Sierra Nevada Glissade Golden Bock | Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.

874 Reviews
Read the review
Sierra Nevada Glissade Golden BockSierra Nevada Glissade Golden Bock

Brewed by:
Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.
California, United States

Style: Maibock / Helles Bock

Alcohol by volume (ABV): 6.40%

Availability: Winter

Notes / Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

Added by adamette on 01-05-2010

This beer is retired; no longer brewed.

For Trade:
User Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Alström Bros
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Reviews: 874 | Ratings: 1,274
Photo of ElCommodoro
1.98/5  rDev -45.8%
look: 1 | smell: 3 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 1.5

How many beers labeled bock must I try before I find a real one? This beer poured a straw yellow pilsner colour. The other fake bocks I've had at least had the decency to LOOK like a bock. The tiny white head it had disappeared in seconds. It tasted like hops. Hops! That's it. It has sort of a resinous flavour. I paid way to much for this "golden bock" to end up with a resinous hopped beverage. It is WAY too bitter. Not enough to not be palatable. Some people might even like the flavour, but I just want to get across to the potential consumer and hopefully to the brewery how far from a bock this is. Bocks should never ever be at all bitter. It's not part of the style. They should also be dark.

Compared to the standard (Shiner Bock):
Definitely inferior. Shiner Bock lacks the proper maltiness to be an excellent bock, but Glissade trails so far behind it. And they have the nerve to charge more! Don't buy this. Buy a Shiner instead. Buy ANY bock instead.

 966 characters

Photo of HugePlume
2.06/5  rDev -43.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 1.5

Extremely disappointing brew. Appearance is pleasant with a nice pour and good head retention. Then its downhill from there.

Smell is not unlike pabst or another low grade macro, very grainy with bitter hop notes.

Taste is equally unremarkable. No distinct malt presence, just blandness. Hops are bitter but the finish is fast and not very strong. Light lemony notes but its not good.

Mouthfeel is average. good carbonation and body. Nothing remarkable though.

I bought a six pack of these to take to a dinner party along with a trader joes pale ale. I wish I had brought the left over Mission streets home, not these. I've had two since the party and finished neither. An extremely disappointing brew from Sierra Nevada.

 725 characters

Photo of semibaked
2.06/5  rDev -43.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1

Poured into my trusty pint glass

A - Clear golden color with active carbonation and a gigantic soapy looking head that has big air bubbles.

S - Smells a bit like glass cleaner with hops added, kinda weird.

T - Bitter and a bit rancid tasting, hops are prevalent but in a bad way.

M - light sunflower oil.

D - Terrible, really disappointed in this, SN usually have great offerings but this is all sorts of awful. Drain pour, I kinda feel bad for my sink.

 458 characters

Photo of xerxes2695
2.06/5  rDev -43.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Argh, this should come with a tube and a funnel because that's about all it's good for.

A: Clear filtered with 1/4 finger of bubbly head. I'm surprised that it's not bottle conditioned like the other SN offerings.
S: Mild lemongrass sweetness and a very very faint sourness hiding in there
T: Yuck. Really thin, weak flavor. A bit of mild vegetable starchiness like potato water combined with an off-sweet flavor reminiscent of rancid malt liquor, topped off with a vomit-like bitterness that brings back bad memories of teenage debauchery and hard evenings spent curled up against a ceramic bowl. Yuck.
D: Like I said, give me a funnel and I could slam these back until I'm poisoned but certainly not enjoyable.

Notes: What went wrong here? I understand the style, but I think this really needs to be revisited. It's very close but to do this style well you have to be perfect. The first taste is the deal breaker. The bitter/sour combination is way too close to vomit. It's just not nice. Meld something....anything into the combo and it would be good. My suggestion to SN is to take this recipe and turn it into a rice lager. Give it an earthy, oily flavor and I think it would round out nicely.

 1,200 characters

Photo of buschbeer
2.23/5  rDev -38.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1.5

I poured into a pint glass to an above average head. It is yellow and clear. The smell is sweet malt. The taste is not good. I get a bitter, metallic taste. It reminds me of European beers in green bottles. It's not skunky tasting, but it is just off putting. I'm glad Alkemy gave this to me rather than me buying a whole six pack. It looked nice poured into the glass, but it went downhill from there.


 411 characters

Photo of DNA
2.26/5  rDev -38.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

This beer produced a 2 finger head that dissipated quickly. The beer is very clear and a nice deep yellow color which is, I guess, appropriate for its type "Golden Bock". Very big creamed corn aroma is the first thing that I smell. Very faint maltiness beneath the sulfury corn. Taste is far too bitter for a bock. Almost no malt flavor is cutting through the bitterness. The mouthfeel seems a little light for a bock but the carbonation is just right. If it wasn't for the overwhelming corn aroma this would be a very easy drinking beer.

 538 characters

Photo of deebo
2.31/5  rDev -36.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 2

2011 bottle

A-Clear golden with moderate carbonation. Firm white head that dissipates after a few drinks.
S-Not much of an aroma, weak malted barley aroma, similar to most large scale lagers.
T-Smooth malt flavor upfront, takes over with fair amount of piney hop notes that linger.
M-Lots of lubricity and creamy mouthfeel.
D-Below average for a bock.

Overall-If you like a lot of pine tree/grapefruit hoppy flavor this is a good beer for you. Thought the hops weren't balanced well with the malt, so I would choose many others when choosing a maibock.

 554 characters

Photo of cbn
2.37/5  rDev -35.1%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

The beer looks as the name suggests, golden with fairly lively carbonation. A flufffy head slowly retreats to reveal a cirrus cloudy head replenished by a constant stream of small bubbles.

The smell is rather thin, acrid yet sweet, understated.

Fairly bitter flavor, slightly fruity.

Thin watery body, plenty of carbonation scrub.

Nothing stands out as paticularly bad, easily drinkable.

Not impressed with this offering from SN

 444 characters

Photo of Bouleboubier
2.41/5  rDev -34%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

Like their Tumbler, two important elements here are seriously underwhelming/listless: smell and taste. Even with ample time to warm up and a few hopeful swirls, my taste buds failed to rouse and sinuses nearly imploded through countless feeble attempts to detect aroma. When it was all said and done, I either imagined that I did or I actually did get an 1/8 oz of something in each facet that introduced itself to me as maibock. Just casually sipping this, however, I wouldn't object to the suggestion that this tastes/drinks like any ordinary "premium" lager.

From the notes: (poured into a trumpet pils glass)

A: golden shower yellow-gold, mostly clear but with chill haze, tiny fizzy head, no lacing
S: nearly no aroma - DMS, weak malt, bitterness(?) when warm, vaguely maibock-smelling
T: bland, transparent - light malt, DMS, champagne....cannot even begin to start talking about depth, metallic/bitter herb in aftertaste, slight tang
M: light-bodied, soft, clean, quite dry
D: see above...never again

 1,009 characters

Photo of Beaver13
2.45/5  rDev -32.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

12oz bottle. Pours a clear golden orange with a medium white head that quickly diminishes to a thin film that leaves a little lacing.

The aroma is cereal grains, hay and a little honey with some soapy floral hops.

The flavor is sweet malts with some off, slightly metallic notes. It leads to a medium bitterness in the finish that is a bit plasticky. The mouthfeel is light to medium bodied with smooth carbonation.

Overall, I didn't really care for this. The off notes subsided some as I drank it, but it was still not something I liked.

 541 characters

Photo of pi5porter
2.45/5  rDev -32.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

A - golden color like the name suggests, very little head, disappeared in a 2 or 3 minutes.

S - i couldn't smell anything

T - a malty taste. it had an aweful aftertaste which was really nasty bitter.

M - like water

D - i would buy it again.

Really didnt not enjoy this beer

 278 characters

Photo of wojoparkcity
2.46/5  rDev -32.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 4

Good pour... nice golden color. At first glance and whiff, looks and smells just like a Bud, Bud Light, Miller Lite, or PBR for that matter. But I didnt prejudge it based on that. I know SN uses natural ingredients so I was optimistic that would come through. Unfortuantely, it didnt :(. I love SN beers a ton, but not this one. It tasted just like above said less expensive offerings. Cool bottle and cool feeling that its a SN product, but this beer just has no WOW factor like other SN beers like celebration ale, torpedo, pale ale, etc. I do like Miller lite sometimes, but unfortunately Miller lite is much much less expensive. I think SN needs to rethink their spring offering. Perhaps add some more hoppiness to this golden bock and give it some SN character. It needs something to make it stand out.

 807 characters

Photo of allthatAles
2.48/5  rDev -32.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pour: Lightly bubbly pour, Head is modest at best, gives way quickly to a nearly nonexistent layer across the Lager. yellow tints orange-ish highlights.

Nose: Smells of notice-able malt sweetness and slight banana esther.

Mouth: Slightest sweetness pronounced malt flavor. Only a footprint of the hops is present ie the same quickly fading effervesance. The Malt mingles into a blatantly bitter but not caustic lingering finish.

I am not slamming this beer by any means. I am a HUGE fan of this brewery's Bigfoot Ale. I dunno, maybe this a reason i associate as an ale drinker not a lager. I tend to shy from banana esther, and anise flavors. Can any of the wise clue me in to what one should expect from a Glissade, as i imagine it to be a style more than a singular offering.

 783 characters

Photo of Lauthaha
2.5/5  rDev -31.5%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Poured from a 12 ounce bottle into a mini beer mug.

Appearance: Beer is a deep golden color. Head is similar to a meringue topping, very wispy and frothy. Fairly even moderate carbonation.

Smell: Roasted toffee malt, heavy on the earthy scents (hops, fresh cut grass), some mellow spices. Just a touch of ester.

Taste/Mouthfeel: Beer has a medium-lightness, with sparse carbonation. As it settles, there's a very smugly bitter taste which is not super-pleasant. It tastes brown, and thorny. Kinda like sod removed from underneath a rose bush in a manure pile. Alcohol is overdone, and the earthy taste is just overpowering.

Overall: Below average. The taste is just too much.

 679 characters

Photo of RJUGA03
2.5/5  rDev -31.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

A- Golden with an orangy tint that held almost zero head.
S-Sweet, burnt caramel and hops.
T-Hops, Malt,and the simplicity of a Macro-brew.
M-Heavy hop tingle with a somewhat dry finish.
d-If it was 1/3 the price then it would be very drinkable or if it was the same price as a typical domestic macrobrew.

 305 characters

Photo of Brew33
2.53/5  rDev -30.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

I had this beer at a tasting last weekend. The apperance is promising, strong yellow/gold, thin white head. The smell is not great. Grain, faint hops, light struck Euro lager. The taste was not great but the finish and aftertaste were bad, really bad. Similar aftertaste to a Heineken. I use the term loosely but it tasted "skunky". Slightly hoppy. Mostly faint, spicy, European hops. I don't like the malt profile.... at all. It's awful. This beer isn't good. I don't have many other Maibocks to compare it to but if this is indicitive of the style, I don't want anymore. Somthing tastes off here.

Maybe I had a bad example but I tasted it with a table of 7 other craft beer enthusiasts and 1 of 8 enjoyed it. Not a good effort from SN. The ESB will be sorely missed.

 770 characters

Photo of wrb357
2.54/5  rDev -30.4%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Either my six-pack is bad, or I just wasn't expecting the taste of this beer. I poured it into a pint glass. Looks good, light lacing, nice head. Smelled it - smelled like beer. Ok, great. Off to a good start.

The taste...I'm sorry, there's no way of getting around it, but it tastes like Pabst Blue Ribbon. Or some other cheap beer. Maybe I'm not familiar with this Helles Bock style, but I was expecting a sweetness you find in most bocks. This seems very carbonated and bitter, and to me has almost no redeeming qualities about the taste.

I love Sierra Nevada, and tend to like most of their offerings. This one I can't stand. It's easily drinkable, but again, so is a Pabst. I've been trying all sorts of new beers and styles, and this is one I can't possibly imagine having again.

Please someone let me know if something went wrong with my six pack. I've tried two separate bottles and they're both the same. If it's SUPPOSED to taste really malty and bitter, then I guess I just don't like this sort of beer. Really disappointed I spent the money on this one, because like I said, I love Sierra Nevada.

 1,113 characters

Photo of SWMeyer4141
2.58/5  rDev -29.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Appearance-Golden yellow, light brownish body, lots of carbonation bubbles sticking to side of glass. Solid one finger head, little retention, no lacing.

Smell-Is this beer not fresh? I love Sierra Nevada but this is real dull. Some light lemon and some malts. Pretty boring.

Taste-As I figured after first sip, dull. Slightly bitter throughout whole sip. Lighty sweet, with a dry finish. Leaves an awkward aftertaste, not sure if I'm just not too familiar with the style, or it's just not my cup of tea.

Mouthfeel-Smooth, with some better flavors I'd say it's refreshing. Light bodied with moderate carbonation

Overall-I may be unfamiliar with this style. I'm going to get a Dead Guy Ale this weekend to compare. Just not impressed, better then BMC.

 754 characters

Photo of nrbw23
2.58/5  rDev -29.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

A- Pours a gold color with a thin layer of white bubbles. Doesn't look much differenet than a BMC beer.

S- A bit of some sort of funk maybe even skunky. A bit of grass, grains, lemons and pepper.

T- Follows the nose pretty well. A bit of lemon and bready. Finishes with the peppery and funk.

M- Fairly light in body and a good amount of carbonation.

D- Had a hard time with this one. Don't think I'll hit this one up again.

 430 characters

Photo of claminat420
2.68/5  rDev -26.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

A- poured a transparent golden color with a frothy white head. left a light amount of lacing.

S- smells like a basic plain @ss lager. nothing too special coming from it.

T- a very light bubble gum taste. maybe some spicy euro hops backing it up. pretty much basic but not to the point where it seems like you're just tasting yeast water.

M- medium/ light bodied. good carbonation.

Drinkability- the one and only six pack i'll ever buy.

Overall- being a massive hophead this beer to me tastes bland to sh%t! i can't discriminate because there are other lager's i've liked out there but this german bock seems recycled. it tasted like that pilsner urqueal(spelling?) crap i tasted awhile ago. nothing great but coming from sierra i'm sure people hype it up. and i know that was a pilsner and this is a bock but to me it tasted the same. nothing special. beer tastes cheap.

 875 characters

Photo of sweemzander
2.74/5  rDev -24.9%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

12oz. bottle poured into an imperial pint. 2010 bottling.

(A)- Pours a clear goldenrod color that produced a thick; fluffy white head with some good retention. The foam sure is sticking to the sides of the glass.

(S)- A light grass-like corn meal. Bits of light lemon citrus.

(T)- That same grassy corn meal with a big dryness behind it on the tongue. The citrus is subtle; spicy.

(M)- A good carbonation level. A bit off balance with a massive grassy dryness. Just slightly sweet.

(D)- Not my favorite Sierra Nevada offering. Fits the spring season, but not really the style all that well. Would definitely gravitate towards other maibocks than this one.

 665 characters

Photo of SAxDRC5
2.76/5  rDev -24.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 4

A: Looks good, light lacing, nice head.

S: Smells like typical cheap beer. Not what I was expecting, though i haven't much of this style.

T: Tastes like PBR to me. malty with a touch of hops bitterness.

M: way way way too carbonated. prickly on my tongue. very light feel.

D: pretty good I guess, but if I'm going for drinkability with a beer that tastes like this I'll just drink PBR, as it's a lot cheaper.

I was honestly disappointed with this offering from Sierra Nevada.

 482 characters

Photo of gratefuld
2.78/5  rDev -23.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

A: Kind of what I expected. Golden like pour with a nice foamy head.

S: Initially did not get much from this beer and then I got some floral scents. Better than I initially thought.

T: Very mild taste. Not too much stands out here to me.

M: Silky smooth feel. I like the finish. Smoothed out my palate.

O: I don't know why, but I think I would like this beer much better after working all day in the yard. Tastes like it would be better on hot afternoon.

 461 characters

Photo of travduke
2.79/5  rDev -23.6%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

12oz stubby poured into an Otter Creek pint glass.

Appearance: Cloudy golden body. 1 finger head. Looks almost like an adjunct lager.

Smell: Light hops, malty, earthy. Nothing really stands out here.

Taste: Is this supposed to taste like something? Minimal hops, malt, bready. Sadly this reminds me of budweiser with a mild hop presence.

Drinkability: Could easily down a 6pack of these. Goes down like carbonated water.

Side Notes: I'm not really impressed with this SN offering. I didn't go into this with high expectations from what sierranevadabill was saying from the get-go. Its a nice intro beer into the craft world non-the-less.

 643 characters

Photo of FollowedMyFolly
2.8/5  rDev -23.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

I have the utmost respect for Sierra Nevada but I must say that I am not a fan of Golden Bocks. Coming from Colorado and trying Coors Origional, which is a pale lager, I feel that these two beers taste alike. Cooking with this beer might be a great way to bring out the flavor in a spicy chicken.

 296 characters

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Sierra Nevada Glissade Golden Bock from Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.
3.65 out of 5 based on 1,274 ratings.
  • About Us

    Your go-to website for beer (since 1996), publishers of BeerAdvocate magazine (since 2006) and hosts of world-class beer events (since 2003). Respect Beer.
  • BeerAdvocate Microbrew Invitational

    Join us June 2-3, 2017 in Boston, Mass. for beer, cider, mead, kombucha and sake from over 70 small producers.

    Learn More
  • Subscribe to BeerAdvocate Magazine

    Support uncompromising beer advocacy and award-winning, independent journalism with a print subscription to BeerAdvocate magazine.