I guess I'm spoiled, every comp I've ever judged was 4-5 point spread max, as requested by the comp coordinator. I would say there are maybe 1-2 beers that I judge per competition (usually 3+ sessions) that I end up more than 3 points away from the person I'm judging with.
the BJCP so called certification drives me crazy
- Thread starter chewse
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk:
Just to pile onto this. I am a certified judge, and really do work hard to give feedback that will help the brewers I judge to improve their craft.
That said I have 2 experiences to relate:
In judging a recent competition I was paired with a gentleman 30 years my senior, also a certified judge, and a very good brewer (I've had his beer). We were judging historical beers and on one particular beer I came in at a 38 and he was at a 23. He even agreed that it was better than a beer of the same style that he had just given a 30 to. So I took a stand and really fought for that beer. It was uncomfortable, it took about 20 minutes of discussion and arguing, and eventually he relented and we agreed on an average score of 34. That pushed the beer into a mini-bos round (which was my goal) and side-by-side it was "slap you in the face" better than all the others in the flight except 1, and ended up taking second place by consensus of all the judges present. My point in relating this, is that judges are not always rational or logical in their approach to judging, and their partner will not always push against a score that clearly doesn't fit the beer.
Second, I entered 7 beers in that same competition and took 3 golds and a second place BOS. One of my golds was for a stout that scored a 40. Two of my beers that didn't place were and IPA that scored a 38.5, and a Helles Bock that scored a 31
I entered those same beers (bottled on the same day, in new bottles) into a second competition and just got the results back. The stout scored a 27 (compared to 40 the week before), and the IPA scored a 23 (compared to 38.5) and the Helles Bock scored a 37.5 and took a gold.
I'm very interested to get the scoresheets back to see the feedback to see if there was an infection or something because that point spread is very strange.
What I tend to do in this situation and go with the opinion of the judge who's feedback matches my own perception, and who clearly put more thought into describing what they are tasting. If a judge gave me a score of 23 and wrote "funky roast character, not a fan" (I have seen that on a scoresheet), then I tend to discredit their scores and ignore them.
For example on my scoresheet for the Helles Bock that scored a 31, one judge provided a very well written description and could clearly taste a touch of DMS and sulfur. The second guy said my malty clean lager tasted like "pumpernickle, and honey coated toast with plum jam".. a comment which is not only not helpful, its inaccurate since there's no rye in it at all. But based on these sheets it's pretty easy to tell who's opinion to take more seriously.
At the end of the day, your own opinion is the only one that matters.
That said I have 2 experiences to relate:
In judging a recent competition I was paired with a gentleman 30 years my senior, also a certified judge, and a very good brewer (I've had his beer). We were judging historical beers and on one particular beer I came in at a 38 and he was at a 23. He even agreed that it was better than a beer of the same style that he had just given a 30 to. So I took a stand and really fought for that beer. It was uncomfortable, it took about 20 minutes of discussion and arguing, and eventually he relented and we agreed on an average score of 34. That pushed the beer into a mini-bos round (which was my goal) and side-by-side it was "slap you in the face" better than all the others in the flight except 1, and ended up taking second place by consensus of all the judges present. My point in relating this, is that judges are not always rational or logical in their approach to judging, and their partner will not always push against a score that clearly doesn't fit the beer.
Second, I entered 7 beers in that same competition and took 3 golds and a second place BOS. One of my golds was for a stout that scored a 40. Two of my beers that didn't place were and IPA that scored a 38.5, and a Helles Bock that scored a 31
I entered those same beers (bottled on the same day, in new bottles) into a second competition and just got the results back. The stout scored a 27 (compared to 40 the week before), and the IPA scored a 23 (compared to 38.5) and the Helles Bock scored a 37.5 and took a gold.
I'm very interested to get the scoresheets back to see the feedback to see if there was an infection or something because that point spread is very strange.
What I tend to do in this situation and go with the opinion of the judge who's feedback matches my own perception, and who clearly put more thought into describing what they are tasting. If a judge gave me a score of 23 and wrote "funky roast character, not a fan" (I have seen that on a scoresheet), then I tend to discredit their scores and ignore them.
For example on my scoresheet for the Helles Bock that scored a 31, one judge provided a very well written description and could clearly taste a touch of DMS and sulfur. The second guy said my malty clean lager tasted like "pumpernickle, and honey coated toast with plum jam".. a comment which is not only not helpful, its inaccurate since there's no rye in it at all. But based on these sheets it's pretty easy to tell who's opinion to take more seriously.
At the end of the day, your own opinion is the only one that matters.
Exactly.
This just happened to me at a local club comp - BJCP approved comp. Scored 38.5 took bronze at our state fair for specialty IPA. Same batch, bottled 10 seconds after the fair bottles, scores 19. lol....
The bottom comment from the club read, this is not a flawed beer, but needs more hop aroma. Pretty sure a 19 is for a flawed beer.
Outstanding (45 - 50): World-class example of style.
Excellent (38 - 44): Exemplifies style well, requires minor fine-tuning.
Very Good (30 - 37): Generally within style parameters, some minor flaws.
Good (21 - 29): Misses the mark on style and/or minor flaws.
Fair (14 - 20): Off flavors/aromas or major style deficiencies.
Unpleasant. Problematic (00 - 13): Major off flavors and aromas dominate. Hard to drink.
The only negative comment I received from the fair was slight vegetable flavor - I mash hop my White IPA so I wasn't too surprised on this note.
@Spikybits And what ranks were the judges? My bet is there was one Recognized or Certified jerk who gave you the lowest score, and another one or two unranked judges with him who just plagiarized the ranked guy's comments without trying to fight him.
Lol. Didnt check at first but the first beer was by a sensory trained and by a certified. My other was by a certified and "pro-brewer". I mean I have had tons of flawed terrible pro beers too... go figure....
To be clear, my 38.5 scored beer was scored locally by the sensory trained and certified pair. Which resulted in the 19
My american ipa scored also a 19.. but I wasn't concerned. It was a good smash but not an amazing one
To be clear, my 38.5 scored beer was scored locally by the sensory trained and certified pair. Which resulted in the 19
My american ipa scored also a 19.. but I wasn't concerned. It was a good smash but not an amazing one
Last edited:
![Craft A Brew - Safale S-04 Dry Yeast - Fermentis - English Ale Dry Yeast - For English and American Ales and Hard Apple Ciders - Ingredients for Home Brewing - Beer Making Supplies - [1 Pack]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41fVGNh6JfL._SL500_.jpg)
Yeah... And were the Certified scores the lowest of all for each of the 19's?
certified was 17 and sensory was 21
Really - oh well! I have better luck at the fairs at those actually give you ribbons! i just chalked it up to two judges that this really wasnt their cup of tea(beer).
Similar threads
