Blood And Thunder
Round Guys Brewing Company
- From:
- Round Guys Brewing Company
- Pennsylvania, United States
- Style:
- Wild Ale
- ABV:
- 11.2%
- Score:
- +8 ratings needed
- Avg:
- 3.53 | pDev: 3.4%
- Ratings:
- | reviews: 2
- Status:
- Inactive
- Rated:
- Sep 03, 2019
- Added:
- May 24, 2018
- Wants:
- 0
- Gots:
- 0
NO SCORE
-
-
No description / notes.
Recent ratings and reviews.
Reviewed by jmdrpi from Pennsylvania
3.4/5 rDev -3.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
3.4/5 rDev -3.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
from 750ml bottle
dark reddish brown in color, light tan colored head. aroma is malty slightly tart. taste is similar, mild dark caramel malt flavor, vinegary finish. boozy. okay, but sours don't seem to be their strong point.
Sep 03, 2019dark reddish brown in color, light tan colored head. aroma is malty slightly tart. taste is similar, mild dark caramel malt flavor, vinegary finish. boozy. okay, but sours don't seem to be their strong point.
Reviewed by NeroFiddled from Pennsylvania
3.65/5 rDev +3.4%
look: 3.25 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 3.75 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
3.65/5 rDev +3.4%
look: 3.25 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 3.75 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
Round Guys Brewing Company "Blood And Thunder"
1 Pint 9 Fl. Oz. brown glass bottle, corked and caged
"Batch #1 February 2018" and sampled on 23 May 2018
$11.49 @ Wegmans, Collegeville, PA
Notes via stream of consciousness: Damn, that cork was hard to get out. Unfortunately there wasn't a very good "pop" behind it either, which makes me nervous - but at least it didn't gush! Yeah, it didn't bring up a lot of head when I poured it. It's a hazy, deep reddish-chestnut color beneath a thin cap of yellowed off-white foam. It's already starting to dissipate. There's some fairly large sediment sitting on the bottom. It does not appear to be yeast or proteins which is weird. The aroma is limited compared to what I was expecting of a "Belgian-style Wild Ale" but it expresses some fruit and dark maltiness. The fruit is like apple and dried dark skinned fruits and red berries. The maltiness delivers medium to dark caramel and sugar. There's some clove and banana phenols that round it out. The flavor is fairly bold. It's malty sweet and almost sugary. Well, not almost, it's actually quite sugary. It seems as if it's not completely fermented. It's caramelish and fruity, and just slightly acidic. Except for the fact that it's phenolic with Belgian yeast clearly in use (clove, plastic, banana) it could almost be an English-style barleywine. Ehh, maybe not, there's too much dark caramel there. It's a little bit like a super-big Dubbel though. What it's not like is a wild ale. There might be a touch of some Brettanomyces character underneath the sweet malt, maybe something metallic or like wet straw, but it's not clear if it is there. And there's no real acidity. Certainly a "wild ale" would have some touch of tartness to it, right? Hmmmm, OK, moving on, the bitterness is nicely balanced. I can see where they were going with this but they just didn't get there. Had it fermented out a bit more it would have been nice, and even as it is the bitterness is almost enough to balance the full maltiness. It's not cloying in the end any more than many doppelbocks are. And there's certainly some alcohol there - it's very nicely hidden but you can sense it, and I'm already starting to feel it. In the mouth it's full bodied and dextrin-rich, and very creamy and smooth but to a fault, there's just not enough carbonation there. If I had to guess where it's at I'd imagine it's barely at cask level of around 1.8-2.0 volumes of CO2/liter. A standard beer is around 2.5, and a hefeweizen is 3.0 or so. This thing is just flat and I'm guessing they figured it would ferment more fully in the bottle but that didn't happen. Unfortunately they released it rather than holding it to check. Or, maybe I got a bad bottle? Or maybe not, mine lists "Bottle 295 of 432" so that's fairly in the middle. On the other hand, at racking the first and last bottles out of the tank would have probably received more yeast. But at 11.2% abv, if it is that, that would be a hard push for most yeasts, even "wild" yeasts. So they've basically dropped the ball is what I'm saying here, and rather than checking on it and maybe just selling it at the tap room they've gone to the trouble to bottle it and push it out the door - not good in my opinion. But let me just throw this in as well: one day I got a call from a brewer that everyone knows, big national brewery, and he told me he had bottled a beer and it just hadn't carbed up and asked what could be done about it. So, #1, he didn't release it. #2, he had an idea for adding yeast to each bottle by uncapping and then recapping them all by hand (which he did), and I suggested two things. First, you can just wait and see, but that would have been a lot of money to sit on, and a huge amount of warehouse space; and two, if you're going to uncap, dose-and-recap, add some extra sugar in with a good amount of yeast. In the end it turned out OK but my point is that they were on top of it, and this doesn't seem to be that way. Judged for what it should have been it fails miserably; judged just as it is hedonistically it does a bit better. I'd have to recommend avoiding this beer as I don't think that it will improve even through cellaring, but you might want to look out for their next release.
Review# 6,027
May 24, 20181 Pint 9 Fl. Oz. brown glass bottle, corked and caged
"Batch #1 February 2018" and sampled on 23 May 2018
$11.49 @ Wegmans, Collegeville, PA
Notes via stream of consciousness: Damn, that cork was hard to get out. Unfortunately there wasn't a very good "pop" behind it either, which makes me nervous - but at least it didn't gush! Yeah, it didn't bring up a lot of head when I poured it. It's a hazy, deep reddish-chestnut color beneath a thin cap of yellowed off-white foam. It's already starting to dissipate. There's some fairly large sediment sitting on the bottom. It does not appear to be yeast or proteins which is weird. The aroma is limited compared to what I was expecting of a "Belgian-style Wild Ale" but it expresses some fruit and dark maltiness. The fruit is like apple and dried dark skinned fruits and red berries. The maltiness delivers medium to dark caramel and sugar. There's some clove and banana phenols that round it out. The flavor is fairly bold. It's malty sweet and almost sugary. Well, not almost, it's actually quite sugary. It seems as if it's not completely fermented. It's caramelish and fruity, and just slightly acidic. Except for the fact that it's phenolic with Belgian yeast clearly in use (clove, plastic, banana) it could almost be an English-style barleywine. Ehh, maybe not, there's too much dark caramel there. It's a little bit like a super-big Dubbel though. What it's not like is a wild ale. There might be a touch of some Brettanomyces character underneath the sweet malt, maybe something metallic or like wet straw, but it's not clear if it is there. And there's no real acidity. Certainly a "wild ale" would have some touch of tartness to it, right? Hmmmm, OK, moving on, the bitterness is nicely balanced. I can see where they were going with this but they just didn't get there. Had it fermented out a bit more it would have been nice, and even as it is the bitterness is almost enough to balance the full maltiness. It's not cloying in the end any more than many doppelbocks are. And there's certainly some alcohol there - it's very nicely hidden but you can sense it, and I'm already starting to feel it. In the mouth it's full bodied and dextrin-rich, and very creamy and smooth but to a fault, there's just not enough carbonation there. If I had to guess where it's at I'd imagine it's barely at cask level of around 1.8-2.0 volumes of CO2/liter. A standard beer is around 2.5, and a hefeweizen is 3.0 or so. This thing is just flat and I'm guessing they figured it would ferment more fully in the bottle but that didn't happen. Unfortunately they released it rather than holding it to check. Or, maybe I got a bad bottle? Or maybe not, mine lists "Bottle 295 of 432" so that's fairly in the middle. On the other hand, at racking the first and last bottles out of the tank would have probably received more yeast. But at 11.2% abv, if it is that, that would be a hard push for most yeasts, even "wild" yeasts. So they've basically dropped the ball is what I'm saying here, and rather than checking on it and maybe just selling it at the tap room they've gone to the trouble to bottle it and push it out the door - not good in my opinion. But let me just throw this in as well: one day I got a call from a brewer that everyone knows, big national brewery, and he told me he had bottled a beer and it just hadn't carbed up and asked what could be done about it. So, #1, he didn't release it. #2, he had an idea for adding yeast to each bottle by uncapping and then recapping them all by hand (which he did), and I suggested two things. First, you can just wait and see, but that would have been a lot of money to sit on, and a huge amount of warehouse space; and two, if you're going to uncap, dose-and-recap, add some extra sugar in with a good amount of yeast. In the end it turned out OK but my point is that they were on top of it, and this doesn't seem to be that way. Judged for what it should have been it fails miserably; judged just as it is hedonistically it does a bit better. I'd have to recommend avoiding this beer as I don't think that it will improve even through cellaring, but you might want to look out for their next release.
Review# 6,027
We love reviews (150 characters or more)! Check out: How to Review a Beer. You don't need to get fancy. Drop some thoughts on the beer's attributes (look, smell, taste, feel) plus your overall impression. Something that backs up your rating and helps others. Thanks!