1. Extreme Beer Fest. March 20 & 21, 2015 in Boston, Mass. Join us!
  2. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  3. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Redhook Slim Chance Light Ale - Redhook Ale Brewery

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

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
73
okay

75 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 75
Reviews: 58
rAvg: 3.09
pDev: 13.59%
Wants: 0
Gots: 1 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Redhook Ale Brewery visit their website
United States

Style | ABV
American Blonde Ale |  3.90% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
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.

(Beer added by: SirChugsAlot on 02-18-2009)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 75 | Reviews: 58 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of Misfit138
2.98/5  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.

Misfit138, Jun 07, 2009
Photo of WesWes
2.63/5  rDev -14.9%
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.

WesWes, Jun 06, 2009
Photo of ChainGangGuy
3.03/5  rDev -1.9%
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!!"

ChainGangGuy, Jun 03, 2009
Photo of BretSikkink
2.98/5  rDev -3.6%
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.

BretSikkink, May 16, 2009
Photo of dewalt
3.1/5  rDev +0.3%
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.

dewalt, May 12, 2009
Photo of ChadS99SVT
4.1/5  rDev +32.7%
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.

ChadS99SVT, May 10, 2009
Photo of Spikester
2.55/5  rDev -17.5%
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.

Spikester, May 04, 2009
Photo of climax
3.1/5  rDev +0.3%
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 brew...you (at least I) don't really look for the one with the least calories. Slim chance I will drink it again, refreshing at best.

climax, May 04, 2009
Photo of NJpadreFan
3.03/5  rDev -1.9%
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.

NJpadreFan, May 01, 2009
Photo of BeerSox
3.55/5  rDev +14.9%
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.

BeerSox, Apr 18, 2009
Photo of froghop
2.73/5  rDev -11.7%
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.

froghop, Apr 18, 2009
Photo of puboflyons
3.33/5  rDev +7.8%
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.

puboflyons, Apr 16, 2009
Photo of JayNH
3.65/5  rDev +18.1%
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.

JayNH, Apr 16, 2009
Photo of kshankar
2.95/5  rDev -4.5%
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..

kshankar, Apr 13, 2009
Photo of Brad007
3.15/5  rDev +1.9%
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?

Brad007, Apr 04, 2009
Photo of jimmytc
2.8/5  rDev -9.4%
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.

jimmytc, Apr 03, 2009
Photo of allengarvin
3.58/5  rDev +15.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

This pours a crystal clear light gold color, but features no head retention. The nose is light but pleasant: sweet malt with no graininess, and a dusting of hops. Very clean malt flavor with low but sufficient bitterness, and, like the aroma, a light touch of floral hops at the finish. Good carbonation, otherwise very neutral mouthfeel.

Not a bad light at all.

allengarvin, Apr 01, 2009
Photo of Yeastcakes
3.13/5  rDev +1.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Serving notes - 0.5L German glass, cellar temp
A - Nice malt in the aroma.
A - no head, crystal clear light amber-yellow.
M - light to medium body, medium carbonation.
T - popcorn is the first thing that comes to mind (diacytl), nice malty sweetness. Buttery flavor actually works well with the body and sweetness and is not overpowering.
D - Not bad for a light beer. I would almost prefer this to the regular ESB. However, there are many other great beers and I am not sure if I'll get this one again.

Yeastcakes, Mar 31, 2009
Photo of Halcyondays
2.25/5  rDev -27.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

12 oz. bottle, listed as a described as a light blonde ale,

A: Pours yellow with a good sized white head, some sticky lace.

S: Very light, some bready malt notes, nothing much to speak of really.

T: Again, very light, quite possibly the lightest beer I've ever had from a craft brewer. Some wheaty notes are there in the aftertaste, but there's nothing to latch onto.

M: Light-bodied, some carbonation character, really not that bad.

D: I don't really know what Redhook is going for here. The light beer drinkers aren't going to pay $7.99 a sixer and the craft drinkers are going to want a lot more flavour for their money.

Halcyondays, Mar 19, 2009
Photo of jasonjlewis
3.43/5  rDev +11%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Pours a 1 finger head with decent retention that fades all together half way through.

Smell is of pale malts with a little little grassy characteristic.

Taste is clean/crisp and refreshing. This is a no frills beer with a little bit of a grassy finish.

I would like a little bit more crispness for the style, but there is a decent amount of body.

This is a nice summertime beer, well done.

jasonjlewis, Mar 18, 2009
Photo of BEERchitect
3.2/5  rDev +3.6%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

It's funny how Redhook can lessen the good beer styles to the point of such criticism, but then the poor beer styles see much improvement.

The beer begins with the standard, medium straw color, head formation that boarders on fizzy, retention that quickly reduces to a trace along the edges, and offers no lacing at all. Looks like Budweiser.

Aromas are surprisingly floral, nectar-like, and a bit perfumy from the boquet of aromatic hops. These compliment the softer pilsner malt aromas and mask the grainy-sharp sensation in the nose that usually accompany pilsner grains.

Flavors, however begin to revert to the pilsner part-malt/part-grain taste that are common in Pale Lagers and Blonde Ales. The hop flavor takes a back seat to the malts but do a decent job of rounding out the background flavors into a light, fresh-grass taste.

Not as thin to the mouth as you'd think. The beer is a little fuller and rounder than your average Light Beer, getting into German Pilsner ranges. Light acidic notes along with clean hop bittering gives the beer a crisp, clean finish that compliments the grains well.

The beer may be as nice of a Light Lager as any I have had. Good job Redhook, now shore up the rest of your beers!

BEERchitect, Mar 18, 2009
Photo of RedDiamond
3.08/5  rDev -0.3%
look: 4.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Think I might enjoy a new light beer from this Northwest cousin of Anheuser-Busch? Slim Chance indeed.

Actually, while I don't care for the intrusive yeast component defining this blonde ale, I've had worse. Slim Chance was released in early 2009 as a permanent, low-calorie (125) replacement for Redhook's regular Blonde Ale - a serious mistake in my view. Its name derives from a kiteboarding maneuver that I have no personal familiarity with. To my ear, Slim Chance is a flawed name for any budding business enterprise, but in this case the kiteboarding reference says "Full Sail" and seems out of place in Woodinville.

Be that as it may, I enjoyed the impeccable clarity of this sunny yellow beer. Redhook serves it with a bright white head of short duration. It delivers low carbonation and a dilute aroma that's somewhere between dishwater and hamburger. The flavor is also dishrag-ish with that punky yeast voodoo I can never get used to. Suffice it to say I think a blonde ale should be clean tasting and this one doesn't fit the bill. The malt and hops of it are entirely recessed behind yeast esters. It's not horrible and it does warm well. But I'm not rushing back for more.

RedDiamond, Mar 11, 2009
Photo of MEsquandoles
3.6/5  rDev +16.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4.5

They say it is an ale.

Tastes like a cross between a Kolsch, an American Wheat, and an American Lager (in that order).

Definitely some wheat. A dry finish and fleeting flavor. Crisp and very drinkable. Some Kolsch/Pilsner flavours (or Blonde Ale) but not as grassy and full. Some lemon peel. Slightly thick for a Light, but just prolly just as effervescent.

Not that bad for 125 calories, but I'll stick with an IPA for the same price...I'd prefer it over a "Light" (or "Lite") beer, but not for the price of something fully satisfying.

Their website shows there are also some Munich and Caramel malts; IBU:18. 3.9%abv

Note: I am rating this against other "Light" beers. I'd prolly prefer NB Skinny Dip and then SA Light, but this would be third.

This would be a good candidate for drinking a keg of out in the sun all day long.

MEsquandoles, Mar 07, 2009
Photo of Zorro
2.83/5  rDev -8.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Clear yellow colored beer with a small white head.

Smell is malty with a toasted grain and corn scent. Hops appear as a slight grassy and lemony scent.

Taste starts out malty with a strong wheat cracker flavor. Crackers and cooked vegetables this tastes a lot like most non-alcoholic beers out there.

Mouthfeel is average.

Not a great beer but better than a non-alcoholic one. Not awful, but not great either.

Zorro, Mar 04, 2009
Photo of SirChugsAlot
3.13/5  rDev +1.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Picked up a bottle of this at Redhook Brewery in Woodinville, WA. The label says it's a Light (Lite) ale. This one was bottled Jan 26 2009.

Appearance: Poured this into your typical pint glass. Golden straw color with a finger of white head that fades rather quickly to the edges of the glass and leaves no lacing

Smell: sweet with malts and wheat

Taste: Like one of americas "favorite" from AB only with a sweeter twist and not a harsh finish. a real subtle hint of hops

Mouth: Light, crisp, pretty smooth and not bad on carbonation

Drink: Overall i'm a little let down by redhook on this one.

SirChugsAlot, Feb 18, 2009
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Redhook Slim Chance Light Ale from Redhook Ale Brewery
73 out of 100 based on 75 ratings.