Session IPA: Should it be its own style?

You crazy kids and your hopped hopping slang...I don't likkit

 

Just two points;

1. Low-gravity beers called IPA have existed for more than 100 years (almost 200, depending on your definition of low gravity).
2. I quite like the modern US type. Unpissed trousers and arse out of the gutter.

Oh, and I think they taste quite nice. Three points, then.

 

Beer is beer. If it is good who cares what it is called?

 

Gold Jacket, Green Jacket, who gives a schitt...

 

Had a Carton Boat and it was very good, over 4 Abv but better than any beer in this style I've had from anyone. Case worth stuff IMO, really liked it.

 

session pale ales make more sense no?

 

I had a feeling someone would bring this up. Yes, sessionable IPAs have been around for a while, but I'm willing to bet the English versions differ quite a bit from their American cousins, just as "regular" English IPAs differ from "regular" American IPAs. This just bolsters my argument that the sessionable IPAs being brewed in America today should be referred to as something other than "session IPAs". I don't believe that the sessionable IPAs being brewed in America that have popped up in the last few years are quite like any other beers brewed before (admittedly I have not tried every beer brewed since Creation, but I have had quite a few, and American "Session IPAs" are fairly unique in my experience).

I'm sure there are a few folks on this site that would disagree with this statement.

 

A Session IPA is one of my go-to summer beers, but only when they are done right (and I've only had two of those). I feel like there aren't enough good ones to warrant a seperate style category.

 

In the UK, the Golden Ale style has been producing what we call Session IPA here for years now. Stuff like Dark Star Hophead and Crouch Vail Amarillo. Since Golden Ale is already well known here as analogous to Blonde Ale and not a hoppy beer, US brewers needed a new name to sell the style, and Session IPA stuck more than the other myriad of terms that were thrown around over the last few years.

This thread is pretty ridiculous actually. Session IPA has been a style for at least a couple of years now and everyone in the industry recognizes it as such. Ratebeer has had a classification for it for some time now as well. Session IPAs are becoming big sellers for many of the larger regional breweries right now which means a lot of people like them regardless of what a handful of people have to say in this thread.

 

Yesterday I had a Dark Star Hophead, a really nice beer. It would be lost to many on here as it is 3.8%.

 

Session IPA = More marketable American Pale Ale
21st Amendment
Bitter American (Pale Ale) 42 IBU 4.4% ABV retired and replaced by Down to Earth Session IPA 42 IBU 4.4% ABV.

 

And there's another beer called Hophead at 3.6% ABV, from Brewster's which I think just edges out the Dark Star version. I had them head to head recently;

Both of these beers have been around since the 1990s.Nothing new.

 

Exactly. It's not like something becomes a style because users of BeerAdvocate will it. The site listings will either reflect the market, (plus culture and history) or not.

This might seem like a contradiction, but I don't necessarily have a problem if the answer is sometimes "not." As a drinker and consumer, I don't frequently make a personal distinction between an IPA and an imperial IPA, but there is a lack of internal logic if this site makes a distinction for imperial and not "session." The only reason why this is even an issue is because of the amount of drinkers that are nearly IPA exclusive... and their desire to compartmentalize IPAs (not that that is unwarranted). Other classifications are permitted to be more reductive without debate.

 

The other thing is that other forms of IPA are well established and were around long before Americans rediscovered the hop.IPA has been many things since the early days, it cannot be pinned down as a style because of this but who cares? Do you have to have averything spelt out?

 

This is spot on. And personally on a hot Texas summer day, having a lighter ABV beer with a nice hop flavor is perfect.

 

I think you mean IPA Lite

 

I've actually been thinking that if IPA popularity and ubiquity continues, we will need another strength designation to make a complete spectrum that is meaningful to the consumer. So Session IPA at <4.5%, "medium" or whatever sounds good at 4.5-6%, standard IPA at 6-7.5%, Double/Imperial at 8-10%, and Triple at >10%.

Right now we have a gap in between what drinkers expect in a standard IPA (at least 6%) and what many people consider the top end of the session range at 4.5%. Something like Oskar Blues Pinner at 4.9% isn't a session beer but isn't a regular IPA either, which is why I think they call it a "throwback IPA" right now. If people continue to want to differentiate IPAs from regular pale ales based on the hop character-to-malt balance, there is more work to be done.

 

I think styles are important for people entering beer in competitions and for people selling beer but in the great scheme of things I think styles are eroding and merging with one another around the edges.

 

Because then there are 4x styles for every existing style. You have to have a light, regular, imperial, and even a double imperial (talking to the triple IPA folks here). Does imperial pilsner or light bock really need to be a recognized style?
It is either a pale ale that is a little hoppier than the style guidlines or an IP that is a little lower ABV than style guidelines. There is no reason for a new style every time someone adjusts a standard style a bit.
On the other hand...I suppose I don't really care that much.