Educate me: IPL vs Pilsner

Get outta my head, Domingo! ^_^

 

Great, so he enjoys pale lagers. Comparatively few people do. People rate the hoppy, high ABV beers because they like them. He rated a high abv pumpkin beer because HE liked it. That is my point. Nothing against the guy, so back down a bit being his online guardian.

His post seems to generalize most people on this site for only liking "big" or "hoppy" beers. Yet, he likes one himself. To me, that speaks volumes. If he likes it, good for him. I am positive that he didn't grade it high because everyone else did. He graded it high because he liked it. Does that mean if he rates a beer low, its because everyone else did too, or that is how he felt the beer was?

Perhaps, people rated the beer he linked lower than what he had hoped simply because they didn't enjoy it as much as other more hoppy beers. I find nothing wrong with that.

 

I think there is something to big, boozy, hoppy beers that demand higher ratings on this site than "boring", "bland", or "unoriginal" styles. Consider the huge backlash against Session IPAs that has come out recently on this site- this style is massively underrated by most people. I've seen it disparaged as "hopped-up horse piss". Why? "The body isn't there", "the beer is so thin", "it tastes like hoppy iced-tea", and "6% ABV is totally sessionable strength".

Perceptions of the consumer overall skew towards big and hoppy, which equally causes poorly made big, hoppy beers to be overrated while simultaneously leading to massive underrating of unpopular styles.

Similarly, to the bolded point in your post: I think that when someone goes to rate a beer on this site, seeing the overall ratings of other people unfairly change your perceptions of the beer whether you're aware of it or not. When I see, for instance, that my recently enjoyed Narragansett Lager (a fantastic example of an AAL, mind you), is rated a 77 by users and an 88 by The Bros, there is definitely something causing this disparity, and I likely attribute it to: 1) a "boring" style that people like to hate on for being overly simplistic and too much like the macros, and 2) seeing that the beer is poorly rated by others.

The hype engine goes both ways.

 

All I know is that if I see two beers in a bar that I've never heard of before, and:

Both are rated 4.00 on this site
Both have 100+ ratings
One is a BA Imperial Stout
One is an English Pale Ale

Then I will be staying the f**k away from the BA stout and will be all over the EPA

Take that how you will, but for the record I enjoy both styles. It's just that for my tastes, a 4.0 BA stout and a 4.0 EPA are two very different things (other than the obvious)

 

But, like me, he doesn't like them exclusively. And yeah, I'm calling that out -- as you think is generalization, I believe it's utter truth that there's a lean toward in-your-face beers at this site. The modern beer drinkers seem to think it's the only way a beer can be good and that's just not true -- if you take the time to understand all styles you widen your perspective and enjoyment greatly.

 

I agree.
I would too.

 

But that is across the board with EVERYTHING (foods, music, automobiles, movies, etc). It just seems like when I see these posts about light, non hoppy beers that "get no respect", I envision the same thing happening with a couple of old guys sitting outside a Baskin Robins, complaining that all these crazy flavors of ice cream are so popular, and why can't people just appreciate the vanilla?
But I don't think that beer was rated low because its not super hopped up. It was rated low because... people just didn't care for it as much. I see nothing wrong with that.

 

So does that mean that you and I are coincidentally two very f**ked up individuals; outliers of the BA community.

Or does it mean that BA stouts (and other "big" beers) tend to get higher scores than more understated styles, which means that when looking at scoring, you need to mentally adjust up/down accordingly to get a "truer" idea of the quality of the beer?

 

I take every "score" here with a grain of salt. I know that hype, brand association, locality, rareness, etc all factor in to peoples scores. I also think that putting that aside, if I were to hand an "average" (is there such thing, maybe not) "craft beer" drinker two beers... Unlabeled.... One a heady topper and another a Weighetesienin Pilsner or something, which one do you think they would enjoy more?

I would wager that out of a 100 tests such as that, the majority would enjoy the unlabelled hoppier beer more. Why? More noticeable flavor I would guess.

I do agree that big beers get bigger score and light beers get lower scores. I also find that prettier women get more attention in a bar than less attractive women. A pristine, shiny sports car would get more gawkers parked next to a school than a brand new prius. Super mocha toffee swirl ice cream would be chosen over plain chocolate the majority of the time.

Such is life.

 

At this point, we are just rambling. I will conceded. Back to the OPS question... I think dupage25 answered that quite well.
I think there will always be those who find no issues with styles or names, and there will always be those who do find issues with styles or names.

Not sure what would be a happy medium for all.

 

Maybe Hoppy Medium would be a better name than IPL? Oh wait, that's not what you typed...

 

I get what you're saying. That it's human nature to like bigger/better/faster, and that to most BAs, big beers are inherently "better".

Point is you agree with me that in the case of two identically rated beers, you'd take the EPA, because a 4.0 rated BA stout will likely taste like shit.

Those two trains of thought don't tie together.

 

“At this point, we are just rambling. I will concede.”

IMO you are not rambling and I would encourage you to not concede. I happen to like hoppy beers like Heady Topper. I also great enjoy beers like Weihenstephan Original (Munich Helles). While I greatly enjoy drinking both of these beers there is no doubt in my mind that a beer like Heady Topper is a BIG & BOLD beer; it is a shiny sports car per your prior analogy. There is no confusion on my part on why a BIG & BOLD beer like Heady Topper is greatly loved by the BA community. The reality is that a beer like Weihenstephan Original is just not a shiny sports car for BAs; it simply is not an exciting car (sticking with the car analogy).

Since I am a fan of beers like Weihenstephan Original there is part of me that would prefer that more BAs would appreciate and enjoy this sort of beer but the reality is that more folks get excited about shiny sports cars vs. a Volvo.

Cheers!

 

15 years.

 

They aren't supposed to.
I never said the barrel aged beer would taste like shit. My reason for choosing the English Pale Ale would be that I don't often drink that style, and barrel aged stouts are a dime a dozen nowadays. I'd be curious to try the EPA, especially since it was rated a 4.00.

 

Actually they tie together reasonably well once we realize that a particular score only counts within a particular style and that the numbers are suitable for comparison across styles. Making them match across styles requires either constraints on ratings which don't get imposed on this site or numerical manipulations which aren't used on this site.

 

See, I always assumed the underlying constraint across all styles of "craft" beer would be, well, how well it is crafted. Not how intense its hop, malt, coffee, or bourbon flavors might be. However, I, too have long ago learned that on this site -- and in general among the U.S. "craft" beer movement -- this is simply not the case.

 

That varies with the rater. Back when I rated (I think the last one was about 8 years ago and I never rated very many) I would sort after each rate to make sure the rank was to my liking. If the new beer was clearly out of place, I would modify its rating.

 

While it may vary with the rater that variability simply disappears once there are enough ratings in the pile.