1. American Craft Beer Fest returns to Boston on May 29 & 30, featuring 640+ beers from 140+ brewers. Tickets are on sale now.

Baltika #9 Extra (Strong) - Baltika Breweries

Not Rated.
Baltika #9 Extra (Strong)Baltika #9 Extra (Strong)

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
66
poor

590 Ratings
THE BROS
81
good

(view ratings)
Ratings: 590
Reviews: 377
rAvg: 2.8
pDev: 26.07%
Wants: 6
Gots: 39 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Baltika Breweries visit their website
Russian Federation

Style | ABV
Euro Strong Lager |  8.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 11-08-2001

No notes at this time.
View: Beers (51) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | Likes | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Baltika #9 Extra (Strong) Alström Bros
Ratings: 590 | Reviews: 377 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of auntfloyd
2.83/5  rDev +1.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Served from a 500ml bottle into a pint glass.

Pours a pale yellow color, with a big white head, looks very much like a macro. The smell is not very noticeable; slightly sweet and grainy. The flavor is fairly sweet as well, with definite fruit and vanilla notes. The mouthfeel is pretty thin, and drinkability is ok.

This is sort of like a slightly better than average macrolager, but not really anything special.

Photo of cheers2beers
2.9/5  rDev +3.6%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Appearance: This beer poured a light yellow hue with a foamy bright white head that stacked up roughly an inch and a half. There are many columns of bead floating to the top.

Smell: The aromas are all around vague. Corn/corn husks is the dominate scent in this one. Smells like most pilsner styled beers.

Taste: A corn flavor is present but it is not the pilsner I thought it to be. It has a slight Belgian Tripel taste with some buttered bisquits. My palate keeps telling me" hay field" but its still not quite there. The alcohol is strong but it plays hide-and-go-seek very well.

Mouthfeel: Thin bodied with a low side of high carbonation. Easy to drink. Almost spritzy on the togue.

Drinkability: At first, I was thinking this was going to be another beer that just bombs all around, but after takeing a few more gulps it slowly...slowly.. grows on you. Perhaps it is the strong 8% that I like about it. I wouldn't mind buying this up again, but it would not be in my regular rotation.


Cheers2beers

Photo of Commandogeraldo
3.27/5  rDev +16.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Working on my Baltika Extra 9 Lager as I speak, right here at the keyboard. First beer review for me! Not a bad balance on this one in my eyes, hints of sweetness in there, but with enough hops present to keep it interesting. The head was thick at first, but it was not a creamy one and had very little staying power. I could see buying it again at two bucks for a single; not a bad value at all. Three quarters of the way through the drink I can definitely feel the warming effects of the eight percent alcohol content. Not a bad beer, would not mind recommending it to someone for a try.

Photo of shadow1961
3.4/5  rDev +21.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Baltika 9 Extra Lager pours out a fluffy white head
over a transparent yellow brew. Carbonation is steady
and moderate, and the nose is very pleasantly of malt
and yeast. The flavor is light malt, grain, citrus, and the
smallest touch of hop. I think the 8% alcohol by volume
really adds to the crispness of this brew. To be honest,
I've had beers with more a sophisticated blend of flavors,
but there's something strangely refreshing about this one-
it's one of the better lagers I've had and I really think I would
buy it again.

Photo of chadspivey
2.81/5  rDev +0.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

december 2006....poured into a pint glass

A: pours a clear yellow, very light yellow. Head is impressive, about two fingers, but dissipates fast.

S: not impressed here. smells like budweiser or something related. Macro swill is what I think of. Very light malts, very little hop presence.

T: slightly better than the smell. From the smell, i didn't know if i'd finish this beer. apples and vanilla in the taste make this beer bearable.

M: very light mouthfeel. suitable for a lager, i guess, but nothing impressive.

D: this is one of those beers that you say, "well, you can't taste it after about 4 beers, anyway...". I'd probably choose to keep drinking this over just going sober at a party, but only if there were no other beers available.

Photo of Cresant
2.86/5  rDev +2.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured this 16.9 oz brown bottle into a pilsner glass. Bottle was dated 06.04.06. Body was rich golden with a moderate off-white head. A lazy bead of carbonation rose steadily.

Smell was corny and grainy. Pilsner like at times (husky and lemony).

Taste was sweet. Lemons, sugary syrup. Husky grains. Well covered alcohol.

Mouthfeel was medium, body and carbonation. This is not one I will have again, too sweet.

Photo of aforbes10
2.18/5  rDev -22.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

the "loser" of our Baltika Challenge. this is a clear beer with a white head that pours almost like a spirit. doesn't smell strongly, which i wasn't expecting....kind of corny like baltika's #2 and #3. some alcohol on the nose too. Taste had too much on the ethanol/rubbing alcohol side of things and too little on the beer-ness. way to go, you created alcohol. thinner than expected and off-putting overall. Vlad says that in Russia its much better and popular (likely due to the ABV).

Photo of shivtim
2.62/5  rDev -6.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

The last beer of the Baltika challenge. A very clear, mildly yellow beer with a white foamy head. Way too clear. Nose is sweet alcohol, mild hops, and some corn. Taste is grainy with strong alcohol and more alcohol. Mouthfeel is ok. Drinkability is hurt by the alcoholic taste.

Photo of AltBock
2.91/5  rDev +3.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

16.9 oz. bottle with a label that is a little different that the one pictured on BA. Mine is a black label with gold trim on the top and bottom and with a big circle in the middle that's 4 circles deep. The outer circle lists the ingredients, next comes the word "Extra Lager" in white letters with a red background, then comes 4 barley rows, and then it finishes with a big black "9" with a beige background. Above the main picture is the Baltika brewery crest, right is the Govt. warning, and to the left is the refund values. If you go southeast of the label, you'll find a Best Before date. Mine says, which I'm guessing is a born on date of 06.04.06 and a Best before date of 06.04.07. I just found out that there is information about the beer in small words next to a barcode on the black with gold trim neck label.

Appearance: When poured into a Pilsener glass, the beer was a pale straw yellow with a 1 finger head of white foam. What made this appearance so nice was the fact that the head of foam had really good retention and left behind plenty of white foamy rings and plenty of white sticky lace. After 30 to 40 minutes, there was still a small head of white foam on it. For a beer that looks like an average American macro, it had an appearance that I enjoyed seeing.

Smell: I guess the aroma of this beer could have been worse. It had a simple, yet average aroma of sweet corn, little malt, a hint of bitter hops, and all of this was in front of a subtle juicy fruit background.

Taste: Like the smell, the taste of this beer could have been worse. The initial taste was just sweet malt and corn. After that comes from what I believe is a subtle taste of metallic juicy fruits. The sad thing is, is that was the highlight of the taste. A slight taste of bitter hops after that kinda covered up the metallic juicy fruits taste. I thought that since it has an ABV of 8% that there was going to be a strong taste of alcohol. I really could taste any alcohol to this.

Mouthfeel: For a beer that supposed to have an ABV of 8%, this has to be one of the lightest beers I've had. I'm not joking! There was no sign of a strong beer. If they didn't tell me it had an 8% ABV, I would have guessed it would have been at 4% or 5%. Other than that, there wasn't much going on in the mouthfeel. It was light and with an aftertaste of subtle bitter juicy fruits.

Drinkability: If you happen to like light beers with little flavor that are supposed to be relatively strong, then you better pick this cheap import up. I had it and I don't hink I'd pick this one up again.

Photo of ViveLaChouffe
3.65/5  rDev +30.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Pours a pale but rich gold with a frothy and very lacy snow-white head. Smells of sweet pale malt, very faint grassy hops.

Hops are a bit more pronounced in the taste but there's a good amount of alcohol heat here too. Keeps the beer on the dry side although there is considerable sweetness from the malt. Mouth is semi-sweet with a dry herbal aftertaste. Warming alcohol in the belly. A good drinker. Decent malt liquor style beer.

Photo of kernalklink
1.86/5  rDev -33.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Poured well, though distinct strong malt aroma was present. Taste was as advertised- strong alcohol with a rice cereal-like sweetness, most definately from the added maltose. The Extra 9 must be the eastern European answer to the Steel Reserve, if not a little more sophisticated.

Photo of Byeast
3.23/5  rDev +15.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured very clear golden , with a frothy white head that stuck around. Alot of nice bands of lacing were left on the glass. Very grainy malt in the nose , slight hop , and definate bit of alcohol. The taste is also a grainy ride with a noticable spirit like alcohol throughout. Some sweet cereal like malt , probably from the maltose syrup. The carbonation and alcohol bites the back of the tongue , as well as just a touch of hop bitterness to round out the mildly sweet malt profile.

Photo of IntriqKen
1.72/5  rDev -38.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 1 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1

Pours a really pale clear yellow with a two finger large bubbled white head that melts pretty quickly.
Aroma is lightly (read LIGHTLY) sweet malt and a touch of''...soap. (nope...honest...the glass was clean and soapless)
Taste is sweet...strangely sweet....a little corn...a little rice (are their adjuncts in this beer?)...a little bubblegum....a lot of alcohol...and enough 'nasty' to make it a drain pour for me.
The tastes just shouldn't be in this beer...the bubblegum really throws me off for a lager and especially one so strong.
No thank you....
Enough is enough and I can't finish this pint.

Photo of kimcgolf
3.59/5  rDev +28.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Not sure if I’m rating the same beer as everyone else. This one has a red label, and says "#9 Strong Lager". Since I found no others to match. I’ll rate this. I was actually impressed with this beer, much more so than the Baltika #6 Porter. The flavor, while not real recognizable, was smooth and left a good finish. If this really is the same beer, it was a far cry above the Schlitz (Bull) Malt Liquor I drank as a kid, and I must say I actually enjoyed this beer.

Photo of BEERchitect
3.62/5  rDev +29.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Perhaps a bit atypical of Euro Lagers. It didn't have a dead skunk in it! Actually the flavors were quite malty and sweet, with a noble hop earthyness and pungentcy. A grain aroma persisted under the heavy malts and (corn) adjuncts, which transpired through to the flavors. The grain 'bitey-ness' was light and overshadowed by pilner malt flavors and textures, and sugary sweetness. Hops were regulated to offsetting the sweetness, and adds an herbal quality to the beer. Tastes dangerously close to a malt-liquor with the residual sweetness and abrasive alcohols.

Photo of Neehan
2.6/5  rDev -7.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Poured a pale gold with a very thin, quickly disappearing head. A sweet smell of malt and syrup is noted. A very sweet taste that lingers long after it goes down. It tastes like it is too low on the hops and needs a better balance with bitterness and carbonation. A light, mouthfeel that is unremarkable and consists of nothing exceptional. If this beer has been preceeded by several others, it's drinkable otherwise probably not the first drink of choice.

Photo of Georgiabeer
2.01/5  rDev -28.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1.5

Appearance is apale golden with a short pure white head that vanishes to a ring pretty quickly.

Smell is mostly of adjuncts. Very sweet corn smell with a noticeable alcohol background.

Taste is very sweet with an unpleasant grain alcohol flavor that makes me want to gag. There is a faint hop taste on the finish, as well as a slightly unpleasant metallic taste. This beer would be better with lower alcohol- the hops would come through more, although you'd still have to deal with the strong corn flavor. Right now it tastes as if someone dropped a shot of cornschnapps into a slightly better than pedestrian lager.

Mouthfeel is okay- fairly sticky, not refreshing, not interesting. Carbonation is fine.

Not very drinkable. If I hadn't already had a couple of beers tonight, I'd finish it. Given that I have, this ones a drain pour.

Photo of karst
3.21/5  rDev +14.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Best by 20.09.05 pours clear golden yellow with white dense short lived head that falls to a cap sustained by beading leaving the sides of the New Belgium0.4 L rastal sniffer well laced.
Aroma light but suggesting sweet malt with some light floral hops (Saaz?) hiding its 8%abv.
A medium body - slightly dextrinous mouthfeel - with moderate carbonation provides a creamy middle that finishes nearly dry with help of moderate hop IBUs and almost hidden alcohol. Been putting this off thinking it would taste much more harsh. Although the aromma and taste became slightly fusel with warming, drinking this was not that big of chore.

Photo of shertzogovina
2.47/5  rDev -11.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

A 500ml can.
Pours bright yellow with a fluffy white head that disappeared quickly. large bubbles floating around.

A somewhat surprising fruity aroma with hints of pineapple, but other than that almost no malt or hops are present on the nose.

The taste is far from good. medicinal bitterness is dominating the mouth, the fruits are long gone, and still no signs of malt or hops . awful coarse finish flavored with pure alcohol.

decent mouthfeel, highly carbonated and light to medium bodied.

Not a fun drink to have. Avoid if you can and try the brewery's #6 instead.

Photo of klewis
3.03/5  rDev +8.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

A: Pours a clear and very light straw color with a bubbly 3-finger head.

S: Subtle aroma of malt and honey.

T: Sweet malty taste with some honey. Alcohol presence is nowhere to be found. Slight Heinekenesque aftertaste.

M: Light bodied with moderate-high carbonation.

D: I have to admit that this is more drinkable than I expected. I bought this out of curiousity and probably won't buy it again, but at $1.72 for a 500ml, it's not bad.

Photo of stcules
1.93/5  rDev -31.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Light golden yellow, abundant foam, even if not compact, and not too persistent.
At the smell some malt, a light floral. It's a relatively light smell for a beer of this alcoholic strenght.
The taste is malty too. Maybe too much. But the alcohol is well hidden.
Nothing to remark, anyway. Too malty. Light notes of honey and camomile.
In the aftertaste, again malt and honey. Too much. In the end, boring. Again light camomile notes.

Photo of soulgrowl
1.15/5  rDev -58.9%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Appearance: Pale champagne-straw. Fizzy white head breaks down into a cratered, quivering froth, and then into nothing.

Smell: Rock candy, sweet corn. Muffled whisper of dandelion. Mild skunky and sulfuric aromas poke through the sweetness. Slight rubbing alcohol character emerges as it warms.

Taste: Oh my god, who put vodka in my MGD?

Mouthfeel: Sharp, watery, numbing, and abrasive.

Drinkability: This beer is nightmarish. Maybe it would be passable if you drink it ice cold, but otherwise... ugh!

Photo of ernie
1.18/5  rDev -57.9%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Malt Liquor at its worst, an awful beer that gained a vast popularity in the skid rows all over Old World. Generally, it's possible to brew a really strong pale lager, and there are some very successful examples of the style. In St. Petersburg the brewers (or, more likely, managers) were busy only with packing their product with alcohol. Well, they succeeded and offered us a horrible brew. Thanx, no!

Photo of WMBierguy
2.4/5  rDev -14.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Here it is: the Russian version of Camo malt liquor. The beer looks like a Budweiser, but has a a half inch head that it retains for a minute or so. The taste is unpleasant, and is very similar to a strong American malt liquor. It does get a bit better as you drink it, but I expected more from it than what I got. If you really want that malt liqour taste, then buy an American malt liquor; you can get 2 for the price of a single Baltika 9.

Photo of Mebuzzard
2.83/5  rDev +1.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours a light golden, but looks darker as it sits in the pint glass. One finger head that thinned out, but kept a 'skin' of head throughout.
Smell of malt, alcohol and damp grass.
Taste was totally absent of hops. Hidden pear affects and malt.
Creamy feel, did not go down smooth. Alcohol bites a bit, but nothing 'extra strong'.

Baltika #9 Extra (Strong) from Baltika Breweries
66 out of 100 based on 590 ratings.