Thomas Creek Dockside Pilsner - Thomas Creek Brewery
Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
Ratings: 79 | Reviews: 48 | Display Reviews Only:
3.5/5 rDev +9.4%
12 oz. Nice looking gold pour, minimal white head. Subdued aroma of biscuit and citrus, some hop. A bit musty actually. Pilsner Urquel-esque flavors. Some malt, some citrus, some pepper like spice and piney hops. Finish pretty clean and reasonable drinkability. Could have used a little more malt sweetness, but still not bad.
07-09-2009 00:41:37 | More by Bung
3.25/5 rDev +1.6%
I have tried a few Thomas Creek brews with mixed results.Poured into a pilsner aclear straw color with a nice crowned white head atop leaving broken lace behind as it settled slowly.Lighter aromas of toasted grain with a bit of bread dough,a hint of peppery/spicey hop as well.Prickly and thin in the mouth at first it gets a little better after a few drinks but is still off,flavors arent bad with notes of lightly sweet pizza dough and a tad of honey as well with a crisp finish.I dont think its as bad as most everyone else but its pretty average.
03-18-2009 20:14:34 | More by oberon
2.8/5 rDev -12.5%
The aroma is malty and grassy with a touch of corn and vegetables. The appearance is pale gold with a small head. The flavor is like the aroma. The palate is thin but smooth. Overall it's not a bad beer but it's not a good one either. This is just what I was expecting so my hopes were not let down.
03-02-2009 11:30:02 | More by nick76
3.6/5 rDev +12.5%
From bottle to pint glass at the Kingsport Grocery...
Looks more honey-colored than a true Pilsener - not unattractive but not quite to style
Lots of raw malt and mild Saaz hops. I usually steer clear of Pilseners because the Saaz really doesn't do it for me but I could actually use more here
Again, we actually need a little more Pilsener flavor-hops are way too mild - missing that bitter Saaz sting. The malt is more natural and raw, which is interesting.
This feels a little more sour than you would expect - there is a little more fruit than necessary - not sure where it's coming from. Finish is tight from a sort of spoiled citrus
Aside from all that it actually drinks pretty well - a little heartier than your average Pilsener but it'll play
02-18-2009 13:37:31 | More by IBUnit63
2.98/5 rDev -6.9%
Long day of work in the grain fields... A bunch of straw-hat clad chaps under a clear sky full of puffy white clouds.
"Why yes, thank you. You know I've heard that Pilsner is better for a dehydrated fellow than Water?"
"I doubt that, but think what you want."
A bit too watery, really, a bit to clear. Head retention is rather poor even with the constant bubbling.
A hint of grain husk and some white grape, a flash down the throat, and it's gone, leaving only slightly sour breath behind. Hops are rather wet-cardboardish.
Really it's not a bad pilsner, just not a good one. All the flavors are there, just not quite as well-done as one would hope.
Thomas Creek clearly has the skills. I've had a couple of their offerings that were terrific. This one just needs a bit of work.
"Back to the field, we ain't got all day!"
01-30-2009 21:23:10 | More by khiasmus
3.33/5 rDev +4.1%
Bottle thanks to Joe, listed as Dockside Pilsner. Pours a crystal clear golden color with a small white head. A nice citrus aroma, some honey and light malt notes also. The taste is very smooth and nice; sweet honey, smooth citrus and a very light bitter hop bite in the finish. A light earthy malt throughout. Refreshing and very quaffable.
12-02-2008 06:09:52 | More by Douglas88
3.1/5 rDev -3.1%
Thanks to mikesgroove for this extra.
A - Pours yellow-gold and fairly clear. The white head tops out at just under one inch. Retention is good. Lacing is better than expected. Head settles to a thin white cap. Not a bad looking beer.
S - Some fruitiness at first, mostly lemon. Mild grains come in around midway. Some softer sweeter malt finishes it up with hints of bread dough. Slightly solvent in the very end.
T - There is a decent hop presence in the flavor. Comes across as grassy. Malt backbone is significant doses of honey and pale malt. Grain comes in at the end mixed with a nice hop bitterness. Is that soap I'm tasting?
M - This one does have a good mouthfeel going for it. Lighter bodied with a bitter clean finish. The abundant carbonation works well for this brew.
D - Drinkability is just about average. It goes down easy enough. There isn't really much going on in this beer. At least not enough to keep me coming back for more. Glad I go to try it but this is not one I would seek out again. Given the other pilsner options available, this one comes in about the middle of the road.
11-17-2008 23:27:06 | More by csmiley
2.78/5 rDev -13.1%
Pours a light staw body with decent head that sticks and leaves good lacing. What the hell is floating around in this beer? Not a clear body.
Smells are slightly hoppy and a strong sweetness.
Taste is sweet cereal grains with a flash of hop bitterness that stays a bit. The mouthfeel is made really fizzy by the carbonation and doesn't really help the beers flavor profile. A Slightly soapy quality to the finish as well.
I didn't expect much and I wasn't let downn. Beer coming out of SC has a long way to go.
08-11-2008 21:33:37 | More by rtratzlaff
2.9/5 rDev -9.4%
Thanks to mikesgroove for sending this along in a recent trade.
Slightly hazed golden yellow colour with a short cap of fine, white foam. The head settled to a thin layers of fine bubbles and a thick collar after a couple minutes, leaving behind some streaky lacing. The initial whiff had notes of lemony hops and leaned to the floral side. This diminished after a few minutes, leaving a malty character behind, sort of crackery and bready with an undercurrent of caramel. As it warmed, fruity esters started to appear. Fruity, almost tart flavour up front with yellow grapes towards the end. Light lemon and cracker flavours in the mid. Fruity finish too, with some sharp tartness. Light bodied with ample carbonation, decent texture. This really missed the mark for a pilsner, but was still a drinkable beer.
07-26-2008 00:24:34 | More by DrJay
2.78/5 rDev -13.1%
Thanks to Mikesgrove for this one
Bottle poured into a pint glass had a good finger worth of white head that went to a good lace .The body was gold in color and clear
The aroma of this brew is mostly fresh bread some grain
Flavors are a bit sour, kind of confused me but it wasn't bad. Not to much hop as well
Mouthfeel was light and crisp
Not very true to style had I drank it but I would not seek it out if I was looking for a Pills
07-20-2008 01:29:36 | More by joepais
3.3/5 rDev +3.1%
My bottle says 'Dockside Pilsner'...
Appearance - pours a slightly hazed straw color, an inch of snowy white foam on top. It is very sticky, taking the chance to stick everywhere inside the glass.
Aroma - grain, a zest of spice that is gone too quickly to identify. A slight whiff of fruitiness after setup.
Taste - basic grain out of the gate. A light citric bite mid-palate and on the swallow, turning a little drier and astringent towards the finish. Some brief florals, but the tasting started very cold so it needs a little warm-up time, but not too much - it's a pils for Pete's sake! Interesting spicing as I get accustomed to it. Clove gumdrops?
Mouthfeel - very well-carbonated, lighter per the style.
Drinkability - a fine session pils, but doesn't really stand up to my faves for the style.
05-07-2008 03:40:17 | More by brewdlyhooked13
3.28/5 rDev +2.5%
Need to make more of an effort to try local brews like this as I have seen a few different varieties from TC hit the shelves recently. This brew pours very pale gold, looks a bit like a macro lager, but has a good bit of carbonation in the bubbles rising. That leads to a nice nice lacy white head that doesn't leave. Aroma has a good showing from the hops, some light grassy notes and a good bit of citrus. Unfortunately, not much more than the hops come through in the taste as a big sweet lemon zest flavor overwhelms leaving no room for the malt to balance. Hops offer a little bitterness but the citrus is too strong here. At least its not watery and flat.
Not a bad offering, I think this just needs a tweak or two and could really be good.
04-07-2008 07:50:59 | More by saintwarrick
3.85/5 rDev +20.3%
On tap at Stone Soup, Landrum, SC
I tend to favor local beers whenever I get the chance; TC definitely qualifies as a local brewery for me. This one is solid, for sure. It does sit there looking a bit ho-hum in the glass (nervous glance around at neighboring tables -- might they think I'm drinking macro US watery stuff???), but once it hits the nose there's no doubt that we're talking a real pilsner here. Great balance of malt and bitterness. Not at all over the top, but solidly holds its own. Try with creamy pasta dishes or shellfish. Nice one.
03-26-2008 13:43:46 | More by drperm
3.15/5 rDev -1.6%
12oz. bottle, courtesy of bobbyc881
Slightly hazy (maybe due to chill) pale yellow. Large, rocky white head. Haze cleared up a bit as it warmed, but never went away entirely.
Scent was pretty mild, bread dough and lemon.
Nice hop flavor, citrus - lemons. Crackery flavor, picks up some with temperature increase. Grassy at finish.
Light bodied, with medium carbonation. Fairly dry.
Easy to drink, a good summer beer.
04-30-2007 14:41:20 | More by
2.42/5 rDev -24.4%
Pours a golden yellow into my impy pint glass. Head rises a half inch or so and falls gently. Aroma is doughy/bready with nary a hint of hops to be found.
Hits the mouth a bit light but not quite watery. Has a light tingly carbonation that quickly transitions to a simple bready malt - that quickly fades to something a bit sour and ends with a hint of dry hops and I still have some sour on my tongue.
Not sure what the intention here was but it just did not do it for me.
04-18-2007 21:02:18 | More by gpcollen1
3.63/5 rDev +13.4%
A - Poured a pale golden yellow, with no head and no lace. Lots of visible carbonation streaming up from the bottom.
S - Smell was lively, tingling the nose. Biggest aromas were of bread malts, very light smell. Hints of some fruitness as it warmed, maybe apples or pears.
M & T - The taste was suprisingly sour, lots of grape flavors, and other fruity tones intermixed with a grainy feel. A slight hoppy finish. Went down easy enough as it was quite smooth, but a bit too sourr, expecially for a pilsner.
D - Overall this was a bit too sour tasting for my liking. I will give it credit for being alot more complex then I thought it would be, however it just came off as too strong. A knoble effort none the less.
03-29-2007 21:39:16 | More by mikesgroove
2.55/5 rDev -20.3%
Pours a cloudy light gold, very fizzy but no head. My fault for pouring it too cold, but I wasn't really caring too much with this one.
Aroma and flavour are very weak. Aroma is fruity hops, maybe peach, with some malt showing up. Corn or other grains, I think.
Taste is a little skunky, with some of the fruity hops and some floral notes. Carbonation is way too high. Mouthfeel is very watery.
10-07-2006 21:37:57 | More by crwills
2.28/5 rDev -28.8%
A hazed and semi-clouded appearence. No head at all. Milkbone biscuit in the smell. Quite awful, stale hops and malt. An indifferent beer with its only presence lying in its weakness. Light drinking. Closer to Euro Swill than pilsner. Carbonation at a good level. Mouthfeel leaves a cardboardy texture. Drinkable, but so is water.
09-16-2006 14:56:27 | More by biegaman
2.33/5 rDev -27.2%
Off-the-mark pilsner. Good head, yellow with lace. barleywine aroma. Metallic and off tastes. fizzy, not well carbonated. Thin to medium mouthfeel. I will have to be convinced to try this brewery again. Not drinkable still thanks for picking up crwills.
09-13-2006 01:06:43 | More by Sammy
2.13/5 rDev -33.4%
tasting party sept 11/06 with northyorksammy, crwills, biegaman and me (grub). everyone threw in a few bottles and we had an interesting mix of beer and mead. not sure of exactly who contributed what, so i'll just thank everyone.
pours light yellow with a big white head.
aroma is malty. rye bread and biscuit. smells a bit like a milkbone.
taste is odd. slightly funky and definitely not like any pilsner i've ever had.
mouthfeel is ok. the carbonation is low and i don't think it's really working here.
drinkability on this one is ok, but not great. if i didn't know it was supposed to be a pilsner it's not half bad, but it misses the mark for a pilsner.
09-12-2006 15:04:28 | More by grub
3.05/5 rDev -4.7%
Sickly pale gold in hue, for a microbrewery Pils the color is especially off-putting. Yet another volcanic head from Thomas Creek, in a Pilsner glass I got a fist of foam. Yikes! Not too surprisingly the head retention was great. Subsequent lacing was splotchy, thick, and unorganized. While its a sad looking beer in the color department, the head saves it from sucking.
The nose is lemony and husky, while the nose is bright and lively it doesnt smell hoppy like a Pils should. I dont want to be the style police but at least give me some hope the palate wont be insipid. There are few malty influences. Moderate potency, not too chatty pleasing smells but there isnt much here to call it inviting.
The palate was shockingly bad. A Pils, this is not. There is no malt foundation. The hops are overly lemony and the bitterness is fleeting. No further complexity beyond that. I can think of more attributes missing than are present. I get a bitter lemon candy finish, clean aftertaste with only a slight residual sweetness. The palate is not flawed and it has flavor but when I open a bottle that says, Pilsner I better be getting one. No so much here.
Medium in body, low carbonation, the mouthfeel is decent but nothing noteworthy.
Sure, it is plenty easy to drink but pointless to do so. It is not crisp enough or hoppy enough or malty enough to be a Pils. As just a beer this is a fine drink. I like it as is. Nothing more, nothing less Thanks timtheenchanta for the bottle.
03-29-2006 16:42:03 | More by bditty187
2.88/5 rDev -10%
If it weren't for the ten million barrels of Bud served up to the American public every year I'd describe this as a "pretty standard" Pilsner. Compared to most craft beers this is "pretty standard" but compared to the country's most popular brew this is a "pretty good" beer - it's more than just fizzy yellow beer.
The pour is good but uninspiring - the beers is a medium straw yellow with a thinnish white head. It's filtered to crystal clear but the minimal carbonation doesn't give it that classic "beer" look. The head quickly dies to a small collar with no lacing on the glass.
The smell is pretty good but disturbingly sweet. There are a lot of residual sugars in this beer and you can easily find them in the nose. While there are no corn adjuncts in this Pilsner the smell is vaguely similar to the Corn Pops cereal. Surprisingly no hops at all in the nose.
The taste is pretty good - there's a pretty clear malt body but again it's a bit on the sweet side. Still a slight corny note though it may just be suggestability on my part. Some light hopping of something vaguely noble but not enough clarity or strength in the hops to start to identify which Euro hop is used.
Mouthfeel is okay but a little syrupy for a Pils. Not enough carbonation to clean the palate and not enough hops to dry out each sip.
Compared to most craft brews this one's pretty run of the mill... Compared to Bud this is a pretty meaty brew. There's a pretty strong malt body here (even though it's a bit sweet) and the beer does have some personality but it's pretty far from the style standard. Not enough hops to keep my attention and too heavy bodied to be a good Pilsner.
03-02-2006 04:41:16 | More by RedwoodGeorge
2.85/5 rDev -10.9%
This beer was tasted in a Pilsner glass from a bottle.
The beer pours a hazy orange gold with a sizeable frothy white head that holds and laces well. The smell is primarily sweet almost buttery. The beer tastes very sweet up front. It is almost buttery maybe toffee and possibly a little butterscotch. The beer has a fairly good thickness but is a little overly cabonated. Overall I do not find this a very drinkable beer because of the sweetness. It could certainly use more hop bitterness to balance out the malts.
02-07-2006 03:33:40 | More by MSchae1017
3.55/5 rDev +10.9%
One of the ugliest labels I have ever seen. Not sure if a color didn't print, or what, but... I digress. Pretty good looking beer otherwise, tending toward golden. Crystal clear, with a decent head that receeded to nothing. Not much for nose, and a little disappointing taste wise as well. Crisp but thin saaz, with a fruity undercurrent. It tastes nice, but it is just too watery to really be a top notch pils. Very refreshing though, good for a relaxing summer afternoon.
08-14-2005 03:24:31 | More by hustlemuscle
3.2/5 rDev 0%
Appearance: Pours a clear medium gold body, a little dark for a pilsner, with a decent head and some lacing
Smell: A grainy malt character with a somewhat musty smell that I am having a hard time describing
Taste: Much maltier and sweeter than I would expect from a pilsner; not bad, but not the crisp, bitter taste I was expecting; very little in the hops department
Mouthfeel: Medium bodied with medium carbonation
Drinkability: Basically, a summer afternoon beer that is OK, but mislabeled as a pilsner
03-10-2005 22:00:38 | More by brentk56
Thomas Creek Dockside Pilsner from Thomas Creek Brewery
75 out of 100 based on 79 ratings.