Boag's Draught - J. Boag & Son Brewing

Not Rated.
Boag's DraughtBoag's Draught

Educational use only; do not reuse.

37 Ratings
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 37
Reviews: 21
rAvg: 2.7
pDev: 24.44%
Wants: 0
Gots: 2 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
J. Boag & Son Brewing visit their website

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  4.60% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: brewdlyhooked13 on 10-30-2004

No notes at this time.
View: Beers (13) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
Ratings: 37 | Reviews: 21
Reviews by doktorhops:
Photo of doktorhops
2.38/5  rDev -11.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Today we journey to a far distant island where trees grow like titans on the banks of cool mountain streams, where unspoiled nature combines with urban sprawl and people marry their cousins (apparently): Tasmania! In Tasvegas (which is what I will call this place from now on) there are two main breweries; Cascade and Boag's. One is better than the other but I won't tell you which, you'll just have to read and cross-reference my reviews and find out for yourself.

Poured from a 375ml stubbie into a 500ml Stein glass.

A: Clear amber body with a 0.5cm white head. Interesting fact: in Tasvegas all the water is amber coloured so there is no need for brewers to colour their beers.

S: Sweet malts define this beer, with a hint of grassy hops.

T: Yeah I'm not a big fan of Aussie lagers as you may have guessed and this one isn't much of a departure from the others; the sweet malt grain is the main actor in this theatre of brews, with supporting actors hint of honey and slight bitter hop twang. If anything this beer tastes more like a European lager than the other macro Aussie lagers (which is a good thing).

M: Big and belchy carbonation, as typical for an Aussie lager; it's as if we love feeling bloated when we drink down here.

D: It's OK. Not winning any awards for "spectacular Aussie lager" but certainly not getting a gong... I would place it mid-field if anything and we'll see how well my stubbie of Cooper's goes as that's next on the menu. Better than VB and XXXX for sure.

Food match: For an Aussie lager I recommend BBQ fare; sausages, hamburgers, steak or for something really Australian: Kangaroo steak, with a side of the usual BBQ suspects (potato salad, coleslaw, beetroot and corn).

More User Reviews:
Photo of Andrewziggy
2.93/5  rDev +8.5%
look: 2.75 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

light, enough bubbles to please, sour apple and soggy cereal linger

Photo of Kulrak
2.26/5  rDev -16.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Pours a darkish gold color with crumbly white head that takes a while to fade away and laces the glass. Smells mostly of yeast, and a little of aluminum (yeah yeah, from the can.. but I call 'em as I smell 'em). There's also a very faint hint of flowers. The taste is very coppery but without a lot of hop flavor. There's a bit of sour bitterness though. Mouthfeel is very heavy, and not very fizzy or harsh. Just real heavy. Overall, it's not my favorite aussie macro, but it's nowhere near my least favorite, either.

Photo of norwichboy
2.13/5  rDev -21.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

I compared Boags Draught with Cascade Draught during a moment of poor beer options on holiday in Tasmania.

On appearance alone, the two look absolutely identical, light yellow hue with a slight head. I can hardly smell anything with the Boags, a little more (hops) with the Cascade but still minimal. As others have said there is the usual Aussie macro beer taste with both of them, although Boags has a heavily carbonated mouthfeel which Cascade seems to manage better. There's very little in the way of the finish with Boags, but a bit more with Cascade. Overall, Cascade clinches it with a better mouthfeel and finish.

Photo of foles
3.13/5  rDev +15.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Not as bad as you would think. For its class - boring draught aussie macro, its better than the rest. A slight flavour and freshness comes through where it wouldnt with the others.

I'm convinced the pride of ringwood hops are very poor for flavouring.

Photo of joecast
2.17/5  rDev -19.6%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

pours a crystal clear deep gold color. forms a smallish white head of large sized bubbles. after a minute or so, the head disappears leaving a sticky looking lace on the glass. and not that good type lace either. the kind that makes you wonder what formed it in the first place.

very slight buttery aroma. not enough to be ofensive but its all i could pick up.

taste is, well...there is some bitterness that comes through, but not much malt sweetness to go with it. maybe a bit of diacetyl, but not heaps or anything. pretty bland outside of that.

mouthfeel aint so bad. kind of tingly going down, and leaves a trace of butteriness. drinkability is pretty obvious after all that.

Photo of WHROO
2.56/5  rDev -5.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Poured from a stubbie...

This followed a Tasman Bitter & then Boag's St George, & this was definately the least interesting. Appearance was the best, golden froffy, good lacing, gentle carbonation. Aroma was average, little sulphury, little citrus & maybe apple. Taste was soooo average, just so bland...would've even gone a bitter kick to give it something. Got only a honey hint to give it some sweetness.
Nothing to make me go yuck, but nothing to make me go yum either!!!

Photo of soju6
3.33/5  rDev +23.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A: Served a golden color with a full head and nice lacing.

S: Clean aroma of fresh grain and a bit of fruit sweetness. Nothing fancy.

T: Taste has a mild sweetness up front with fresh grain and bit of bitterness and a clean finish.

F: Fairly light body. Nice crispness, smooth and quite refreshing.

O: Goes down easy, not bad at all. A nice casual beer that seems good for session drinking as it does not fill you up.

Photo of vancurly
2.96/5  rDev +9.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Tastes at new Belrose Hotel in Sydney.
This is a typical Aussie macro; it sits somewhere between the ordinariness of VB and the next tier e.g. Boags Premium, Cascade Premium etc.
Certainly a session lager, with subtle sweet malt notes and medium bitterness.
Will stick to Coopers Pale next time in that pub.

Photo of BeerNutta
2.4/5  rDev -11.1%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Inoffensive beer. Standard canon fodder. Beer you drink when ya mates are over and you dont want to fork out a fortune. Pours light amber with minor head. Taste is your standard cannon fodder taste, of chemicals followed by a hop bitter finish. Not bad. Just not great.

Cheap beer. Can't knock it too much. If I had a choice between VB, Boag's Draft, and Carlton Cold. Ill get the Draft.

Photo of wordemupg
2.39/5  rDev -11.5%
look: 4.25 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.25

Pint at some random bar, 19/3/14 from notes

A clear golden liquid with plenty of bubbles, a finger of foam falls in no time but manages to leaves 4 thick distinct rings and lots of random patches deep down the glass

S cabbage, sweet and sour malt, some honey, and stinky feet, smells like a wet shoe

T less cabbage and wet shoe but adjuncts and rotting hay are somehow an improvement

M feels the part, light, enough bubbles to please, sour apple and soggy cereal linger

O not sure what I was expecting but I got what I deserved ordering cheap pints at a pokie bar

I liked this beer when I lived in Australia 8 years ago, I think my palate and taste for beer might've changed since then

Photo of rowey77
3.86/5  rDev +43%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Tried this beer at the boags brewery in tasmania on tap and thought it was alot better than drinking carlton draught or
victoria bitter..

Was smooth and resfreshing and could definately drink alot of them with feeling bloated..

Overall: Good Draught (Recommend)

Photo of lacqueredmouse
1.84/5  rDev -31.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Pours a clear but bright golden yellow colour, with an initial firm and frothy head of white. Lacing is good, leaving some honeycombing and worm-trail patterns down the glass. Carbonation is vigorous but restrained. Overall, it's a pretty decent looking lager, truth be told.

Minimal character on the nose, just a thin light grain note, and perhaps something slightly acidic - not much different from carbonated water. Very weak indeed.

Taste is cloying with a vague honey sweetness on the front that degrades to a musty grain flavour on the finish, like bread that has been soaking in a puddle. Thin for all of this, with little depth or resonance; neither does it have a crispness or a level of refreshment that would in general aid a pale lager.

Very unimpressive. I try to review beers without any presentiment, but I know I really shouldn't be shocked that this is terrible. And yet every time I take a sip of a bland Aussie macro lager, I'm always surprised at just how bad they can be.

Photo of xylophonica
3.45/5  rDev +27.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A - Pale golden colour with a good finger of head. Some decent lacing appearing as the head subsides.

S - Rich honey malt with a touch of wheat.

T - Quite vibrant at first but with a lower than expected level of carbonation so the taste doesn't quite hit as hard. Smooth and malty with a touch of spice and some honey.

M - Very smooth but with little carbonation and a slightly more harsh aftertaste.

O - Having had the previously from a bottle the lack of carbonation is quite notable. Overall though it's a decent beer to throw back on a summer's day without being overly complex.

Photo of diablo14
3/5  rDev +11.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

i really didnt think this beer would be any good, but once i got into it i found it wasnt all that bad. first mouthful all i could taste was chemicals, but then it actually ended up being a fairly flavorsome and quite drinkable brew.

seemed a little light in color, golden heading toward yellow, with the usual white foamy head all boags beers seem to have. smelled sweetish, a little adjunctly, with some sneaky malts and lemon zest in there, tho after awhile the adjuncts did fade into the background. taste was pretty much the same, a little like strongarm bitter but not quite as robust. the hop bitterness actually ended rather well, and a good level of carbonation rounded out the whole thing in an acceptable manner. i was just happy that after the first inspection that it didnt continue to smell/taste like camels piss like most beers of this type tend to do.

ill stick with strongarm over this anyday, but if i was stranded in a pub with tooheys/CUB and this, id drink this without reservation. yet another handy, alround solid drinker from boags.

Photo of jarmby1711
2.85/5  rDev +5.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

A: Poured a deep golden colour with a reddish hue.Had a tight persistent head and a persistent lace.
S: Pleasant low level malt
T: Disappontingly even throughout with a hint of malt and a very mild bitter finish
M: Dull
D: I thought it had a good flavour for an adjunct beer, it might just becomew my cheap session ber.

Photo of Finite
2.86/5  rDev +5.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Appearance: Pale golden in colour, Thick head with remarkable head retention, Fine carbonisation. Thick lacing on the glass.

Smell: Oily hop aroma and mild ale-like malt. Not much else

Taste/ Mouthfeel: The taste is where it does downhill. Very tinny and thin. After that leaves there is some nice ale like caramel malts. Some mild bitterness but not distant. Aftertaste lasts a little but has a good balance of hops and malt. The mouthfeel is bitey and slightly corse.

Drinkability/Overall: Its refreshing and easy enough to throw down. I went down a treat in Cradle Mountain in Tassie but I can help but think it wouldn’t hold up against even a half decent craft brew.

Photo of Andrewharemza
3.69/5  rDev +36.7%
look: 3.75 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.75 | feel: 3.75 | overall: 3.75

Get a sweet malt grain and a hint of honey not to bad

Photo of wl0307
2.89/5  rDev +7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Coming in a 375ml bottle; BB 12/11/13, served mildly chilled in a straight pilsner glass.

Appearance: pours a dark straw to light golden colour, coming with lively carbonation and a well-lasting creamy white beer head.
Smell: mineral & old-limey aroma comes first, on top of rather mild grainy maltiness with a touch of doughy acidity and the sour side of honey on the side; given a good swirl, the more lively grainy notes come to the fore, as of corns but not exactly that. I suspect the recipe purports to replicate a German Helles Lager.
Taste: quite unnaturally sweet comes the foretaste; in fact, it’s full of grainy, corn-ish, lightly syrupy sweetness as well as soaked white bread; the maltiness carries on through to the finish, giving very little space for hops or other elements to manifest. Faintly chewy in the finish, along with random aroma of starchy malts and honey.
Mouthfeel & Overall: lightly-carbonated, thin-bodied, the palate goes lightly slicky and yet turns watery at the end of each sip. Not a balanced or distinctive lager this is, I’m afraid, and the sweet side of flavour kind of turns me off.

Photo of LittleCreature
3.5/5  rDev +29.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Appearance - 3.5
Poured a finger of bubbly white head over a body that is very clear, orange/gold and looks to be highly carbonated. Bottle reads 4.7% ABV.

Smell - 3.5
A whole lot more interesting than most macro lagers. Smells clean with some toffee and a little fruit (apple?) along with the malt sweetness and mild flowery hops.

Taste - 3.5
A whole lot tastier than most macro lagers also! It is sweet and malty upfront, tastes of grains, toffee and a little fruit, and finishes with a moderate hop bitterness. There is also a metallic flavour which detracts from the taste.

Mouthfeel - 3.5
Carbonation and weight in the mouth are both moderate. Goes down even smoother when it's not fridge cold.

Drinkability - 3.5
This is not quite as drinkable as some macros, simply because there is so much more to it - it has a lot more flavour, too much flavour for some. For those who like a bit more flavour in their beer, and aren't adverse to the style, this makes a great session choice.

The first time I ever had a Boag's draught I could barely finish it, and I thought it was the worst tasting beer I had ever tried (admittedly this was out of a bottle, not cold enough and while in the passenger seat of a car). Now I am truly shocked by how competent this beer really is. I see it as being the best macro lager in Australia! It's the cheapest beer made by Boag's, and I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out to be better than their Premium (I already know it's better than the St George). Not a great beer, but well above average for its style in my opinion.

Photo of Otterburn
3.35/5  rDev +24.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

This beer is alright on tap. I have got a few at he local pub in Walcha where I scratch a ticket and win a hat. Next day at work
I wasnt ashamed to wear it, cause the brwe is good, nothing special. just a beer you can enjoy bloody cold and its alright after work. theres is a nice white head, good body and taste.
Thats alrigth for me.

Boag's Draught from J. Boag & Son Brewing
68 out of 100 based on 37 ratings.