1. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  2. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Nine Man Ale Golden Ale - Cooperstown Brewing Company

Not Rated.
Nine Man Ale Golden AleNine Man Ale Golden Ale

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
78
okay

107 Ratings
THE BROS
81
good

(view ratings)
Ratings: 107
Reviews: 71
rAvg: 3.38
pDev: 13.31%
Wants: 1
Gots: 1 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Cooperstown Brewing Company visit their website
New York, United States

Style | ABV
American Blonde Ale |  4.30% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 04-13-2002)
View: Beers (8) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 107 | Reviews: 71 | Display Reviews Only:
Reviews by beernut7:
Photo of beernut7
3.43/5  rDev +1.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours a chill-hazy copper with an impressive sticky head. The aroma is that of white-wine and bready malt. An initial light body pairs with a refreshing bready malt character and a flush of fruit on the finish. Very mild bitterness and very easy drinking. I would like to try this on tap.

More User Reviews:
Photo of Todd
3.43/5  rDev +1.5%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Presentation: 12oz brown bottle. No freshness date, but it's got a cut bottle-cap that looks like a baseball.

Appearance: Rich, bright golden hued beer topped with a frothy white head which retains well and trails the glass.

Smell: Pretty empty in the nose, with some hints of apple-skin.

Taste: A bit coarse on the palate, with a tight, spritzy, scrubbing and sharp-ish carbonation that creams up in the mouth, providing a bit of smoothness on the palate. Body is quite light. Major blast of zesty bitterness, with a watery citric character to it. Touch of cheesy hops. Sweetness is low, with notes of saccharin. Touch fruity berries, apple, pear and plenty of Ringwood yeast character (which may be odd for some). Dry, grainy and ashy in the finish.

Notes:A tasty ale. Uncomplicated, easy drinking and quite the refresher. The Ringwood yeast is a bit powerful though, and perhaps a bit too dirty and dominant.

Photo of sponberg
3.75/5  rDev +10.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

Sampled: 12 oz. bottle, in pint glass. Bright golden/amber color, head lasted about one minute (may have dissipated when I stuck my nose into the beer by accident while checking the aroma. Note to self: Watch that next time.)

Aroma: Some light malty notes, but mostly the distinct Ringwood yeast aroma. A bit prickly on the tongue, with a good malt/hop balance that does a pretty good job of quenching the thirst. Hints of alcohols and yeast are also present in the background. The finish is pretty clean, with a nice roundness, but the aftertaste is somehow reminiscent of an ice cream cone - no ice cream, just the cone. And not a sugar cone, either - one of those light yellow Eat-Em-All ones. Despite all that, it somehow manages to be a rather quaffable beer, even if it isn't up to the standards of its big brother (Old Slugger).

Photo of generallee
4/5  rDev +18.3%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4.5

Presentation: It was poured from a tap at the brewery into a small plastic tasting glass. This was part of the breweries tasting. I think it was two or three dollars to sample each of there seven beers.

Appearance: It is hard to say from the sample size but I would say that it would be very similar to the bottled version.

Smell: Here is where I started to notice some difference. The malt is still pale and light but the hops are fresher, brighter and bring more citrus notes to the nose.

Taste/Palate: Like the aroma, the hop flavor is fresher and more vibrant. The light pale maltiness is cleaner as well and I didn't notice any diacetyl notes. It is still light and fairly clean on the finish with just a little more citrus hop character. This is very refreshing, light bodied and easy drinking.

Notes: This is the way to drink a Nine Man!!! On Tap!!!

Photo of Jason
3.68/5  rDev +8.9%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Presentation: 12 oz. brown long neck with a baseball motif label and cap. No freshness date.

Appearance: Rich golden hued brew with a clinging white lace.

Smell: Light malty caramel and buttery diacetyl make for a toffee like aroma, mild esters appear also.

Taste: Crisp with a very mellow rustic earthy flavour from a mix of the hops and Ringwood yeast strain, some dehydrated pear in the middle also. Definitely on the dry side with a grainy undertone. A herbal/orange hop twang towards the end helps to finish this brew off with a small amount of residual dextrins.

Notes: A pretty good brew , though peculiar tasting, the Ringwood strain is a bit of a distraction for this Golden Ale Style ... perhaps a cleaner stain would have been more suitable unless you are accustomed and enjoy the Ringwood traits?

Photo of OldFrothingSlosh
3/5  rDev -11.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Presentation: 12oz. pin-striped bottle with ol' Abner Doubleday on the bottle. Bottle cap looks like a baseball.

Appearance: An aggressive pour yielded a briskly-carbonated and fizzy dull orange-colored beer with a thick layer of lacing head that quickly died off.

Aroma: Different. An earthy, "flowery" aroma. Bits of malty sweetness as well.

Taste: Gritty, earthen flavor. Very, very dry. Nothing too exciting here. Moderately bitter. Long-lasting dryness.

Drinkability: Again, not too exciting. The finish knocks a point off the drinkability. A little smoothing of the rough edges would do this beer well.

Mouthfeel: Low-bodied, very fizzy. Almost a "macro"-like mouthfeel.

Photo of Thrasher
2.9/5  rDev -14.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Interesting but not entirely successful. First bottle was incredibly foamy, possibly infected, so I was maybe too careful with the second since this time there's no head to speak of. Dark for the style. Good caramel malts with rich butter and toffee flavors overshadowed by indelibly tart green apple flavor. Initially an interesting balance but grows tiresome. Mouthfeel a touch too fizzy, like soda. I don't know if the apple flavor comes from the hops but it serves the same purpose, to dry out the finish but unfortunately does not tickle the tongue into wanting more sips. I wonder if these could be old bottles since they seem a bit off; not ruined but lacking refinement. Put dates on your labels, Cooperstown.

Photo of JMS1512
2.75/5  rDev -18.6%

Photo of mdaschaf
3.23/5  rDev -4.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Thanks to THECPJ for this bottle.

A: Pours a slightly hazy orange color with a massive white head, tok a while to pour the entire beer as the foam rose all the way to the top quickly. However, it reduced just as fast and there was nothing left on top and no lacing within moments.

S: Actually has a little funk to it, very surprising. A little bit of grains and a bit of citrus, but the funk dominates.

T: Again, slightly funky/sour. It dominates the flavor profile and I can't really get much else out of it.

M: Medium bodied with moderate carbonation. Rather slick.

O: Very confusing with the funk/sourness. Can't really imagine why it smells and tastes like it does. I like it, but reviewing to style is what will keep it low.

Photo of Griffith
3.5/5  rDev +3.6%

Photo of Sammy
3.08/5  rDev -8.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

aggressive carbonation. A lot on fizzy gas, little on taste, which gives a middle mouthfeel with an uncomfortable graininess. Tad of tartness more than bitterness and drying sweetness and not very satisfying. Little head, beer and skunky smell, but still fresh, little interest.

Photo of tempest
3.6/5  rDev +6.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

This beer is most easily described as ringwood-light. No it's not a lite beer, but it has trademark ringwood taste, but is lighter than others of the same yeast. Gold colored and smelled of light fruits. Tasted of apple and orange with a slight grassy bitterness. The bitterness didn't seem to fit for me. I'd keep this one malty, that is unless you like your blonde ales hoppy.

Photo of Larrydoherty
3.25/5  rDev -3.8%

Photo of KTCamm
4.1/5  rDev +21.3%
look: 3.75 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 4.25 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.25

Brewery bottle pick up. Pours into a pint glass.

Pours cloudy pale gold, settling out foam. Some layering. Bright malty nose and citrus. Taste is light, lemon citrus. Some tart, clean finish. Mild hop at the conclusion lends a little bite. Great summer beer, light mild, but tasty. Well made.

Photo of edchicma
3.5/5  rDev +3.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

A different flavored brew. Color is a nice copper with very little head. Smell was smoky butterscotch? Taste likewise had a smoky, buttery flavor, rounded, yet witha slight bitterness on the finish///a bit unusual IMO. Mouthfeel was a bit oily...not unpleasant, but not spectacular either. Drinkability was hampered a tad due to this oily quality. Not my favorite, but if others like the qualities I described, give it a try.

Photo of hotstuff
3.2/5  rDev -5.3%
look: 2 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4

There is nothing fancy about this beer, but it is a decent beer to drink.The appearance was a medium ivory creamy and rocky head that consisted of fine-small bubbles.The body was slightly hazy and it had a lot of fizzy and lively carbonation.The hue was orange and this beer left a good lacing on the sides of my glass.The nose wa malty, hoppy, fruity and citrus.The flavor was lightly hoppy, tart and it had a bit of an aftertaste.The mouthfeel was smooth, thin and light bodied.

Photo of pjkelley82
3.75/5  rDev +10.9%

Photo of akorsak
3.3/5  rDev -2.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

This is a 12 oz bottle of Nine Man Ale served in a tumbler. The ale is cool.

Appearance: The ale is golden in color with good lacing and no sign of haze.

Smell: There is a distinct biscuity nose of malts but no hops to be found.

Taste: The malts give the ale a definite sweetness and the complete lack of hop nose and aroma cuts out the bitterness factor.

Mouthfeel: I would like some hop character to assert itself.

Drinkability: The ale tastes good on its own, so I recommend it for a hot summer afternoon outside.

Photo of bonbini26
4/5  rDev +18.3%

Photo of AaronRed
3.5/5  rDev +3.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4.5

This was lighter beer then I had expected. Poured nice and golden, of course, with a faint hop aroma as it settled. This beer is light and crisp, with some decent ale flavors, but is very tame- almost too much so. Almost no bitterness, which for some people is a huge plus, but I like a little more kick. But this is a golden ale, and given its style, was pleasing in its own way. Not a substantial beer, but it is smooth and a great beer for summer. Crisp and can easily be consumed- however much you want.

Photo of buzzy
3.25/5  rDev -3.8%

Photo of MmmIPA
2.9/5  rDev -14.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Thanks to my boss Randy for the sampler pack.

Nice, thick and fluffy head and golden body with streams of bubbles rushing to the top of the glass.Not much of a smell.Not a bad taste,sorda watery but thats not turning me away.There is a funky taste in there,that didnt turn me away either.I enjoy this stuff and I think I taste lemon in there and a slight bitterness.Goes down real easy and would make a great session beer.I wish I had a couple more of these, its very refreshing and a well done beer.

Photo of LPorter33
3.5/5  rDev +3.6%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Purchased single bottle from Martignetti's

Appearance = clear golden brown -looks like cream soda, a color I'm not paticularly fond of, good head that quickly fades into trace lacing.

Smell = Bitter sour hops with a very faint carmel like sweetness that comes through in the end. I enjoyed the scent.

Taste = Initial bit of sugary sweetness, then a very sour and acidic flavor dominates through, tastes almost like a hard cider at times. Has a pleasant bread/wheat aftertaste. A little bland overall though.

Overall = Not bad. High drinkability even if it's nothing spectacular in the taste department. I like the crisp, clean taste it leaves in my mouth and the aftertaste is very agreeable. I recommend you try one or two.

Photo of SixpointJMH
3.1/5  rDev -8.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

a pretty standard ale from cooperstown brewing. i can't really say anything bad about his one, but there's nothing definitively good about it either, save for the fact that it's a well made, easy drinking brew. a little hoppy, a little grainy and maybe a bit of caramel in both the smell and taste. there was nothing going on here that i was dissapointed in nor was there anything unexpected. a decent choice if your trying to ween someone off of heineken. even a bud drinker might be prone to enjoying this one.

Photo of tclapper
4/5  rDev +18.3%

« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Nine Man Ale Golden Ale from Cooperstown Brewing Company
78 out of 100 based on 107 ratings.