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!

Budweiser Select - Anheuser-Busch

Not Rated.
Budweiser SelectBudweiser Select

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
51
awful

1,134 Ratings
THE BROS
45
awful

(view ratings)
Ratings: 1,134
Reviews: 389
rAvg: 2.03
pDev: 30.54%
Wants: 5
Gots: 94 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Anheuser-Busch visit their website
Missouri, United States

Style | ABV
Light Lager |  4.30% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
Brewed with two-row and roasted caramel malt for a rich color, and a blend of hand-selected premium American and Bavarian hops for balance and flavor. Budweiser Select spends approximately twice as long as regular beers in the brewhouse, which results in lower carbohydrate and calorie content after fermentation.

(Beer added by: kbub6f on 11-13-2004)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Budweiser Select Alström Bros
Ratings: 1,134 | Reviews: 389 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of cjl1209
2.6/5  rDev +28.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

"Full Flavor. 99 Calories."

A - Pours a clear light gold color with a massive white head. Nice lacing.

S - Light corn, adjuncts, and a hint of hops.

T - A little bit of hops, a little bit of malt, and some sweet corn.

M - Light bodied, rather thin.

D - High. Easy drinking if you're just looking to kill brain cells. More flavor than Bud Light and less than Budweiser so I guess that's a plus.

Final Thoughts: Not bad if you're counting calories.

cjl1209, May 05, 2009
Photo of everetends
2.9/5  rDev +42.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

16 oz can I picked up at the Crawfish Boil Music Festival in Birmingham, AL this weekend. We had gone through quite a few of these over the 2 day festival being as there was no real selection to choose from. Somehow, one survived the humid days and made it back in the backpack we used as a cooler. This one was served up in a 16oz lager glass.

A: Pours your pretty typical macro color. Getting a very simple golden yellow color that is completely clear in the body. This thing actually gave me a good two fingers of tiny bubbly white head that quickly fell about an eighth of an inch that held pretty well. Actually a good amount of lace resting on the glass for a macro. Tons of carbonation activity in the glass. As far as macros go, its just a touch above run of the mill.

S: This is not that great at all. Its actual most dominating aroma is that of dirty water. Other than that you maybe get a bit of corn and a touch of malt, but nothing that makes up for that smell. Not a good thing at all.

T: As far as macro and light lagers go, you know this is not that bad. You have the typical macro flavors. Get the barley and heavy corn flavors. The corn is not overpowering because it is milded by a decent pale malt presence. There is also a touch of lightly salted butter flavor. Its average and typical flavors but they are nice to see a "full bodied" macro flavor in this light lager. Not bad at all.

M: Light bodied brew that lives up to the wateriness and thin body that is expected from such a brew. The carbonation is pretty high and crisp. Pretty refreshing brew. Finishes pretty clean with little aftertaste lingering.

D: Yet again, comparing this only to other macro styles its got decent drinkability. Goes down incredibly easy and is nice and light in the belly. Not bad at all for 99 calorie brew. I've sure as hell had worse and this beer is not bad at all. Sure its not a mind blowing brew, but it is a macro style lager. Its not meant to blow your mind. Its to keep you refreshed and cool you off. It does just that and brings a bit of flavor to the equation. Could be a hell of a lot worse thats for sure.

everetends, May 04, 2009
Photo of drunkboxer1
2.88/5  rDev +41.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Pours a pale golden color with no head. Smells faintly of straw and mainly corn. Tastes the same way. Its highly carbonated and has a very dry finish. It drinks easy so if you wanted something inoffensive and to slam back 8 of this would be an ok choice, but all in all its boring.

drunkboxer1, May 04, 2009
Photo of sopclod
1.6/5  rDev -21.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1 | feel: 3 | overall: 1.5

Holy crap! I was trapped at a family outing, and a few bottles of Budweiser Select had been left in the fridge from the previous fall (so age could possibly be an issue).

I try to be fair, I appreciate what macro lagers are, but this is just crap, plain and simple. Again, I might have had a bad bottle, but if this is what it's supposed to taste like, I can't imagine even the lowest of common denominators thinking this is acceptable, much less "select".

Once of the worst I've had thus far.

sopclod, Apr 23, 2009
Photo of allengarvin
2.6/5  rDev +28.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Bud Select has a limpid straw-gold color, crystal clear, with little head retention after an initial burst of foam. The nose is very neutral, a touch grainy, but otherwise almost non-existent. The flavor is sweet malt, with no detectable bitterness. But, it's very clean and not excessively grainy. Bland is the key word for this beer.

allengarvin, Apr 09, 2009
Photo of aval89
1.53/5  rDev -24.6%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Poured a straw color with little head that quickly vanished. Left no retention on the glass. Smell? What am I smelling? Water? Maybe a hint of grain in there, not very much aroma it gives off. The taste, somewhat like the smell. Tasted very close to water with a slight and i mean slight grainy hint. As it sits in your mouth it is easily mistaken for water. Very light with little carbonation. After it goes down, it leaves no taste in your mouth. If you want something refreshing that taste close to water then this brew is for you. Oh and its only 99 calories

Cheers

aval89, Mar 29, 2009
Photo of cnally
1.65/5  rDev -18.7%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

well, the marketing campaign works wonders for me to even be holding this beer right now.

clear, easy yellow, no substance. slight fizzy head goes down quick.

adjuct city on the smell. sour and grainy.

corn, wheat, yeast, and sugar on the flavor. no substance or aftertaste that doesn't resemble sour well water. a little rusty, even.

fizzy, light, easy to swallow texture.

well, it is not as good as other light beers. so therefore, why would I prefer to drink this over other at least passable options?

cnally, Mar 19, 2009
Photo of biggred1
2/5  rDev -1.5%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Very pale yellow with a white head that fades quick and leaves no lace. Smell of faint toasted grain and nothing else. Tastes of watered down cereal grains, mildly sweet with a watery mouthfeel. This beer is lame, avoid. There are a million better beers, even in this catagory.

biggred1, Mar 15, 2009
Photo of bsend
2.03/5  rDev 0%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 3

Served on tap in a pint.

The intial appearance of this beer is a pale straw color. You can see right through it (perfect in a table tap if you want to see your company on the otherside). There was a thin half inch white head on the top of the glass.

The beer had a faint smell to it, the usual cereal, grainy aroma of macrobrews.

The taste was unimpressive, yet it faired better than I initially expected. Even when cutting carbs it retained some flavor to Bud light (kind of makes that one obsolete if you have a choice between the big three).

The beer was heavily carbonated, and similar to water. That being said it was easy enough to put down a couple of them in quick succession while eating wings.

Final Thoughts - What is there to really say? We know what it is, a low carb macro brew. It contains minimal calories and taste. That being said it goes down easy enough for drinking games and whatever else. Little other redeeming qualites (used to be $1, but now sits at $1.50 a pint. Always a winning feature in my book).

bsend, Mar 10, 2009
Photo of Goliath
2.2/5  rDev +8.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

Pours a crystal clear golden color with a one inch bright white foamy head. Poor head retention.

The aroma is unimpressive. It's sweet, with a pale toasted malt, kind of bready.

The taste is not very good. A pale toasted malt, corn, grain, and a bit of butter. Not much going on and what is going on isn't so fantastic.

Mouthfeel is thin to medium bodied with a high dose of gentle carbonation.

Drinkability is low to moderate. The beer would be sessionable due to the low alcohol, but the flavor profile is boring at best, and what little is happening tastes generic and poorly crafted.

Goliath, Feb 25, 2009
Photo of tai4ji2x
2.5/5  rDev +23.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

lol, i found this thin, slender format can hidden away in the bottom corner of the fridge. it had fallen off the shelf and had been buried for a year and a half without anyone seeing it. a best by date of may 7, 2007. haha.

very pale golden straw color. clear. some fizzy head that soon fades to wisps and thin ring. some initial thin lace, but it fades away eventually.

aroma has very faint noble hops and a whiff of malt - or more precisely, like plain saltine crackers.

palate of watery grains and minuscule malt. slight hint that yeast was at one time use to ferment this thing. microscopic trace of noble hop. clean watery finish.

thin, fizzy and watery. what else to expect?

tai4ji2x, Feb 19, 2009
Photo of acelin
2.25/5  rDev +10.8%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Many a can.
Appearance: Yellow, with weird bubbles.
Smell: Like diet beer, really it does...
Taste: Actually isnt bad for a Macro, but still bad. Typical Bud taste, everyone knows it.
Mouthfeel: lighter than a bud light.
Drinkability: better on you than the average macro lager.

Good for beer-pong, beer games, and those trying to watch their weight while drinking 'beer.'

acelin, Feb 17, 2009
Photo of jcdiflorio
3.23/5  rDev +59.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Haven't done a review in a while,need to get started again! This beer was left in the fridge for a few weeks after a Steeler game by a friend. Might as well give it a review.
A hard pour in a nonic glass gave me about 2" of white creamy head that dissapated quicker that i could examine it,left some spotty webby lacing on the side of the glass.A pale golden color that was clear and not as light as expected with a few tiny strings of lacing scattered around the sides of the glass.
Sweet malty aromas,doughy with a clean mineral water scent,no hop aroma,but had a nice fruitiness.
Watered down taste,light slightly tart fruitiness,again a mineral water taste as in the aroma. Finshes with a light drying tartness. Very smooth,not filling easy to drink,no off flavors,very clean. Not all that bad could see the drinkability factor. Just not enough taste for me,although i wouldn't turn a cold one down on a hot summer day.

jcdiflorio, Feb 09, 2009
Photo of ChrisQ
2.7/5  rDev +33%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

A step up in drinkability from Bud Light, this beer seems to be the same thing minus the metallic aftertaste. Head, color, etc. are not important to this beer. It is all about not having an aftertaste.

This beer has its place at an insurance party's barbecue. Finicky people will drink it because it is an improved version of a famous beverage: we know how the average American adores anything famous.

I have to admit, I still purchase this when my in-laws come to town, something that they will drink and I can stomach.

ChrisQ, Feb 07, 2009
Photo of thekevlarkid
2.28/5  rDev +12.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1 | overall: 3

Out of a 24oz. can this beer produced a ridiculously huge foamy head of off-white bubbles. The retention was decent and the lacing scattered. The aroma was of corn mash, grains and some light hops. The flavors were a cleaned up version of regular Bud, but still quite washed out. Pale malt, bleached hops. Decent balance and a session beer for those who fear taste. The mouthfeel was prickly and watery, the carbonation high and the body light. Skip it.

thekevlarkid, Jan 24, 2009
Photo of waltonc
1.05/5  rDev -48.3%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

This beer is amazing. A triumph in failure. In a blind taste test between this and carbonated soda water, I was unable to tell the difference. Okay, that may be an exaggeration, but it's not far off.

A: Urine yellow with puffy white head.
S: Virtually non-existent, save for a general unpleasant sourness.
T: Tastes like water.
M: Thin body with high carbonation. About the least enjoyable mouthfeel possible in a beer.
D: Just terrible. Atrocious. I could not even finish a whole can.

waltonc, Jan 22, 2009
Photo of cagocubs
2.83/5  rDev +39.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours a piss yellow with think white head that dissapates rapidly, no lacing. The smell is pathetic, you cant smell anything. The taste is watery with slight hop taste. The mouthfeel is similar to drinking tonic water, carbonated and tingly. It is drinkable because it is pretty much water. This would be a good beer if you were sweating one out at a ballpark, otherwise pass.

cagocubs, Jan 20, 2009
Photo of ChrisCage
2.7/5  rDev +33%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 5

A- Pours a light straw color, and there isn't much in terms of a head, even after a hard pour, but rather a fizzy head that dissapears and at least forms a foamy ring. Nothing much in terms of lacing either. I do like the sleek looking bottle however.

S- Not much to report here....just a mild malt aroma. No hops are detectable here. Also maybe some grainy smells but not much else.

T- Surprisingly for a light beer, this has more flavor than I would have guessed it to have. Decent malt flavors, maybe a little dusty aftertaste though. No hops are noticeable but it does leave a sweet aftertaste

M- Quite watery but given the style I wasn't expecting much of a body. Carbonation is heavy in this beer but again not surprising.

D- The good news here is that I could enjoy this beer all night during any time of the year. I'd say that this is a slightly upgraded version of MGD 64.

ChrisCage, Jan 12, 2009
Photo of bvburnes
3.6/5  rDev +77.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

A: very light straw
S: mild, almost non-existent
T: Very low to no bitterness. I cannot taste the alcohol at all (which is a plus for me), and I love the bready/yeast finish
M: A lot of carbonation with a very thin body. Almost like soda-water
D: I could drink this all day. It goes down crisp and is very refreshing (not to sound like a commercial). Think a lawn chair, a warm summer day, and fresh cut grass.

This is not trying to be anything other than what it is, and I think it does it much better than the other light beers I've tasted.

bvburnes, Jan 09, 2009
Photo of unclejimbay
3.18/5  rDev +56.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Bud Select - 9/16/2008
Poured from a 1/2 barrel keg to mug - I bought the keg for a FLA/GA party at our house 11/1/2008.
ABV 4.3%, cals=99
A 3.0
Golden yellow, decent head - lasted longer than from bottle, noticeable carbonation - a bit more than what I have seen from a bottle pour.
S 2.5
Typical American macro smell, not to much to mention here
T 3.5
Typical American macro, generally speaking neutral and harmless for beer newbies
MF 2.5 watery as expected, light on carbonation in the mouth considering how prevalent it is on the pour, could be the keg temp?
D 3.5
Not bad for a Am macro session beer, which is why I got the keg - for my guests. (I was drinking my Pale Ale home brew!) ABV is a little light for my preference to buy on my own. I would prefer a bottle over the can any day. Better than Bud Light and most light beers in my opinion.

unclejimbay, Jan 09, 2009
Photo of Duhast500
3/5  rDev +47.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Budweiser Select taste almost the same as bud light. Bud select has a bit more heavier mouthfeel but the taste is close to the same.

The color is a very lght amber/orange

Smell is a little malt and hops.

Taste is watery hope taste.

Bud select ended up not being as bad as I expected but I only drink this when there is nothing else or it's really hot and I'm in need of a beer that is not too heavy.

Duhast500, Jan 08, 2009
Photo of hwwty4
1.68/5  rDev -17.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1

I want to thank my friend Amanda for leaving this at my house after New Years.

Poured a 12oz bottle into my Bullfrog Ale pint glass. This beer pours a really light straw with a big white head that melted away into just a thin layer. The aroma is canned corn with just a hint of grain. The taste is almost nonexistent. The flavor is slightly corny but mostly just watery. The mouthfeel is slightly dry but mostly just watery. Unless you don't like beer, definitely stay away from this one.

hwwty4, Jan 04, 2009
Photo of ChainGangGuy
2/5  rDev -1.5%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Born on: September 11th, 2008. The World Trade Center tragedy, like this shameful nightmare, will never be forgotten!

Appearance: Pours a clear, gold body with a thin, painfully brief, white head.

Smell: Feh! Another lifeless, uninspired aroma of tired, musty grains.

Taste: Sweet light pale malts with a tiny hint of bored grains. Faintly spicy hop character with a light bitterness. Finishes relatively drying and crisp.

Mouthfeel: Thin-bodied. Medium-plus carbonation.

Drinkability: As is the case with so many of these macro lager, there's really just not much to it.

ChainGangGuy, Jan 01, 2009
Photo of heapofaoatmeal
1.02/5  rDev -49.8%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

beer was poured out of can into red plastic cup, fairly fizzy no real head. very clear not much for aroma. tastes reminiscent of pond scum and shampoo predominate over undertones of corn and rice. unsure if there is an new definition of "select" which means batches of budweiser that didnt pass the qaqc.

definitely encouragement to win at beer pong.

heapofaoatmeal, Jan 01, 2009
Photo of Mistofminn
2.53/5  rDev +24.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Budweiser 2 of 5 from "Budweiser at Ben's" Dec 20th 2008.

Started with Bud Light, and now moving on to Select. I guess we're starting from the bottom up?

There really isn't much to talk about here. In a blind taste test I might not be able to tell Bud Light and Bud Select apart. It's not that I couldn't taste a difference, it's just they are equally light and watery and I wouldn't be able to pin which is which. It's best quality is, once again, mouthfeel and drinkablity. Easy to drink, and hey it's cheap too! Good college beer?

Mistofminn, Dec 20, 2008
Budweiser Select from Anheuser-Busch
51 out of 100 based on 1,134 ratings.