Rating beers offered in Nitro, cask, etc.

I ignore the method of dispense except to mention it and perhaps explain how I think it may have impacted my review.

Once upon a time this site did provide for different review categories: e.g., on tap, bottle, cask, etc. That was changed some years ago after evidence built up that some folks were abusing it. So now all are lumped together.

 

If I write a review, I will post in the review what method I had it by. If I just do the ticks, then obviously I do not have any way of distinguishing it.

 

With Nitro it evens out... Taste rating goes down and feel rating goes up.

Cask though, love me some cask!

 

The brewery is a willing participant in the method of dispense. So I'll rate/review it as it is. However, if I know I don't like a particular dispense method (e.g., Nitro) then I either don't have it that way or wait to do the review with a different serving.

 

Problem is that very often the beer in the cask isn't the same as that in a bottle or can.Very often the bottled/canned version is brewed to a higher ABV to offset the dumbing down resulting from this bottling/canning.Compare Adnam's Broadside, cask 4.7% ABV , bottled 6.3% ABV as an extreme example.
You will often see the point made that a bottled beer is only a pale shadow of the same beer in cask. That's perhaps overstating things but it's basically true. Another problem is that cask ale changes by the day. It develops flavour nuances and flavour depths which aren't there in a bottle but then of course there is a peak followed by decline.The point where you catch it and write a report is quite sigificant.The drinking quality is as much dependent on the patron's skill ,cellaring and at which point you bought the beer as it is on what the beer was like when it left the brewery.
It's an attempt to pin down a moving target.