Rating an infected beer

I can't imagine it ever would

 

Umm... what?!

So if you go to a bar that has a bad tap line, you give the beer a bad rating? And, you expect the brewery to be responsible that kegs, bottles, & tap lines are all being stored properly after they go to distribution?

And how exactly do you determine an off-taste is the fault of the brewery, the bar, or the distributor? If I think a pour is not right I'll ask the bartender about it, and in most cases they will just replace it with a pour of something else. I'm not going to review a beer that I know is infected. If anything, a bar that seems to have issues with the quality of their taps is not a place I'd keep going back to. In that case, the bar gets the bad rating.

 

Interesting. We're thinking along very different lines. First, I wasn't thinking much along the lines of draft beer. I was thinking more bottled beer.

I guess I occasionally rate and review beers at a bar, but only if it's a place I know is of good repute and I confide in their lines, service, glassware, etc. But mostly I review beers at home from bottles and while drinking at home.

So yeah, there's a nuance to all of this. My original argument still stands, but no, I wouldn't review if I was drinking the beer at some shitty bar serving me the beer in a frosted mug from a suspect line handed to me by a ditz that doesn't drink or know anything about brews.

 

Does anyone know what would cause a beer to taste like bile?

 

What is an infected beer? Taste ? What and why and how? Info please?

 

You docked the score of the beer because the tap lines were not clean? Why not review the location and give them a poor review instead? The brewer has no control over the beer once the distributor takes possession. They certainly are not able to control the sanitation of a bar which purchased a keg.

 

And because they have repeatedly had infection problems, it is completely reasonable to rate the infected beer poorly. People need to know buying Duck Rabbit is risky.

 

I don't believe in leaving a negative review for a skunked beer, unless the brewery keep screwing up. Leaving such a review is like rating kate uptons looks while she has a rosie odonnell mask on.

 

I actually did rate the bar poorly on Trip Advisor and Yelp.

Unfortunately they are not listed on BA, so no rating for them here. But if you read my review I was fair enough to the brewery and didn't put the blame on them.

But I do disagree here.

Breweries should have local territory sales reps checking these issues out in the field or at least hire a marketing agency that has the manpower to do so and report back sales, product and consumer data to the sales managers at the brewery.

Tap lines in bars, end caps in super markets with outdated product.

Victory, Troegs, Founders and Bells all have sales and marketing reps out in the field pushing their product, checking inventories and assuring quality control.

Weyerbacher may be slightly smaller, but that still doesn't preclude their local field rep from doing their job, which is to ensure that the product isn't tainted by the time it reaches the customer.

 

They can't be everywhere at once- that's why the proper thing to do is to simply let the brewery know, and then their people can handle it. They aren't very likely to see a review on BA to be able to handle that kind of situation.

 

You don't like sours?

Kidding aside, if it's not intentional then it is probably because some 'bug' like lactobacillus or pediococcus (maybe from a barrel) got into the beer, or even a wild or mutated yeast strain from re-pitching too many times. Those are all along the lines of being 'infections'.

 

You are probably getting butyric acid, which is produced by certain bacteria, and smells like vomit. Clostridium is often mentioned.

 

If it's spoiled/infected/unintentionally bad...review it. Other people on this site want to know if an expensive, brewery only release beer is going to be a waste of their money (O'so in Wisconsin). If you enjoy the off/odd/sour flavors, feel free to give it an okay or positive review, but still mention the above.

I don't care if that's not what the brewery intended to make or not, but in reality they did make it, sold it, distributed it, and so on.

 

It's one thing to state that it was an infected beer, and another thing entirely to review it. Could be a semantics thing, but having looked through some of your reviews, I found a review of yours for an infected beer: "infected and terrible. single sip drain pour." That's not a review, by my definition. But if that's what you're talking about, then I have no problem with what you're saying, 'specially since everyone that sampled that particular batch supported your claim. But if someone actually broke down the flavor, aroma, feel, and look of a beer using descriptive language (an actual review, in other words) - and they knew the beer was infected? That's what I was talking about when I said there's no point in reviewing an infected beer

 

Great answer! Now I know the beer was infected. Still not sure I want to try another from the same brewer.

 

Perception is everything. I have learned that the products (not beer, but food) that I offer have to be the same every batch. Of course demanding consumers wants a consistent product, of course its not always possible and of course someone will aways judge you for it.

 

Just got a Trillium Double Dry Hopped Melcher in a trade and it was salty-sour-milk drain-pour. Who knows what happened. C'est la vie.

 

I agree. To review an infected beer helps who? Once you state it's infected I get it. If it's reoccurring hit the brewery, they are responsible for putting out a proper product.

 

It helps me because I like to do it.

It helps people because they can see the stage of the infection, from early onset to full-blown. Not all infections are created equal, from where it is in the process to the type of bug that brings differing off flavors.

It helps in aggregate because I can see the progression, or perhaps the frequency, of bottles/cans that have been written up as infected.

It helps as a reader because there are plenty of people who have no idea what an infection tastes like - there was a thread a while back about a beer that was "infected" because the hops were more muted than he remembered? Saying "it's infected so I don't like it" doesn't tell me whether it's infected, they guy doesn't like winter warmers, there's diacetyl, he bought it after it sat in the window for eight months...or a host of other things.

Descriptive reviews are always helpful to me if I'm wondering about the quality of a beer that's been called into question.