James Squire 150 Lashes - Malt Shovel Brewery

Not Rated.
James Squire 150 LashesJames Squire 150 Lashes

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
71
okay

70 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 70
Reviews: 24
rAvg: 2.99
pDev: 21.07%
Wants: 0
Gots: 10 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Malt Shovel Brewery visit their website
Australia

Style | ABV
English Pale Ale |  4.70% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: vancurly on 08-19-2011)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | Likes | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 70 | Reviews: 24 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of evianIPA
1.03/5  rDev -65.6%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

345mL bottle best before 18/5/2015

"NEVER FORSAKE FLAVOUR"

errrmmmm...I think it should read

"WHERE THE FOOK IS THE FLAVOUR"

The marketers suggest this is an "Australian-style cloudy pale ale" but it's hardly cloudy, and whilst the suggested aromas of citrus and passionfruit could indeed suggest this is a New World ale, however this has ended up in the English Pale Ale section of Beeradvocate, most likely because those aromas are nowhere to be found.

A - Pale urine. I guess you could say the colour is watery gold. Rocky head dissipates quickly.

S - Pale malt and possibly acetaldehyde and diacetyl.

F - ???? Vegemite, apples, cardboard.

M - Medium full with lots of carbonation and soft bitterness.

O - I'll take a VB, or 150 actual lashes.

Photo of jgspears
1.25/5  rDev -58.2%

Photo of doktorhops
1.88/5  rDev -37.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

I'm not one who ever wants to be a spoiler (I hate those guys!) I will however before I begin this review say one thing; this beer sucks! I really, really wanted to like this beer as I'm a little bit of a fan of James Squires IPA, Pilsner and Porter, however this beer is a massive letdown from one of Australia's best brewers. Where do I even begin? [from the beginning, duh!] I have NO idea what was going through the brewers mind when they tasted this and thought "this is good, lets sell this".

Poured from a 345ml bottle into a conical pint.

A: The body presents with a semi-clear Gamboge colour and a 2cm chalk white head that dissolves down to a weak lacing.

S: The aroma has a Pride of Ringwoody odor that leaves it's insidious rotten vegetable stain (Pride of Ringwood is the primary hop used in Australian macro lagers and the mark of an average beer at best IMO). Grains are very lagery as well, this "Pale Ale" is another impostor!

T: Weak, boring, ineffectual... all three words could be used to describe the flavour accurately. This brew is a lager at best (a weak lager at that). There is a strong corn grain base followed through by non-existent hops (pathetic hops for a Pale Ale!) and a dry slightly crisp finish... I never wanted my money back so bad (at least when I reviewed VB and Tooheys I knew I was in for a crap beer).

M: Lagery mouthfeel, maybe a little less gassy than usual but still watery and weak.

D: Don't piss in my glass and tell me it's water James Squire. Somebody should have been fired for this travesty of a Pale Ale. I understand that Mr. Squire has bills to pay and profit margins (and whatnot) but this is really taking the piss - 1.1 standard drinks!? If you want to make a mid-strength make it like "Rogers" not this watered down Aussie macro lager swill. Now I may sound a little bit harsh on James Squire but thats only because they set the bar so high - they should never have brewed this beer, end of story/review.

Food match: I can't think of any food that will complement a beer this weak - it would have to be plain toast with steamed rice and a side of non-buttered popcorn, even then I think the flavour of the food might overpower this beer.

Photo of Vanz
2/5  rDev -33.1%

Photo of Kroehny_Loves_Hops
2/5  rDev -33.1%

Photo of madvoice
2/5  rDev -33.1%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Poured a golden colour with a very sudsy head that disappeared quickly and left no discernable lacing. Smells of citrus and yeast. No real taste to it. Resembles bad bore water wtih carbonation and a bitter aftertaste. Actually, I've had better bore water than this beer. There's no real flavour, no body and no substance. Drinkable like bad bore water is drinkable... only if you boiled it. Probably should've boiled this. Malt Shovel, I'm ashamed of you!

Photo of mikelward
2/5  rDev -33.1%

Photo of Kulrak
2.03/5  rDev -32.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pours a bright golden color with absolutely no head, even when poured straight into the glass. Smells watery, and a little grassy. Tastes pretty clean, very little sweetness, very little bitterness, finishes...watery. Mouthfeel, again, watery. Overall, it's watery. I expected more from Malt Shovel.

Photo of pharmerdoc
2.5/5  rDev -16.4%

Photo of kazoo
2.5/5  rDev -16.4%

Photo of Texasfan549
2.5/5  rDev -16.4%

Photo of nate1357
2.5/5  rDev -16.4%

Photo of pagriley
2.58/5  rDev -13.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.75 | overall: 2.5

On tap at SYD Qantas lounge - not sure how long the keg has been on
- pale straw thin white head with some lacing. Slightly cloudy - looks decent
- Hints of tropical fruit with a brief waft of cardboard... not a good sign
- Oh dear... Not much going on at all. Very little hop and malt going on - watery as it gets for an ale. As it warms a bit I get hints of the tropical fruit, but also some off flavors competing.
- Too much carbonation, which given the rest of the body and flavor might not be the worst thing - at least it is refreshingly bright and light

Overall, I guess if you get it cold enough you could happily knock back a few - a bit of a gateway ale I guess to get the macro crowd to try craft, but honestly nothing I am keen to ever revisit. Glad it was free, and I doubt I will ever bother to revisit - pretty forgettable.

Photo of csmartin6
2.75/5  rDev -8%

Photo of soju6
2.75/5  rDev -8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

On-tap at the Portland Brewhouse.

A: Served a pale golden color with a decent head and some lacing.

S: Not much here, only a light grain aroma with a hint of citrus.

T: Pretty bland, just a bit of citrus and sweetness with a mild bitterness.

F: Light body, watery with no character.

O: First bummer from the Malt Shovel people.
This could pass for a Coors Light.

Photo of Gasc0igne
2.75/5  rDev -8%

Photo of newbeeraday
2.75/5  rDev -8%

Photo of dansmcd
2.75/5  rDev -8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

On tap at the Generous Squire in Perth. Cloudy orange colour with a flimsy white head that disappears all too quickly. Faint caramel malt and citrus aroma. Taste follows the nose, particularly in its lack of punch and character. Not unpleasant, just too subtle and weak. An OK pale ale, but a myriad of better options around.

Photo of GraduatedCashew
2.75/5  rDev -8%

Photo of LittleCreature
2.8/5  rDev -6.4%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Appearance - 4.0
Pours an inch of white foam head which gradually receded to a thin layer, leaving rings of lace over its slightly hazy, golden body.

Smell - 2.5
Vaguely fruity aroma suggests of citrus, along with macro-lager-like notes of husk and grain.

Taste - 3.0
Again, very lager-like in its lightness and blandness. Grainy malt backbone, low hop bitterness, light mandarin flavour. Nice dry finish with a little lingering bitterness.

Mouthfeel - 2.5
Light bodied, moderately carbonated, rather thin and watery.

Overall - 2.5
We are supposed to review to style, but there is nothing English about this beer, in fact, it is hard to see it as a pale ale. It's inoffensive, but there is really nothing here to entice real beer lovers. When they come out with stuff like this, it's increasingly difficult to see Malt Shovel as a craft brewery.

Photo of lacqueredmouse
2.83/5  rDev -5.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.75 | overall: 2.75

345ml bottle purchased from Dan Murphy's in Alexandria. Although this has been out for a while now, I don't believe I've ever had it from a bottle, only on-tap.

On-tap, this pours genuinely cloudy, much like a Coopers green, which this seems to be trying to emulate, but here it's relatively clear, with just a slight hazing towards the end: although I don't believe it'd bottle-conditioned, I'm guessing there's a yeast addition towards the end to add the haze, and this has settled out in my bottle. Head is very minimal: a fine white ring around the top of the glass, even after a relatively vigorous pour. Some fine carbonation, but mostly it looks flat and still. Not bad, but not something to make you enthusiastic either.

Nose is a mixture of husky grain and earthy, woody PoR characters. There's something faintly floral sitting around the edges, but this seems to undermine the other characters, making the already questionable aromas seem weak as well. Some sweetness comes through as it warms, perhaps a touch of honey or banana. But mostly, it smells like a slightly off-colour Coopers green.

Taste is lighter and sweeter than Coopers though (sorry to keep making the comparison, but it's so obviously the comparison to make), with a solid liquid malt character running through the centre, chased by the ghost of Pride. Some fluffy savoury biscuit characters rise up after a while, along with a plasticky tone towards the back. Finish is suprisingly long, without the crispness, or the bite of hops it feels it needs.

Feel is slightly sticky, and slightly bloating.

Overall, I'm not a real fan. I find this a better option than the ubiquitous New, Extra Dry or Pure Blonde, but it's certainly worse than Coopers green or red. This just has some off-kilter elements: the additional sweetness, the funky floral overtones, the thick finish. It makes it seem like a needless and feckless brew as a result.

I'll stick to the Golden or the Pilsner if there are no better choices, thanks.

Photo of heygeebee
2.83/5  rDev -5.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours a good two finger white head over a typical straw body. Good bubbles. All OK so far.

Aromas? Not too much due to serving temp - some Coopers-like pear but not much.

Taste sadly degenerates into blandness. Malts to the fore, no real hops to balance. This really is not JS moving forward with their range at all, indeed backwards. It's all very 'integrated' but in a way that cries mainstream. Needs a standout element to say 'this is new beer'. A pale imitation of Coopers Pale if anything..

Yes I could drink it all night, but would I? - not thru choice....

Photo of CrazyDavros
2.88/5  rDev -3.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Pours pale amber with a quickly fading head.
Nose shows restrained floral and fruity notes along with faint grainy malt.
Flavours include sweet light malt with grainy notes and a soft, light bitterness.
Could use more carbonation.
Pretty dumbed down.

Photo of deandob
2.88/5  rDev -3.7%

Photo of drpimento
2.89/5  rDev -3.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Geez, what a drag: I just had this on draft at the hotel where I'm staying and it was so much better then - just like a good real, pale ale should tast like. But this poured at a good temperature with a modest head, that soon faded and a bit o lace. Color is a clear amber with some tiny bubble trails. Aroma is skunk malt and not much else. Flavor is very mild- hops are almost gone, some malt and tang, not much else. Bit of bittersweet. Body/carbonation are decent. Finish is like flavor, some mild medicinal flavs.

« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
James Squire 150 Lashes from Malt Shovel Brewery
71 out of 100 based on 70 ratings.