Educate me: IPL vs Pilsner

IPA. See @ChrisLohring's post.

 

Ok, I understand you now. Thank you for the clarification. I agree, perhaps if such a ratings system existed on this site (or elsewhere) then we could have the discussion?

Since it doesn't, I'll happily enjoy my Anchor California Lager and let this rest. However, I'll also enjoy an IPA. For some reason some posters think I hate hops just because I don't want them inserted into every style I drink.

 

An IPA

 

Just out of curiosity, why'd you make Long Play then?

I personally didn't care for Long Play, but Left of the Dial is in my top three session IPAs. I feel ale yeasts work better for hop forward beers. The ratings on this site appear to be in line with my opinion as well. Kiwi Rising is the highest rated "IPL", and it's still only 226th in the top 250. I don't have to remind anyone what beer is in the top spot.

Of course, all that being said, I love your Session Pils the most.

 

But the top 250 just represents each years trends. Years ago, a stout was the top rated. Another year, a belgian quad (BSDA) was top rated.

Look at the beers of fame and in the top 25 beers, only 7 or 8 are hop forward. I think this speaks more about peoples preferences than the top 250.

 

Or wine, or food, or cars, or music, or art… that was the whole basis of my automobile analogy -- no matter what "subsets" might be assumed. The whole craft beer geek "subset" is minuscule compared with the number of beer drinkers in the world.

But the bigger point is, why do lines need to be drawn and sides taken? Mr. Mark doesn't seem to be able to fathom that we can enjoy all styles of beer and still shake our heads at those who think only one subset is best.

 

By my count 4 out of the top 10 on that list are hop forward. And that number isn't trending down.

Heady Topper was simply an example. IPLs, on average, aren't even close to being rated higher than IPAs. And IPLs aren't THAT new.

If people love a hop forward beer, it'll rise on the list rapidly. Look at Maine Beer Co.'s "Dinner" and Lawson's "Triple Sunshine."

For now, ale yeasts simply work better for hop forward beers. Maybe brewers will change that in the future.

 

Sure I can. Not sure how what i've said would lead you to assume otherwise.

 

Funny how those blinders work, eh?

 

@AlcahueteJ Perhaps I misunderstood your comment here:

Do you mean that if Anchor California Lager itself was higher in alcohol, and more hop forward it would be rated higher, or was that just a commentary on the trend of this site to rate any beer high, regardless of style, because it is a highly hopped, high abv beer?

 

:-)

Then we are in total agreement about enjoyng the beer for what it is and finding those we enjoy. For that purpose the ratings and reviews here can be used to very good effect. (And personally I find that doing reviews actually enhances my ability to select out those beers I want to include in my regular rotation.)

And you are absolutely right that if a different ratings system were in use or appropriate adjustments to scores were made here, then it would indeed be fruitful to evaluate overall comparisons between different styles as well as within different styles. But until such data exist spending lots of time and effort on cross style comparisons (whether one thinks they are good or bad or right or wrong) is an exercise in wasted effort that can be better spent elsewhere. (For me life is to short to spend time jousting with windmills. :-) )

BTW, I personally have never thought you didn't enjoy hops.

 

(Boy, I'm sure glad you didn't say drink what you like! )

 

There is another place on the internet though that rates beer according to style, and gives a score relative to others from that style. Is that would you've been alluding to (not the site itself, but the scoring system?)

 

Good question, but in either case it would not be the same beer made for the same reasons.

Edit: Right now it is like Anchor Steam was some years back, one of a kind to be evaluated on its own.

 

Not really. Comparing beers within styles is fairly easy and straight forward. The scores here are also relative to others from that style, but they only meaningful relative to style (although some of the style categorizations are problematic). The fundamental problem with the top 250 beers is that it is a biased popularity contest amongst apples, oranges, mangos, horned toads and lizards, that many people demand but which does little more than, as you point out, tell us the beer de jour (or the beer that fans like that year).

 

shudder...

I may be pedantic, but hope I'm not that irrelevant or condescending... :-)

 

There was the sentence above which stated what I know about America. As an immigrant land, we can absorb ALL of these traditions information. Whether naively, or through academic rigor; we will more often than not rend and also render these things anew and make them our own.

 

The birth of the Pilsner style is extremely well documented because it happened in 1842 in the Bohemian town known at that time as Pilsen, and now known as Plzen. hence the beer known as "Pilsner Urquell": the name means "the original Pilsner (Plzen) (beer)". Before the Pilsener style came about - was invented, you could say - it didn't exist. People drank whatever the local place produced.

 

Why is IPL not really a thing? Some of them are quite good and they're quite different from pilsners

 

IPL is another IPA. But this time... it's with lager yeast.

IPA
IPL
DIPA
White IPA
Belgian IPA
Session IPA

When will it end!?!?!