Rated a 5. Anything else is crazy.

Considering that appearance is a category, I don't see how anyone in their right mind could score Heady a perfect 5. I mean, the label says to drink that shizz from the can. If you've ever poured it into a glass you could understand why. I have no problem with scoring everything else a 5 for it, though.

 

Don't know about you guys by St. Lamvinus is pretty much perfect.

 

I give it a 5 also... Asking me to rank 10 beers from 1 (best) to 10 (worst) and asking me to rate 10 beers on a scale of 1-10 are two different things (the later allows for more than one to have the same score) This is a rating system not a ranking system. When many people on this site rate beers the ranking part takes care of itself (majority rules). So I don't get why we can't have lots and lots of 5s to represent all the great beers out there. Again there are plenty of beers rated 100 on this side.

 

New Glarus Wisconsin Belgian Red......because 'When you say Wisconsin, you've said it all!'

 

Sorry to bust on a homer, but BCBS and BA Silhouette just aren't that great. Abrasive is decent, but easily topped within the style. I'll concede PsuedoSue as a matter of taste. I personally think ZD edges it out by a smidge.

 

I know haha!

 

Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion man.

 

I love stouts, especially imperial stouts, but the best beers I have tried in my short time as a craft beer fan are two IPA's. Ballast Point Sculpin and Deshutes Freshly Squeezed. Are these 5's though? I don't know. Is there really such a thing?

 

I've never given a 5, maybe I never will. HT and Abrasive come the closest as does Bcbs.

 

It's ok, now you know for next time.

 

KBS is my drug. 5/5

 

Fou Foune having received an 85 from the "bros" threatens to destroy this site's credibility entirely.

 

That is the dumbest thing I have ever read. Of course I like BA Stouts more than pilsners but you should judge pilsners against pilsners. Stouts against stouts ect. I will like a ba stout more than the best pilsner in the world but that does not mean that that pilsners is not deserving of a high mark.

 

Then those people should not rate beer. I give no shits about people throwing 5s around but how in the hell can you not rate to style.

 

Its really just one idiot that gave it a 1.52 that crashes their rating. Almost eveyone else has it in the hig 4's and 5. But I completley agree.

 

Celebrator Doppelbock

 

11, it's one more or in this case a 6, but then something comes along that's even better, but it can't because this one goes to 11 or in this case a 6. Simple Tap math

 

Who are YOU to dictate how people rate beer? I give no shits about people rating to style, see how that works? This is a free to use public website for people to have fun and talk about beer, not an industry standards system of checks and balances with auditors.

 

Why do you think so many IPAs on this site average close to a 4 or higher? They're automatically "outstanding", even if they're just like the 75 other IPAs in the same store that used the same ingredients. I don't think I've ever seen one where the rAvg was under a 3.5, while that's darn near the upper bound for pilsners. See also the barrel-aged effect, and in the same vein, where often beers that adhere to the guidelines for their style more or less in name only get ranked higher than exemplars of the actual style guidelines.

Hence why I don't really give much credence to the overall BA Score or even rAvg for any specific beer, and dig into reviews instead.

In any event, it's an argument that's done to death on here. People gonna rate how they rate, and the data may or may not be helpful to any one individual.

 

Simply my opinion on a free to you public website for people to talk about beer. See how that works?