Beer Rating Curiosity

My only point was that using extreme examples to disprove his point seems misguided. Chicken feces is pretty big and bold, but I wouldn't assume that he would prefer a chicken coop aged barleywine to a good czech pilsner. There's still an implied degree of context. We're still talking about alcoholic beverages that generally use similar ingredients.

As far as directly comparing wings to steak, or cornbread to sourdough, I supppose if there was a website that asked me to rate each based on attribute, I would do so. And over time, the collective reviews of thousands of users would bear out what people find more appealing. If I knew that I personally preferred sourdough to cornbread I would sort those ratings by bread type to see which are the "best" in that given style.

 

Yup - no fat means no flavor. Like a beer brewed with a neutral yeast, all base malt, and minimal hops!

 

I agree with these points. I do believe however, that the points above paint an extreme picture and your Eiche review is a bit extreme as well... but I do respect your willingness to go "all in" with your review.

For me, a good beer has some nuance, and a good approach would involve some nuance as well.

 

I generally agree, but at least the superior tenderness can be viewed as a redeeming quality. With the right seasoning and/or marinade, a well-cooked filet is a thing of beauty. I don't know that I can say that about even the best AAL.

 

That it's easy to drink on a hot day or after a rugby match. That I will concede.

 

So, you take issue with my using an extreme example to contradict an absurd point (objectively stating "bigger, bolder styles taste better") instead of the point itself?

 

The local chef would always say "Fat is flavor!".

Lardo has a lot of flavor, once you get over the texture, sort of the anit-filet.

 

I would say a complete lack of noticeable flaws is a redeeming quality. Maybe it doesn't make it great, but it makes it better than many beers.

 

I take some issue with both. Perhaps comparing hot wings to chicken marsala would have made sense, but not comparing chicken to beef. I agree with you that it's very difficult to ever objectively state any one style/flavor/type of thing is superior because it always comes back to personal preference. However, reading his post in its entirety, he is clearly stating that for him it wouldn't make sense to rate a more subtle style on par with a bolder, more flavorful style.

If that's what I'm looking for I'll pick up a gallon of distilled water.

Edit: That sounded snobby. I'm not shitting on AALs, really. I enjoy a High Life on the golf course as much as the next guy. But I also wouldn't consider rating one very highly just because it "lacks flaws"--along with flavor and body--regardless of how well it conforms to style. My only point was that a filet has a lot more potential in the steak world than an AAL does in the beer world.

 

I don't slam any and every beer that experiments outside the strict boundaries of the style guidelines. Capital Autumnal Fire is sort of like a doppelbock meets an Oktoberfest, and I rate that highly - the blending of the styles worked, and didn't completely transform the beer into a different category. I don't feel a need to caveat or asterisk any rating of it with a "hey, this isn't strictly a doppelbock per se" sign.

In the Eiche case, I was looking at something in an entirely different category. Had it been listed as a rauchbier, I'd have had no issues whatsoever - it's still a beer made with 100% smoked malt, which happened to be oak instead of beech. Minor tweak, still within the style. Making that same beer part of a style that is primarily associated with being sweet and bready...much bigger stretch, for me.

I may just be entirely too hard-nosed about it. But being hard-nosed is so easy, even a caveman can do it.

 

Good question, I've never been to a beer competition, so I don't know if these judges get paid or not. But if they do - then them. If they don't, then I just mean people who are selected to judge beers at competitions

 

In the aggregate, the best of each style will come out on top. Rather than look at whether a pilsner, or brown, or lager generally don't score as high as an IPA or stout, I look at how they compare to others in the same style when I'm out hunting. I pretty sure most folks here aren't discouraged from whole styles just because they're not the hot thing right now.

 

But that won't get you a buzz...

 

True, but unfortunately by the time I get a buzz off of High Life or PBR I'm already bloated and feeling like shit.

 

I think it varies a bit - there are certainly people around who don't bother with some styles because they don't rate high - but that is their loss!

 

Eh, more for me!

 

Agreed - but I think it is feeding the whale culture and how breweries focus on different styles. I think it also skews the perceptions of new people coming into craft, and we end up with less choice in some styles which does suck a bit...

 

It definitely seems like breweries are pushing some many "IPA" variations - because they know it's the most popular style.

I hate going to a "beer bar" that has 30 taps, and 20 of them are an IPA.

 

Well, yes. When you have a brewer faced with a choice of making a doppelbock that's going to tie up equipment lagering for two months or more, which a subset of their customers will love and rate highly but a much larger segment will describe as "boring" or "cloying" or "syrupy" and rate mediocre at best, versus taking 3 weeks or so to crank out a fifteenth IPA version that'll fly off the shelves to online acclaim while only disappointing a tiny subset of their customers and will have the equipment open for a run of stout that can be transferred to barrels and left to sit for a while to be hyped up...

 

plus I like when a bottle says vanilla on the label and I can taste the vanilla...5 stars from me.