James Boag's Premium Lager - J. Boag & Son Brewing

Not Rated.
James Boag's Premium LagerJames Boag's Premium Lager

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
72
okay

309 Ratings
THE BROS
80
good

(view ratings)
Ratings: 309
Reviews: 183
rAvg: 3.08
pDev: 18.51%
Wants: 7
Gots: 17 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
J. Boag & Son Brewing visit their website
Australia

Style | ABV
Euro Pale Lager |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 05-28-2002

No notes at this time.
View: Beers (13) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of James Boag's Premium Lager Alström Bros
Ratings: 309 | Reviews: 183
Photo of RonaldTheriot
3.95/5  rDev +28.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.75 | overall: 4

James Boag’s Premium Lager has a thin, white head, somewhat of a lacing sheen left on the glass, a hazy, yellow-golden appearance, streaming bubbles, and some suspended brown particles visible throughout. The aroma is of pungent, sweet barley malt, sugar, and white bread. Flavor is of sweet, bold malt, white bread, a shadow of paper, and a nice balancing hop bitterness. The mouthfeel is medium, and James Boag’s Premium Lager finishes semi-dry, refreshing, and supremely drinkable. Overall, this is another very good beer. Buy it, and try it!

RJT

Photo of cyclonece09
3.26/5  rDev +5.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Poured from a 375 ml bottle into a 14 oz "pint" glass. Pours a translucent straw color with visible carbonation on the glass and a nice white head that dissipates quickly. Smells of grain but the "import smell" dominates. Tastes of plain grain like many macros, but with a fuller body. Beer goes down really smooth, high carbonation and that is ok, nice light body. Overall, a slightly above average beer, and Happy Australia Day from the USA.

Photo of flagmantho
3.6/5  rDev +16.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Poured from 375mL green bottle into a pint glass.

Appearance: golden hue with a crystal-clear body and a moderate effervescence. Head is a thick finger of frothy white foam with a decent retention and lace.

Smell: lightly malty with a big component of graininess, which I actually like here. There was a very slight whiff of skunk when the bottle was first opened, but this dissipated almost immediately. Not bad.

Taste: light, malty flavor with a bit less grain than the aroma. Bitterness is low but a nice noble hop character is present. Not too bad.

Mouthfeel: light body with a big carbonation which, while not creamy, is effervescent and refreshing.

Overall: this is a highly drinkable and very clean lager. I feel like I could quaff tons of this stuff.

Photo of soju6
2.83/5  rDev -8.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

A: Pours a light golden color with a small head that fades to a bit of lacing.

S: Mild aroma of grain and a trace of hops.

T: Mild taste of malt sweetness with a bit of grain. There is a slight bitterness and a clean finish.

F: Light body, slight crispness, smooth and a bit light on flavor.

O: Decent non-offensive euro lager. bland but seems to compliment most meals.

Photo of metter98
3.21/5  rDev +4.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

A: The beer is clear yellow in color and has a moderate amount of visible carbonation. It poured with a finger high white head that died down but consistently left a thin layer of bubbles covering the surface and lots of rings of bubbles down the sides of the glass.
S: There are light aromas of sweet bready and cracker malts in the nose along with some hints of floral hops.
T: The taste is very similar to the smell and has a bit of malty sweetness. Little if any bitterness is noticeable.
M: It feels light- to medium-bodied on the palate and has a moderate amount of carbonation.
O: This beer is quite drinkable. Although the taste is a bit bland, there’s nothing offensive about it and it isn’t watery.

Photo of MoreThanWine
3.4/5  rDev +10.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Poured an 1/8" white head and left minimal effervescence in the body, but the head did last a surprisingly long while. Clear straw yellow body verging on golden. Smells grassy. Taste is BMC and light and smooth but definitely creamier. Medium long finish. Really, it's a pretty decent lager.

Photo of dansmcd
2.12/5  rDev -31.2%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

A - Pours a clear and bright yellow with a trace of a fizzy head despite an aggressive pour. The head fades instantly to a faint ring.

S - Generic corn, sweet grain, grassy lager aroma.

T - Weak. Some grain and corn, a trace of acidic apple skin. No hops detected.

M - Thin, watery, highly carbonated.

O - Certainly not the worst or blandest macro out there, but I wouldnt pay for this stuff.

Photo of SmashPants
3.17/5  rDev +2.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Bottle: pretty standard macro lager label, with decent 375mL green bottle.

Appearance: pours a clear straw yellow with a fizzy white head that settles to a thin cap over the beer.

Aroma: bready grain and floral hops, reminiscent of hay and grass.

Taste: the flavour has some nuttiness and toasted malt although it is very faint. There is some light bread there as well.

Aftertaste: not bad, would be better if there was a bit more flavour.

Mouth feel: lighter body and medium carbonation makes for an easy-flowing beer - goes down easy and avoids the mistake of over-carbonating as some other Australian lagers do.

Overall: a reasonable macro lager, better quality than the XXXXs and VBs. It is a bit more expensive, but overall worth the extra $5 - $10.

Photo of beertunes
2.6/5  rDev -15.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Poured into Stella Artois goblet. Poured a clean, clear golden yellow, with just a thin ring of white head that had low retention and light lacing.

The aroma was a fairly typical grain and gentle hop scent and had just a very faint skunk aroma. The flavors were pretty much the same, a nice grain base, some easy hops and just a touch of sweetness.

The body was nice and crisp, but did have a bit of a sweet, lingering finish. Drinkability was good, the beer went down easily enough and I could see throwing a couple in the cooler for sitting by the bay. Overall, not a great beer, but it's probably worth a shot if you see it.

Photo of rangerred
2.61/5  rDev -15.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

375ml bottle into a pint glass.

Pours a clear straw yellow with a fizzy white head that settles to a thin cap over the beer.

Aroma is completely skunked thanks to the green bottle. Once that somewhat dissipates there is some bready grain and hay.

The flavor has some nuttiness and toasted malt although it is very faint. There is some light bread there as well. The whole beer has an overall soft mouthfeel and no one flavor is overwhelming. Honestly I would have liked everything to be a little more bold.

Overall an average to below average pale lager.

Photo of TMoney2591
2.61/5  rDev -15.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Served in a Gale Sayers shaker pint glass.

Tasmania's finest. Right on. It pours a clear pale straw topped by a finger-and-a-half of white foam. The nose comprises light wheat, very light grass, and I wanna say there's a hint of lemon rind, but that could just be wishful thinking on my part. The taste doesn't change all that much, though a touch of sweet flowers finds a way to work its way in there. It's all very light, very bland. The body is light, with a moderate carbonation and a fairly watery feel. Overall, a bland, sad little beer. I'd like to think Tasmania can do better than this...

Photo of sophisticated
2.58/5  rDev -16.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

James Boag's Premium Lager states to be "Tasmania's Finest Since 1881." It poured like clear apple juice, with lots of rapid carbonation, and a huge fluffy head. Very mild nose, just vague sweetness. The taste, again, was extremely mild. A little tart apple, a little bitter/metallic taste, and a little bit of grass. Light, smooth, pleasant enough, but not enough flavor or substance to make it stand out.

Photo of airforbes1
1.99/5  rDev -35.4%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

I was at Outback and feeling foolish enough to ask for an overpriced bottle of Coopers Ale. Tickers gotta tick and it's an not an adjunct lager, right? Well, I was soon informed they were out of Coopers Ale but that they also had "James Boag's, which is similar." I was even more foolish and took them up on their offer.

Then I saw the bottle and learned this beer was a "premium" (read: cheap) lager, which means it should have nothing in common with Coopers Ale other than the fact they are both from Australia.

It poured straw yellow with a fizzy head. Then came the smell: SKUNK. But isn't that to be expected for an imported pale lager in a bottle?

It was somewhat difficult to judge the taste as the skunky aroma dominated my senses. The taste was inoffensive and flavorless, but I couldn't escape the skunky sensation. The mouthfeel was OK...just your typical fizzy lager carbonation at work.

A pretty weak beer and not worth the "import" price. At least I got a tick out of it.

Photo of heygeebee
2.46/5  rDev -20.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Hmm, I am starting to get little weary of words to describe Aussie Macros, due to the consistent flavours they all take on.

Bought at a cafe, not a lot else to appeal that I had not tried in a while.

Pours OK, looks the part, golden straw, quickly fading head.

Then... aromasandtastereallyquitenondescriptnblandalrightonacolddaydrunkfromtheeskybutapartfromthatitsblandthebeeryouydrinkwhenyoudontwantabeer

Not too bad a fizz factor tho. Sweetness overall is a no-no. No crispness is also a no-no.

So why don't mainstream brewers put some flavour in the beer?

Photo of Mebuzzard
3.06/5  rDev -0.6%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

After a great start, this beer dwindles. Perhaps it wasn't cold enough when poured. But it looks great. A pale golden/straw pour with a sticky white, fluffy head. You could probably eat the foam with a spoon.

Aroma is musty. Some sweet corn, but less corny than sweet. Somewhat skunked and hints of spice. Not sure where that's coming from.

As a Euro-pale I didn't expect much in the way of complexity. However, this doesn't have that cleanliness, or crispness, that the head and carbonation alluded to in the appearance. Even more so, it's a bit flat in flavor and feel. A lingering aftertaste of musky malt doesn't help.

Photo of Knapp85
3.45/5  rDev +12%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

This beer poured out as a clear golden yellow color with a fizzy white head on top. The head fades and doesn't do much in way of lacing. The smell of the beer gives off the earthy lager aromas that are typical in this style. The taste of the beer had a decent grainy and lightly hopped flavor to it. The mouthfeel was light but still had some good carbonation and body. Overall it's a decent brew.

Photo of BYOFB
2.8/5  rDev -9.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Into lager glass.

Clear light straw color with a white head that fizzles quickly.

Saaz hops and light malt on the nose. The taste doesn't match the aroma and is disappointing...

Sharp carbonation yields a medium mouthfeel with a clean finish.

Better than a BMC, but not by all that much.

Photo of woodychandler
3.3/5  rDev +7.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

I may be speaking with an Aussie accent by the end of the day, but that is OK by me. I am visiting my aunt and uncle in DC who spent a year in Canberra and (may) understand my curiosity.

From the bottle: "Since 1881 J Boag & Son have been brewing quality beers on the banks of the Esk River, Launceton."; "Combining pure Tasmanian water and the finest ingredients, our master brewers are dedicated to producing Australia's best beers."; "Tasmania's Finest"; "Beer-Biere-Birra-Cerveza-Cerveja-Bier".

I got two fingers of dense, bone-white head with good retention from my pour. Color was a straw-yellow with NE-quality clarity. Nose had a strong Saaz-hops presence. Mouthfeel was medium and it tasted like a clean, unadulterated lager: slightly biscuit malty, slightly grassy/Noble hoppy, but NO adjuncts as far as I could tell. Nice lacing throughout.

I have nothing against lagers in general, but I am growing tired of the parade of AALs.

Finish was semi-dry and very satisfying after having had salad for lunch. Worth seeking out? Probably not, but it makes for a pleasant tick. I drank this just before its Best Before date of 08/12/11.

Photo of Reaper16
3.17/5  rDev +2.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

12oz. bottle served into a clear plastic cup.

Seriously, this beer is from Tasmania. Tasmania.

Poura a shade of yellow akin to my morning piss. The Tasmanian Devil might have expelled this as waste product. Negligible head -- it basically never formed -- and no lacing.

This basically smells like your average international lager. Aromas of rice, past-their-prime apples, and distant floral notes. There is nothing to speak of aside from those three things. Very basic, but not terrible (for the style).

The taste follows the nose. Appleskin all over the place, and a blase grainy taste. Stale applejuice on the midpalate, leading to a semi-dry finish. There's a curious bit of almond and mint on the finish. Wow, unexpected and appreciated; the finish is enough to elevate this to a 3.5.

A medium-full body for the style helps to cover up the less-than-desired amount of carbonation. Overall, this is an average pale lager. It's absolutely not a terrible pale lager. You shouldn't run out and find it or anything, but its surprisingly alright.

Photo of CHickman
2.8/5  rDev -9.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours clear yellow with a small white head that faded quickly and left a little lacing.

Smells of sweet malt, corn, light yeast and caramel; pretty sweet and basic overall malty nose and flavor.

Tastes of sweet malt, citrus hops, grass, hay, light yeast, grains and caramel. Very basic lager that is sweet and boring.

Nothing exciting going on here, with a creamy mouthfeel, a light crisp, body, high carbonation and high drinkability and what could be a session beer for basic beer drinkers, but this was so dull that I'd only drink it if there were no better options. Basically, it tastes like an Aussie Bud.

Photo of bigrzman
2.88/5  rDev -6.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours out of a 12oz bottle with clear freshness date into glass with no head, tawney color and some active carbonation.

Smells like a Heineken, slightly skunky and malty.

Tastes of light pale malts and grains with some sweetness and some funky thing posing to hops, probably extract.

Mouthfeel is airy and light bodied and thin. Nothing much to say.

Overall this is passable beer. I am not impressed but its not horrible either. Pass on this.

Photo of JohnnyBarman
3.21/5  rDev +4.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Single bottle poured into a small lager glass. Served with pizza at a little italian restaurant in Canberra. The waiter sold me on the fact that the brew was from Tasmania, and considering the only other options were Birra Moretti and VB, I went with it.

Golden, clear, thin but sturdy head, ringlets of lacing. Not a bad looking brew.

Nose was sweet, slightly fruity, a bit of earthy skunk, mild bittering hops.

Not a bad lager I suppose, certainly better than the other options available that night, but nothing exciting either. Starts with a sweet lager taste - some apple peel and grass -and ended with an earthy bitterness. A little too sweet, and slightly skunky, but not bad. Slightly creamy, thin watery body, zippy carbonation.

Certainly drinkable, better than a lot of Aussie lagers, but nothing exciting. A bit of tweaking and this could be much better.

Photo of bilyboy65
3.34/5  rDev +8.4%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

When I first opened the bottle and started to poor the golden deliciousness all I could smell were the hops. It was a good scent to behold.

However from there it went down hill.

Appearance good as it gave a nice head and lots of carbonation to feed it. However there was no retention in the head as it faded quickly. The only reason it did so well was because it really kept fighting to stay alive. For a lager it was quite cloudy too.

As I said the smell was wonderfully hoppy for a lager. With a little butter mixed in. Very nice.

Taste was nothing special. Didn't really have a crispness of a good lager. What really took away from it was how it seemed to stray into the ale category. Makes me wonder how it was brewed and if that was the intention.

Overall a nice drinkable beer that can be enjoyed. Medium body that has a smooth finish and after taste.

Photo of behindthelines
3.19/5  rDev +3.6%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Poured from a bottle into a pint glass.

Appearance - Thin white head with an amber body you can see through.

Smell - Aromas a bit fruity, a tad skunky, nothing out of the ordinary for a plain lager.

Taste - Smooth, a tad on the watery side - with a stinging taste that's uncommon for a lager.

Mouthfeel - Watery, flat, and leaves a stinging sensation once it's in the mouth for a couple seconds.

I feel like this must be a typical type of beer in Australia, but I have no idea. It's not a bad drink but it'd a bit watery and bodyless for a lager.

Photo of shand
3.35/5  rDev +8.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Poured from a 12 ounce bottle into a pint glass.

Pours a pale yellow color with two fingers of dense white head. The smell is about normal for the style, sweet malts and grains, perhaps a touch of skunky odor. The taste is light and wholly pleasant. No hint of the skunk from the nose hits the taste, it's just sweet malts, slightly floral hops, and a bit of a fizzy aftertaste. Nothing mindblowing, but perfectly drinkable. However, it is absolutely not worth the price premium it commands here in the states.

Mouthfeel is clean and crisp, and the drinkability is average for it's style and ABV. A decent lager, but nothing worth seeking out. I wouldn't turn down another.

James Boag's Premium Lager from J. Boag & Son Brewing
72 out of 100 based on 309 ratings.