Do you review to style?

I try to rate to style, but you know what? That doesn't make any more sense than rating to personal preference because I rate the beers I like higher than the beers I don't, regardless if they are considered objectively "better."

Example: I don't like pilsners much, but I love Belgian quads, so I'm more likely to rate a Belgian quad higher than any pilsner. If I find a pilsner to be significantly better than other pilsners, I'll give it a pretty high rating because that pilsner was good enough to impress me. But in all honesty, that's stupid because I'll probably only like a pilsner that doesn't taste much like a classic pilsner. If you make a pilsner that tastes like a Belgian quad, I'll love it and rate it high, but pilsner lovers won't like it at all, so I'll think it's great for the style, but others might think it's the worst pilsner ever.

So in short, I'll rate a beer somewhat relative to style, but I, and every single other person on this website, will more likely rate a beer based on how much we like that beer, and by extension, that style. Also, sacrilige though it may be to say, but this is why ratebeer.com is also worth checking for ratings, since they give each beer two different ratings: overall and by style.

 

I hope you're not suggesting that people who don't like a particular style shouldn't be rating that style. I mean, movie reviewers have to watch and review every classic and terrible movie that comes out, and while they may be professional enough to not say, "I'm not a fan of gross-out teen comedies..." you know they have to bust their ass to come off as objective. I don't like pilsners and I'll almost never give a pilsner over 4/5, so does that disqualify me from rating them? Or isn't a "not a fan..." disclaimer enough for readers to decide whether to look past my review or consider it if they too don't like the style?

 

+1. I often write this in the summary of my reviews. It doesn't mean I'm rating it lower, it means im putting my differences aside to review a beer on its own merit.

 

ZIIIIIIIIING!!

If there was, I'd be there, but I'll still be using my phone to make comments that you don't approve of.

 

I do a mix of what the style characteristics should encompass, and my personal like or dislike.
sometimes I love a beer, but know its not indicative of its intended style, so it gets a lower rating.
dually, sometimes I hate a beer, but its very well done, just not tasty to my pallet. so it gets a good rating.

 

No, of course not, but it does mean your rating is not objective to style.

 

Yes, of course. You wouldn't compare a breadbox to a quasar.

 

Yeah, and trying to be objective is noble and we should all try to do it, but it's also silly because nobody is objective when it comes to taste. 3 people will have 4 different opinions about a beer. And on this website, based on the top-rated beers, everyone seems to prefer high-octane flavor-bombs.

If anyone was being truly objective, the top 250 beers list would contain at least ONE pilsner, which it doesn't. In fact, the top 10 beers would probably contain an IPA, DIPA, stout, porter, lager, hefeweizen, and pilsner, and pale ale, Belgian quad, etc. just based on the fact that the best of each style should be equally as good as the best of any other style.

In other words, I'm calling out most of the people on this site who claim to be objective to show in the ratings.

 

Odd, I thought everyone rating beers on this website was doing it purely for their own enjoyment, as opposed to being paid to do so. Have I been doing it wrong? Should I be getting a check?

I don't have a single review posted of a beer style I know I don't enjoy, because I both won't enjoy the experience, and I know it'd be useful to exactly nobody. Myself, I already know I don't like that beer style. Other people who do like that beer style will care even less than usual what I have to say about it. I suppose I could always start giving every IPA I can get my hands on a 1, but I don't think it's particularly helpful or constructive to do so.

As far as calling people out for not rating to style, there's a rather large chunk of the userbase of this site that doesn't even glance at the forums, much less post on them.

 

Think about this: RIS's and DIPA's are the highest rated beers. What if every brewery only made those two styles because after all, it's what everyone likes the most. What a boring world we would live in. Do your Brewers a favor and give them a high rating when they do a good job on an English Bitter, or a Scottish ale, or an Oktoberfest. Those beers aren't any easier to brew than a DIPA. Why should a really well done DIPA have any better rating than a really well done English Bitter. We might have some beer racism going on .

 

If im rating a beer say, witbier, i understand how it was supposed to be brewed and what the finished beer is supposed to be if it should labeled a wit, so ill go into it thinking wit, and if its off it wont effect the rating, my enjoyment effects the rating, but if i was to look for that specific style again i may not look for that previous said beer, because id compare it to others in its same style.

 

Bingo! That's at the core of just about all of these "rate/review to style" threads.

 

I voted other because, using Gose as an example, most have a head that fades fast, doesn't lace and overall look flat in the glass. It may be characteristic of the style but I have a hard time pulling the trigger on anything over 3-3.5 for appearance. So while I try to rate to style, some styles will have inherent advantages and disadvantages.

 

I don't know how you rate a beer NOT according to style. That's why I have no problem rating a cheap adjunct lager a 4.00, because I compare it to other adjunct lagers IN THAT STYLE. Do you compare an oatmeal stout to a sour? Neither do I ...

 

If you don't take style into consideration then you are rating apples to oranges.

You can't compare a Pilsner to a Stout. You have to rate a Pilsner as a Pilsner and a stout as a stout. If a Pilsner tastes like a stout - something has gone awry.

However, it may be that you prefer stouts to pilsners. So be it. That may influence your rating to a degree. But you should be able to enjoy a good Pilsner for what it is - a good Pilsner.

 

I just review to how much I enjoyed it. There are a lot of great beers that don't fit their styles.

 

I rate to style. It really bothers me when I see on untappd, people give a beer a bad rating because they don't like the style. "Well Cletus, if you don't like IPAs, then why did you buy one? And why did you give it a 0.5 star review when it is a great beer for that style...? Go drink your keystone.". *cough... Sorry for that rant gentlemen. Everyone has their pet peeve.

 

I try to review to style. I rarely comment whether I like the beer or not, unless it's exceptionally good or bad. I do maintain a personal database in which I list, among other parameters, the reviewed-to-style rating but also my personal take on the beer (Sucks, meh, good, etc.). It is possible to have a high scoring review and still think the beer sucks.

 

I rate the beer within the style. 88 vote(s) 67.2%

The fact that the top 250 is 90% sours, IPAs and stouts says that this poll result is bullshit.