IPA's with higher IBU's seem to be the highest rated

More sugars in the boil lead to DECREASED hop utilization in the kettle...

 

Odd, I don't see anything in the style guidelines that says an IPA should finish "smoothly". I do see that they're supposed to be moderately to very bitter. Sounds more like a personal preference on your part.

 

Westbrook IPA is only 60 IBUs and that is a very good IPA.

 

The best examples of IPA, both IMO and most of BA's opinion, are ones that don't have a lingering bitterness. They have a sharp bite, but not a lingering bitterness.

 

In name only. It's one of those walks and quacks like a duck situations.

 

Let's be honest, a disconcerting percentage of craft beer drinkers in North America don't care for nuance, they want a lot of aromatic hops and bitterness. You'll find that a lot of richer maltier beers with a lot of depth of flavor get decried as syrupy messes. Anything that isn't potent, is open to being called boring, or too sweet. Hell, restraint is acceptable if the beer itself is well made. I think there's a definite preference for IPA/IIPAs in the market right now, all the better if they're difficult to track down.

 

Mean Malanashi of Hoppin Frog has 168 Internation Bitterness Units. It is currently rated at 3.79.

Rogue XS Imperial IPA hits 74 IBU's, yet rated at 4.14.

Mikkeller 1000 IBU supposedly has 1000 theoretical IBU's (whatever that means), and scores a 3.88.

Sculpin hits 70 IBU's, and scores a 4.39 rating.

 

And that's well and good, but to knock an IPA for doing what it's supposed to do seems odd.

 

http://www.beertutor.com/beers/index.php?t=highest_ibu

No, not even close. Only 3 beers with 120+ IBUs are in the top 250 as far as I can tell.

 

I still can't believe people who don't brew beer still pay attention to that crap. They don't understand the balancing act between hops and malt, and the timing of said hops. For the average consumer, IBU is a marketing gimmick at best. Hook, line and sinker.

 

I think it's more of an accomplishment to make an IPA that doesn't have a lingering bitterness.

 

Because people like bitter IPAs. I want an IPA with a long, bitter finish. The lupulin threshold shift is real.

 

It doesn't taste or feel like an IPA. It behaves like one.

 

Not necessarily

http://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/13307/56842/

 

Maybe, but I think it can be a good guide and while I have learned through my tastings and as I learn more about the brewing process that I can't pay too much attention to it anymore (I have had 40 IBU beers that I found to be very bitter and 80 ones that I did not) it is still a decent baseline for me most of the time and once an IBU is above 30 let's say, I generally know what to expect with the beer's characteristics (and going the other way when it is very low, I know what to expect there too).

I equate it to the horsepower and torque figures with cars, most people just focus on the HP and that's fine in some cases but knowing the torque figure is equally if not more important and gives you the whole picture.

 

It seems to me that bitterness is only one aspect of hops (eg see fruity and piney)

 

ZD like TG PSEUDO SUE is an APA. I know. Just a technicality.

 

Just for the record, the ST Unearthly sits at 153 IBU. UNEARTHLY! Nobody will ever mistake that beer for a total bitterness bomb.

 

Those numbers are pure hype for the most part. Around 100 IBUs is very high. Lab tests top out around 115 for some rare cases.

 

Yes, we all know these are calculated, not actual. And there are a handful of mistakes (Heady listed @ 120 when it's actually 80) but on the whole, it does a good job of dispelling the myth the TS started.