1. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  2. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Lion Pale Double Bock - M욻anský Pivovar Havlíčkův Brod, A.S.

Not Rated.
Lion Pale Double BockLion Pale Double Bock

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
75
okay

55 Ratings
THE BROS
81
good

(view ratings)
Ratings: 55
Reviews: 38
rAvg: 3.18
pDev: 17.61%
Wants: 0
Gots: 1 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
M욻anský Pivovar Havlíčkův Brod, A.S. visit their website
Czech Republic

Style | ABV
Euro Pale Lager |  5.10% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: oberon on 06-03-2004)
View: Beers (8) |  Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Latest | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Lion Pale Double Bock Alström Bros
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 55 | Reviews: 38 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of alexgash
alexgash

Connecticut

1.1/5  rDev -65.4%
look: 3 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Standard golden yellow with a frothy white head.
Smells of honey, grass, wet basement, corn sugar, light euro-skunk hops, and cat pee. There’s a lot going on here and it’s mostly bad.
Taste doesn’t get any better. Starts with wet cardboard malt with a light nutrasweet twirl. Turns to musty basement cobwebs. Blechh. Minimal skunky hop burns through. Finish is skunky bitter with notes of stale cornflakes. Soapy, thin mouthfeel. Yuck. Drain pour.

Serving type: bottle

11-16-2004 01:05:06 | More by alexgash
Photo of JISurfer
JISurfer

South Carolina

2.03/5  rDev -36.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1

Yeah, this was pretty nasty. I couldn't finish the bottle, honestly. It was quite skunky and had a very grainy taste, mixed with a sweet alcohol. Kind of like a really bad malt liquor. It was a little bit too harsh on my buds, as it left a bad aftertaste. Maybe I got a bad bottle or something. One positive thing, was that it had a nice head to it in it's initial stages, which did last a little bit.

Serving type: bottle

04-03-2005 04:01:23 | More by JISurfer
Photo of Crundy
Crundy

Ohio

2.3/5  rDev -27.7%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

A: clear orange amber color, white head, no lacing

S: corn, wheat, floral hop, slight toffee note, musky malt smell

T: dank flavor, corn, bland caramel malt flavor, earthy hop flavor

M: its dry and decently carbonated, light bodied, leaves a dank bitter aftertaste

O: This beer doesn't have much going on. It's not terrible but I probably wouldn't buy it again. The flavors didn't work well together and the musky dank flavor is off putting to me.

Serving type: bottle

03-19-2012 17:59:32 | More by Crundy
Photo of masikon
masikon

Washington

2.35/5  rDev -26.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured into a pilsner glass this was the expected straw yellow with a fluffy head which didn't last long and very active carbonation rushing to the surface. Nose was not really very good sort of musty and leatherish but it was actually a somewhat offensive odor to me. Tasted better than it smelled but not by a whole lot, biscuity in the beginning but quickly dominated by hops which pucker the lips and act as more of a spicy feeling in the mouth rather than an actual taste. Overall I wouldn't buy this again, For some reason the label said this was a "pale double bock" which it certainly is not. Basically an average or slightly sub-par pilsner. This one is bound for the drain.

Serving type: bottle

12-18-2005 23:17:19 | More by masikon
Photo of Zorro
Zorro

California

2.4/5  rDev -24.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Pours a clear golden brew.

Smell is toasted grains and that is all.

Taste is a bit sweet and metal and some grains and... This just isn't too good.

Mouthfeel is Bud.

Not real drinkable, Zorro SPITS!
This stuff sucks! What more can I say except... Budweiser is better!

Serving type: bottle

05-03-2004 00:11:43 | More by Zorro
Photo of brentk56
brentk56

North Carolina

2.58/5  rDev -18.9%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

I had a bad bottle on my first review so I am re-reviewing this beer:

Appearance: Well, this is a good looking beer, I'll give it that. A nice clear golden body with a frothy white head that lasts forever; plenty of lacing, too. The color is too light for a doppelbock or even a Maibock, for that matter.

Smell: The brew smells of malt, although the aroma is somewhat weak; also a bit grainy

Taste: Very much underflavored for a bock of any kind; mostly sweet malt but rather innocuous

Mouthfeel: Relatively thin, with good carbonation; a bit too carbonated for the style

Drinkability; "Pale double bock???" This beer won a silver in the Bohemian Pilsner category a couple of years ago. So what is it, exactly?

Serving type: bottle

04-10-2005 21:44:10 | More by brentk56
Photo of Vancer
Vancer

Illinois

2.58/5  rDev -18.9%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Boy, “pale dopple bock” – what a disappointment. No date on bottle, maybe it was older than the sands of Egypt. Pour was orange/yellow, no head at all. Just some slight malts in the aroma. Taste was pretty plain, maybe even a little Euro skunk in there – this reminded me of drinkin’ a Heineken – which ain’t a good thing! I’d pass on this one.

Bottle was full of floaties – looks like it has a yeast infection.

Serving type: bottle

08-08-2005 14:29:07 | More by Vancer
Photo of pokesbeerdude
pokesbeerdude

Colorado

2.7/5  rDev -15.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Picked up a single from the State Liquor Store in Vernal, UT for about 1.50. Bottle claims to be a pale double bock?

A: Nice golden straw color, a little deeper than other pilseners. Stark white head about an inch thick reduces to about half of that. Excellent clarity, lots of carbonation as well. Big sticky clumps of lacing on the sides as well.

S: Not a whole lot going on, somewhat medicinal smell, can't really place that one, hops are subtle, but peppery and lemony in the scent.

T: Not at all what I expected. Very minerally and metallic up front. Malt characteristics are somewhat sweeter than other pilseners, but not to the level of a bock. Definite spiciness from the hops comes through in the end. Metallic taste is simply too offsetting.

M: Thin, crisp and nicely carbonated. Feels almost a little higher in ABV than 5.1. Slight burn when going down. Finish is rather wet and begs another sip.

D: Not the best beer I've ever had, but I could drink quite a few of these, and I'd reach for it over a macro, but really nothing that special.

Serving type: bottle

12-20-2008 00:33:50 | More by pokesbeerdude
Photo of hotstuff
hotstuff

Indiana

2.75/5  rDev -13.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

When this beer was poured, it had a small white head with fine sized bubbles. The body of this beer was carbonated and the hue was pale yellow. The nose was malty and fruity and the flavor was bitter. In my opinion, there is nothing to write home about with this particular beer.

Serving type: bottle

07-22-2003 21:23:59 | More by hotstuff
Photo of pkalix
pkalix

California

2.75/5  rDev -13.5%

07-10-2014 00:27:37 | More by pkalix
Photo of djrn2
djrn2

New Jersey

2.75/5  rDev -13.5%

11-22-2012 21:53:23 | More by djrn2
Photo of bditty187
bditty187

Nebraska

2.78/5  rDev -12.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

IMO, “Pale Double Bock” means Maibock; clearly this is not a Doppelbock or a Maibock. Hell, it is not even a bock! The neck label says it won an award as a “Bohemian Style Pilsner.” WTF, it is all so confusing.


Golden-coppery in hue, which is quite attractive; slightly off-white head, at the apex the foam was two fingers tall. Head retention was decent, the bubbles slowly faded to a soapy cap. There was no subsequent lacing. Overall, this is adequate looking beer.

The nose is earthy with lots of grass and hay. It seems spicy at the back. Airy… empty… fairly boring, I get hints of grain. So a “double bock” beer fails to generate pleasant malty aromas? How pathetic. The more I smell this beer the hotter the nose gets, slightly caramely but not in a malty good way. I don’t know what is going on. The nose is not offensive but it is peculiar and not inviting.

The palate is grainy with nail polish remover infused with some caramel notes. I also detect cloying sweetness with an overabundance of grass/hay. As a Pilsner this beer is dismal. Okay, in reality this beer is just so damn odd. I don’t like it, regardless of style. It is just so sweet/hot and grassy and I don’t care for the overall direction. I mean, lack of direction. Messy. I don’t get any joy drinking this, as such, what is the point.

Medium/medium-light in body, the carbonation is way too low for the style, the mouthfeel is sluggish. Yuck.

Not likable. Not drinkable. Not again. What a jumble of flavors. I can’t finish my bottle. Thank you Daniel for the bottle, even though it sucks! Skip it, folks.

Serving type: bottle

05-19-2006 19:22:46 | More by bditty187
Photo of beerguy101
beerguy101

California

2.8/5  rDev -11.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pale gold color with a large white foamy head. Aroma is grainy, fruity and sweet. Light hops. Light malts. A fairly standard lager. Slightly malty, some hoppyness. Mild taste. Mouthfeel is crisp. Finish is clean and crisp. Aftertaste is slightly bitter

Serving type: bottle

08-30-2003 03:07:06 | More by beerguy101
Photo of grdahl
grdahl

Florida

2.85/5  rDev -10.4%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Not all Czech beers (at least imports) are great...This was a bit of a let down for me. It actually tasted a bit skunky to me..I've never seen this beer in the Czech Republic...maybe this is why...Not a bad beer but certainly not up to Czech standards

Serving type: bottle

08-22-2001 12:22:46 | More by grdahl
Photo of msubulldog25
msubulldog25

Oregon

2.85/5  rDev -10.4%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Picked up this 1 pint, 9 fl. oz. bottle on a whim, the last one on the shelf at Beaumont Market. Poured to a pint glass.

A: Clear rich golden-orange pour, with just about 2-fingers of frothy white head. Ample carbonation bubbles float to the top.

S: Smells of adjuncts, lots of overly sweetened malts. Grain and corn with a faint tinniness.

T:Malty-sweetness of corn and wheat and slightly spicy. Mostly grain flavor with enough bittering/herbal hops to round off the finish.

M: Thinner than anticipated mouthfeel, but with a zesty clinging spiciness that gives some tingling residual effects. Weirdly sticky, but generally smooth.

D: OK, but not one I'd get again. I was suckered in by the term "Pale Double Bock" on the label, which sounded plenty interesting. What I discovered, however, was a sweet, grainy hodgepodge of flavors that failed to live up to my expectations. Maybe worthy of a try but nothing more.

Serving type: bottle

01-21-2007 01:15:59 | More by msubulldog25
Photo of JohnnyDuvel
JohnnyDuvel

Florida

2.98/5  rDev -6.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Odd beer. What exactly makes this a double-bock? Tastes like a cross between Pilsner Urquell and DAB, with a little American lager mixed in. Not bad at all, but I've had many better pilsners and lagers. Little head, disappeared quickly. Not the usual array of bubbles you see with a lighter beer. Not much malt, but a little sweet. No standout in any way.

Serving type: bottle

04-27-2003 20:24:31 | More by JohnnyDuvel
Photo of johnbonham1980
johnbonham1980

Idaho

3/5  rDev -5.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Nice crisp beer but not something I'd spend a lot of time seeking out.

Poured into tall pilsner glass, 4 finger craggy white head which takes a good bit to dissipate and leaves some nice lacing all the way down the glass. Medium level of carbonation, sparkly. Drinkability is high, body and mouthfeel a bit lighter than I'd like.

Tastes and smells like fresh apples and pears. Decent enough hop bitterness, malt presence really needs to be upped on this beer. If you ask me, this beer would be an easy 3.5+ if it had some decent malty backbone to balance out the yeast and hops. Also has a hard to identify spicy aroma, maybe some clove... on initial pour I found some very interesting stuff in the nose but I can't identify exactly what it is. Almost struck me as a sweaty aroma, but not in a particularly unpleasant way. Curious.

Finishes with a lingering sweet, fruity aftertaste.

Probably be much better on tap.

Serving type: bottle

11-06-2006 01:51:51 | More by johnbonham1980
Photo of dgallina
dgallina

Georgia

3/5  rDev -5.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours a pale yellow-gold with smallish white head, strong carbonation, and decent lace. Smells very grainy. Sweet and metallic with a touch of hop bitterness. Simplistic, if clean and pleasant, flavor profile. Sweet graininess dominates and is finished with a drying hop bitterness. Medium-weight for a pilsener. Perhaps a bit too carbonated and gassy for my taste.

Refreshing and easy-to-drink if you're in the mood for an uncomplicated beer. Not much character to remember it by, however.

Double-bock labeling is double-marketing-bull. This is more of a Bohemian-style pilsener in my opinion.

Serving type: bottle

12-21-2004 22:14:13 | More by dgallina
Photo of jessicapreuss
jessicapreuss

Brazil

3/5  rDev -5.7%

03-28-2013 22:42:48 | More by jessicapreuss
Photo of mpalestino
mpalestino

Pennsylvania

3/5  rDev -5.7%

11-24-2013 23:04:32 | More by mpalestino
Photo of Ceballonegro
Ceballonegro

Ohio

3/5  rDev -5.7%

08-22-2012 20:37:40 | More by Ceballonegro
Photo of EMal
EMal

Illinois

3/5  rDev -5.7%

03-29-2013 03:18:59 | More by EMal
Photo of doctorb
doctorb

Maryland

3/5  rDev -5.7%

09-10-2013 22:25:41 | More by doctorb
Photo of aracauna
aracauna

Georgia

3.1/5  rDev -2.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

I was a bit surprised at the paleness of this doppelbock. I know that the style can be fairly pale, but this is the first one that I've had that wasn't to lagers what stouts are to ales. A nice maltiness keeps this from being a total dissapointment, but I was expecting more after seeing the name.

Serving type: bottle

05-16-2003 00:05:38 | More by aracauna
Photo of jwc215
jwc215

Wisconsin

3.15/5  rDev -0.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours orangeish golden with a thin, but creamy and lasting, off-white head.

The smell is grainy, herbal, a bit of apple and sulfur.

The taste is herbal/Continental-type hops (Saaz?) with a yeasty breadiness and something chemicalish/sulfur-like. An apple-like fruitiness seems out of place, and brings this one down. Sweetness restrained by a bitterness.

Why does it claim to be a Pale Double Bock? (A bit stronger than there pils Rebel?) A mediocre-ish pilsner that has too many little flaws/detractors if you ask me. Becomes a bit aspirin-like as it progresses, and the apple-thing didn't do anything for it. Overall- it's okay, I suppose, as there's enough to it to keep it from the "bad" side (helped by very good appearance and nice enough aroma - everything else meiocre), but wouldn't seek to have again.

Serving type: bottle

07-20-2008 13:58:50 | More by jwc215
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Lion Pale Double Bock from M욻anský Pivovar Havlíčkův Brod, A.S.
75 out of 100 based on 55 ratings.