Redhook Slim Chance Light Ale - Redhook Ale Brewery

Not Rated.
Redhook Slim Chance Light AleRedhook Slim Chance Light Ale

Educational use only; do not reuse.

59 Reviews
no score

(Send Samples)
Reviews: 59
Hads: 76
Avg: 3.08
pDev: 13.31%
Wants: 0
Gots: 2 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Redhook Ale Brewery visit their website
New Hampshire, United States

Style | ABV
American Blonde Ale |  3.90% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: SirChugsAlot on 02-18-2009

This beer is retired; no longer brewed.

Slim Chance ale combines the best attributes of a crisp, refreshing ale without the extra calories. Golden kilned malt and a touch of wheat create this smooth, satisfying ale that is not your typical light beer.
View: Beers (46) | Events
Beer: Reviews & Ratings
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
firstprev| 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Reviews: 59 | Hads: 76
Photo of BuckeyeNation
3.25/5  rDev +5.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

"How come 'fat chance' and 'slim chance' mean the same thing?"


Bold gold with lemon peel highlights. The beer has a surprisingly rich hue for only having 125 calories, probably from the use of black malt (no kidding). Two fingers of dingy ivory colored foam sit atop the beer. The head looks just good enough to keep the score from slipping to average.

The nose is either American blonde ale or American all-malt lager (which are pretty close to being the same thing when you come right down to it). Only thing is, this beer is an ale. It features slightly toasted grains and almost no hops. Fruity ale yeast esters are virtually absent.

Slim Chance is far from the worst 'light ale' that I've had. Actually, there haven't been too many, since most low-calorie offerings are lagers. Note to brewers: light ales are a better choice because they're more flavorful... assuming your intended audience doesn't shy away from flavor and that dreaded 'aftertaste'.

This is decent beer, possibly because Redhook went to the trouble of designing a pretty extensive ingredients list. Malts include pale, wheat, Carapils, Munich, Vienne and black. Hops are Alchemy, Saaz and Willamette. Slightly sweet cereal grains are lightly accented by herbal-grassy hops. The finish is clean and semi-crisp. Not bad at all.

All things considered (including relatively few carbohydrates), the mouthfeel more than holds its own. It's light, without being watery, and is properly bubbled. No annoying fizziness helps.

Before popping the cap, I thought there was a slim chance that I would like Slim Chance. Actually, 'like' might be a stretch, but this is a better than expected light ale that I would have no trouble drinking during a warm weather picnic.

 1,745 characters

Photo of Giveit2medark
3.28/5  rDev +6.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

If i wanted a beer that tasted like this i would have bought a thirty pack of something and saved my money.
I thought this beer was slightly under carbonated.
It is not a bad beer to try to convert the light beer drinkers, but you can't do it at $8 per six-pack.

 263 characters

Photo of soupyman10
2.87/5  rDev -6.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Never heard of a "light ale" before, and for good reason. It wasn't any good. Combining a mediocre/bland style with a mediocre/bland brewery is a recipe for a boring, forgetable beer. And this is it. Everything about this beer is mild and uninteresting - a touch of malt, a hint of fruitiness, and a lot of water. No reason to drink this whatsoever.

 349 characters

Photo of billybob
2.99/5  rDev -2.9%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

pours a golden color almost no head and no lace. aroma has a slight spice note. taste is dry, mostly malt, with a grainy feel to it. mouthfeel light with a crisp carbonation. average at best not a beer i would look for when shopping for beer. ok very cold on a on a hot summer day.

 281 characters

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

Had this one over at the BeerHive in SLC.

Pours a golden orange color, nice carbonation, nice little fizzy off-white head, with some sticky lacing left behind. The nose is malty, with some slight yeasty/grassy notes. The taste is slightly sweet, malty, grassy. Light body. Drinkable, but not by much, would not buy again.

 322 characters

Photo of cjgator3
2.24/5  rDev -27.3%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

12oz bottle

A- Pours a golden yellow color with a thin white fizzy head that turns into a ring of lace.

S- The aroma is faint with grain and a touch of hay. Not much in terms of hops in the aroma.

T- The taste is grainy malt with just a touch of hops in the finish. Like the aroma, not much going on in the taste department.

M- The mouthfeel is light bodied with a good amount of carbonation.

D- Not a horrible lawnmowing beer, but nothing really special with this one that would warrant a repeat purchase in the future.

 525 characters

Photo of u2carew
3/5  rDev -2.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A) Pours with a foamy head then settles quickly. Leaves no lacing on the glass. Bronze in color. Visible carbonation.
S) Malty. Some wheat notes. Just a bit of banana tries to get through. Light citrus notes as well.
T) Malty nose. Nutty finish. Not much in between.
M) Fizzy. Light bodied.
D) Meh, not that great. Not that bad. Refreshing enough for a hot summer day.

 368 characters

Photo of mikesgroove
3.03/5  rDev -1.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Why oh why do I do this to myself. Curiosity more then likely. Eventually someone has to make a decent light one right? Served cold as I figured that would be best and poured into a pint glass, this one was consumed on 06/25/2009.
The pour was decent, nothing mind blowing here at all. Light golden straw in color with a nearly crystal clear look to it. Big fizzy white head on top that hung out for a little bit before falling back into nothing and leaving the top essentially bare. Lots of carbonation visible. Not much in the way of aroma, light bready malts, a touch of grain, perhaps the lightest of hop notes, but nothing crazy here. The crisp, clean flavor was not alarming or stand off in any way, it just lacked the complexity and depth of anything that I would have really wanted. Light grain and grassy notes with no aftertaste at all. Very light body and highly carbonated.
Overall not bad, but nothing to write home about. I would not mind having it as a water substitute, but would not go out and buy one again.

 1,035 characters

Photo of beerthulhu
2.33/5  rDev -24.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

A: Poured a clear brass-orange with a weakly formed and weakly retaining fizzy dull white head. Tightly bound micro bubble streams rose at a moderate pace while no visible lacing was observed. To say the appearance was average would be giving this to much credit.

S: The aroma was faint with pale oranges. The chances that you'll detect much else here...slim.

T: The flavor opens up with some stale cold oranges wit a light floral hopping. Brisk, slightly acidic, and tart with some mushy melon notes and other over ripened fruit comes to the surface. Theres not much flavor here, rather mundane and leaves rather quickly off the tongue with a light orange bitterness grind left on the tongue. Overall didn't find the flavor bad, but certainly didn't find anything memorable about it and was unimpressive to say the least.

M: perhaps one of its only bright points, but sadly still only comes off average. A medium fullness, with an oily slick texture was felt with a soft carbonation. The mouthful was much like the flavor mundane and hardly gave you any incentive to hold and savor it.

D: unimpressive, not bad, but a boring drink overall that certainly not leave any impression or reason to try again. Your not missing much here.

 1,238 characters

Photo of Misfit138
2.97/5  rDev -3.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured into my Sweetwater Blue pint glass

A- Straw color with an inch head

S- Grassy caramel malt with some hop

T- Grainy malts with some mild caramel followed by subtle citrus hop bitterness

M- Rather light and heavily carbonated

D- An OK beer, probably a tad overpriced. The beer is a step up over the mass produced lager beers that flood the market, but you can do better for the money. It is a beer style that goes well with the warm summer weather. As far as a "light" beer goes it is very good.

 505 characters

Photo of WesWes
2.65/5  rDev -14%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

The beer pours a gold color with a thin, fizzy white head that fades to spotty lacing. The aroma is average. It has a pilsner and Munich malt scent along with a dry yeast aroma. There is little evidence of hops here. The taste isn't all that great. It has a bone dry pilsner malt taste with some Munich malt sweetness. Again, the hops are non existant. The mouthfeel is terrible. It is a low/medium bodied beer with prickly carbonation. This is a terrible low-calorie brew. If it were light and refreshing I could see the lack of character, but this is medium bodied and sweet in the finish. I'm not a fan of this beer at all.

 626 characters

Photo of ChainGangGuy
3.01/5  rDev -2.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

16 ounce pint - $4.50 at Taco Mac in Kennesaw, Georgia.

Appearance: Quite clear, deep yellow body with a smallish, fine, but sustaining, white head.

Smell: Mildly sweetish, meager malts with a lightly earthy, vaguely floral hop scent. It's not exactly a stand out aroma.

Taste: Light pale maltiness with an infinitesimally small amount of wheat grain. Subtly sweet overall. Earthy, lightly floral hop character with just enough hop bitterness to balance. Ill-defined maltiness in the later half with an encroaching wateriness. Finishes dry, clean, but a little on the weak side.

Mouthfeel: Light-bodied. Medium carbonation.

Drinkability: A light ale, indeed! Thankfully, no off flavors, and, it has kindly low ABV%, so there's that. But, being so light, it's hard not to the shout 1...2...3... CHUG!! Although, I'm left wondering who in the Production Development Dept. tasted their Blonde Ale and said "not light enough!!"

 928 characters

Photo of BretSikkink
2.98/5  rDev -3.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Obviously golden and insipid in color, with a bone white head of about one inch of thin bubbles. Lacing is actually quite good and long-lasting. Kudos there.

The nose and flavor are just really bland. Light grains, not quite pils malt, just...light. Quite grassy, even a little herbal, along with a slight fruitiness. The finish is a little sticky, with a distinct diacetyl edge in the aftertaste.

Drinkability is a big question mark for me. On the one hand, for a light "Blonde" ale, it's really pretty innocuous. But to be fair, I really have no desire for another.

 571 characters

Photo of dewalt
3.1/5  rDev +0.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

I'll offer this qualified praise: Slim Chance is pretty good, for a light beer.

Pours gold and clear, with a thin head and lots of quickly-dissipating small bubbles. It has a faint aroma of grain, lemon, and grass --there's not much scent to it, but at least it doesn't stink like a lot of lights. It tastes clean, very crisp, with slight fruit flavors, a bit of sweet malt, and buttery flavors at the end.

It's very clean and drinkable. Whereas I find most light beers on the market actively unpleasant to consume, Slim Chance is perfectly harmless. I can't say I like it, but I don't dislike it, and for a light beer, that's an achievement.

 644 characters

Photo of ChadS99SVT
4.08/5  rDev +32.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 5

A - nice clear golden color

S - Smell is real subtle hint of sweetness.

T - Crisp, refreshing, and has that RedHook beer taste. Nice light beer.

M - Crisp no lingering flavors medium carb.

D - excellent drinkability. perfect for a hot summer day.

I guess I am impressed and dissapointed at the same time with this beer. It's nice that some of our favorite brewerys are coming out with light alternatives to BL, etc. but I am not so sure it's worth the extra coin. I paid $9.50 for a 6pack here. This is good but not sure it's worth 3$ more than budlight.

Anyhow definately worth a try it's a great refreshing light summer beer.

 634 characters

Photo of Spikester
2.55/5  rDev -17.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Clear amber with one finger of white rapidly receding head. No lacings that stay. Sweet malts with a soapy character. Slight bitter almost sour finish. Mouthfeel is alright cold. I would almost prefer a Silver Bullet if I have to go light. Even better a S.A. light lager.

 271 characters

Photo of climax
3.1/5  rDev +0.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Slim Chance kinda sums it up...(3.0% and 125 calories??). Must be Redhook's beer for the health/weight conscious drinker.

Thus, it poured a yellow/pale amber, very good clarity and a quick fading white head.

Nose is soft and sweet. Predominately sweet cereal grains and some toasty malt. A slight bitterness, diacetyl and some sweet fruit.

Taste is warming with a decent bit of wheat, and some sweet malt and a tish of fruit, thats about it. Finish is quick and nothing. Light pilsner???

The body is light, but not as a typical light lager. Mostly sharp carbonation and a bit dry.

Surely not really a blonde ale, yet its better than most light beers out there.... but who cares?? I think if your gonna drink light beer all night, cut your losses and buy some cheap stuff instead of droppin extra for these. If you want a craft (at least I) don't really look for the one with the least calories. Slim chance I will drink it again, refreshing at best.

 966 characters

Photo of NJpadreFan
3.03/5  rDev -1.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Red Hook- Slim Chance

A- Light bright yellow with a small soapy head. No lacing and a quick dissapation.
S- Sweet sugary malt, hay/ straw, and a sweet leomny citrus.
T- Light sugary sweet malt with dry hay/ straw. Slight caramel butteriness.
M- Very watery and light. Slight buttery malt and a touch of sugary sweetness.

Overall- Just too weak and watery. Flavors are there but they're just to watered down.

 409 characters

Photo of BeerSox
3.55/5  rDev +15.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

12oz bottle into pint glass.

Crystal clear with a white one finger fizzy head that quickly settles to just about nothing.

Very light and sweet grainy aroma, that provides just a bit of toastiness.

Very delicate biscuity flavors, really no hops to speak of, although there is the slightest flake of bitterness in there. Light bodied.

Certainly refreshing on a hot day, which is about all it's going to do. I'd say this is maybe on the lighter side for a Blonde Ale, certainly more like a Light Ale.

 503 characters

Photo of froghop
2.7/5  rDev -12.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

pours a pale yellow with a thin white head, and good lacing.

smell of malt, citrus, and hay/straw.

taste is crisp, light, sweet and tart, citrus, malt, and grain.

not much to say on this one, it is a redhook version of a light beer, it is overall okay, and has big notes of citrus.

 284 characters

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

From the 12 fl. oz. bottle from Redhook's Portsmouth, New Hampshire brewery and marked 037609. Sampled on April 16, 2009.

Appearance - Golden yellow with a short-lived off-white fizzy head. It diminishes quickly before your eyes. The lacing tends to hang on a bit longer on the glass.

Smell - Grassy mainly and a little hoppy. After a few whiffs you might catch a little maltiness but not much in the way of sweetness. Kind of metallic like a macro.

Taste/Mouthfeel - The mouthfeel is weak but not watered down. It has a vaguely lip-smacking honey texture but there is no honey in the taste. The taste is slightly hopped and grainy but there's a pinch of bitterness in it too. It ends crisply. It goes down quick and more than likely I could piund down 3 or 4 of them on a hot afternoon with ease. Overall for a light lager it is better than most.

 851 characters

Photo of JayNH
3.67/5  rDev +19.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

A- Pours a clear pale yellow color with a small foamy head. Not much in the way of lacing or retention.

S- A hint of sweetness with a hint of spicy hops.

T- Not much going on here, smells pretty much just like it tastes.

M- Light bodied, carbonation is appropriate.

D- It's OK. Definitely a step up from any of the Macro Lites, albeit a small one.

 351 characters

Photo of kshankar
2.92/5  rDev -5.2%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Appearance: Clear and bright golden. Looks like very little carbonation, I can see a few bubbles, but not much. Head dissipates rather quickly leaving a layer of foam..and I can see some lacing stick to the top already.

Aroma: Some malty aromas, a little breadyness..but otherwise pretty light (which is what its meant to be...)

Taste: Sweetish and some malts, and a finish of breadyness. All on the lighter side

Mouthfeel: Crisp, light, goes down pretty well

Drinkability: Light, tastes fine, and goes down well, so it works in this one.

I don't know about recommending this. Its not bad really..for a light beer its actually better than I expected. But why would a craft brewery go out of its way to make a light beer? I don't think I'll be getting this one again...but I would like to try actual beers by Redhook.

The reason I got it was because it was in a shelf of individual bottles that were in the "seasonal" section of the beer store I go to. Doesn't really stand up next to the other ones I bought that day..

 1,026 characters

Photo of Brad007
3.18/5  rDev +3.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours a golden color into my glass. Has a one-finger head to boot and looks like a typical light lager.

Aroma is full of sweet, grainy malt. Yep, you can check that off. Certainly seems like it.

Taste is sweet, grainy and a bit watery. Yep, that's another typical characteristic.

Mouthfeel is full of lingering sweet, grainy malt. Watery and thin. Certainly to the style.

My question for Redhook is WHY? Why would you want to dumb down your brewing standards to brew THIS? Is this part of A-B/Inbev's influence or what? Redhook already has a light and drinkable ale, which is their Blonde Ale. Why brew this?

 612 characters

Photo of jimmytc
2.85/5  rDev -7.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Had this beer the other night and not sure what to expect from a "light" ale.
A. Clean straw color brew, refreshing looking.

S. Not overly anything, but then again it was made to be light.

T. Enjoyed the flavor, light hops, expected more but was a clean, crisp beer.

D. Very drinkable ale. Could see myself indulging in a few at a outdoor party or after a finishing a weekend project around the house.

 406 characters

firstprev| 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Redhook Slim Chance Light Ale from Redhook Ale Brewery
73 out of 100 based on 59 ratings.