the West Coast and are usually higher in alcohol and bitterness, should be made with domestic ingredients, and fermented with less esters than their British counter parts. That was easy.
Naming 1 commercial example gets you another 10%! SNPA, Lagunitas Censored, Big Sky Moose Drool.
Given those two things, you would have to correctly describe less than half of the sub-styles in the biggest point catagory to come up with a 60% overall score. So a Pale Ale should be jet black, no more than 15 IBU's, with an OG of around 1.053 and a FG of 1.012, and finish with a pleasant, citrus-y late hop character. I just got 60%! Come on.
"Certified" is a little more in line, missing 30% of the information the test was looking for, but at least carries a minimum experience of sitting in on 5 panels (for 2.5 points). I think I would accept notes from a Certified judge as being pretty helpful, but what % of judges are at least certified, let alone a "Nationally Recognized" or "Master"?
I am at a point I would really like to start entering some beers to get credited feedback, and get things to a new level, but I just want to know if other people have done this and in the end found it to be a waste of money. I appreciate that judges are volunteers, and it is like yelling at an umpire during a little league game, but if I am only paying real $ to enter a beer for feedback, and that feedback sucks, I think I have a right to be a little pissed. It is the honest feedback I am after, not a ribbon. Jamil himself has expressed some distain in past events. He noted that his Irish Red was perfect for the style, but constantly lost and scored poorly. He finally caved, entered a Scottish 80 as an Irish Red (the two are not really close), and won a gold medal. He admitted a flaw in the system, but attributed it more to when you see one bad driver on the road, get to work and say, "no one knows how to drive anymore". I hope that is the case.
I'd like to hear the test is harder than the study guide makes it seem. I want to be clear; I am not saying I would be a great judge, I am just saying I think I could crush the test. Now if I could sit down with my wife, who has a far better pallet than me, and she described what she is tasting and let me write it down, that would make a great judge.
Thoughts? Experiences?
Joe