What beer styles should be retired?

Why distinguish imperial from non-imperial? Hops, malt, and ABV increase in an imperial, but why should that be a separate style? Sure, call it imperial in the name, but still would just be a stout/porter. Stouts are a stout porter, so an imperial stout would just be a stouter porter.

 

Well, would do away with imperials as a style. Perhaps;

Porter

• Stout Porters
• Pale Ales

IPA

• NEPA

I am certainly no expert on beer, having only been into craft a couple of years, but my engineer blood has led me to the observation that there is currently no single style classification system, so we need one. With the current styles, differentiation can be color, strength, taste, brewing method, country/region/target location, etc, etc. With the current system, every beer could be its own style! I'm really liking the idea of 5-20 major styles, with 0-5 sub-styles each. Brewers can still use distinctions in their names, such as imperial, but it won't be a style.

 

Had a hell of a time with those damn indents! Should have been;

Porter

• Stout Porters

Pale Ales

• IPA
• NEPA

 

Clear lines and solid definitions will never be a major part of beer divisions unless you do away with the rich history and diverse cultures that make beer more interesting.

I feel like people have looked past your point... which has some applicability. Some beer styles here are little more than categories for classification. Others are a part of culture. Dropping them would be a big sacrifice for a site that is dedicated to promoting conversation, understanding, and information about beer. I've seen people state that we should do away with porter as a style. That would be a big shame. Likewise, the inclusion of something like Grodziskie would culturally enrich the site (and then users' understandings) even though there's little practical need for it in categorization. Then extending the conversation to Grätzer would make things even more complicated - but doing so would highlight the real world complexities of everything... and then we'd get to the similarities of calling something a Pilsner... and before you know it we are all looking at common things a bit differently. This would be a good thing.

If the styles on BeerAdvocate were reduced to maybe 10 basic beer types, then yeah - "pumpkin ales" would be a silly distinction... but within this site's system, pumpkin ales deserve to be a specific "thing." "Fruit/vegetable beers" aren't a style, they are a broad classification. In the marketplace, pumpkin beers are definitely enough of a thing that giving them greater distinction makes sense. Look at DIPAs. If they were just a tiny part of the marketplace, they would just be "American strong ales" (which isn't really a style).

Can you elaborate on your take on this?

 

If you're going to roll Pumpkin Ales into one of the catch-all categories... aren't most of the "pumpkin ales" a better fit for the Herbed/Spiced category rather than Fruit/Vegetable? From what I've seen (and heard), generally the pumpkin ales are more of a "pumpkin spice ale" sort of thing, with relatively few focusing more on the pumpkin itself than on the pumpkin pie style spices...

 

Not disagreeing, but an additional complication is that pumpkin ales can be based on several styles including stouts, porters, saison/farmhouse, etc. If we lump them into pumpkin ale then we're overlooking their base style in favor of flavoring. Should raspberry or strawberry or chocolate flavored beers make us disregard their base style and instead have a raspberry ale, strawberry ale, and chocolate ale? Doing this explains less about what the beer really is.

 

I don't think it's necessarily a style, probably more of a category, but get rid of the "Session" nomenclature. I can decide on my own whether a beer fits the criteria or not. Soon as I see the word session I'm usually looking for something else

 

I'm going to have to go with zero styles. Hopefully beer will be as confusing as old world wine because it will come down to where the ingredients come from. ABInBev is helping usher this along a little. If they keep buying up ingredients then maybe the industry will be forced to go all DOC/AOC and there will just be thousands of tiny breweries simply selling to thier communites with local ingredients the locals like?

 

A similar point could be made the other way, since puimpkin is added to the mash and has some degree of fermentability, though not much.

The problem is no standard way of categorizing. I find it irritating that I have two main hobbies, beer and mycology, and both are suffering from no clearly defined way of categorizing and constant debate and review/update of already listed items.

 

I thought an ESB was (originally??) a bitter brewed with a bit higher ABV and bottled for export (as opposed to live on cask).

But, that's just something I recall; probably read it somewhere. (Doesn't mean it should be a separate style; but if my recollection is accurate, it does convey consumer information, however poorly.)

What you say about Wee Heavy is what I read as well. It is not usually a stand-alone separate style, though... it is another name for a Scotch Ale (at least on this site it is). Which, of course, leads to.... should Scotch Ale be a style?

 

What are the colors of the rainbow? Certainly more than ROY G BIV, and certainly I draw the lines differently than others. Different cultures actually "see" different colors all together. As I understand, in the West we tend to distinguish color families, while Native Americans distinguish shades and saturation.

With language we tend to add words for nuanced meaning (also to impress others), and over time the meaning of words shift, combine, and diverge. This is natural to communication.

My point is that we can discard all styles, and in twenty years we will find that we have a new list of styles, differentiated along new lines, with the same type of concerns noted by folks in this thread. Styles serve a purpose, in some instances are fussy or trivial. Generally they are communicating some information to people, granted on different levels due to an individual's understanding.

This conversation is still fun and, in some cases enlightening. Sometimes the very act/art of conversation is just the right mental exercise required to maintain community.

 

Had to look that up - you're the shroom guy? Do you like shroom beers such as Jester King Snörkel?

 

Sad to admit that I haven't tasted that one, or any mushroom beer.

Hope to get enough Chanterelles (wangled an invite to a killer spot if July weather cooperates) to make one of my own this year.

I am def not in favor of adding mushroom beer to the database

 

Yes, Fullers ESB was stronger than most bitters of the time but not particularly strong by historical standards.Certainly nothing new.
Fowler's brewed a strong Twelve Guinea Scotch Ale and some of it was sold in small or wee (third of a pint "nips") bottles. These small measures were the only place that "Wee Heavy" appeared.

As for Scotch Ale , like most other styles, has existed in so many different guises that it is difficult to pin down.Ron Pattinson published this:
http://barclayperkins.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/lets-brew-1879-william-younger-no-1.html as an example of a Scotch Ale. But with 136 IBU it doesn't fit with most peoples' understanding of a Scotch Ale !
Words and names stay the same but the objects they refer to change.Modern drinkers would not recognise a 19th century IPA or mild because these styles (if Mild ever was a style) were simply names attached for convenience.
Tha Head brewer of Bass once called the same beer a Pale Ale, an IPA and a bitter in the same conversation.

 

A session beer is simply one with sufficient balance and low ABV (under 4% in its country of origin) to enable it to be drunk in large volumes without causing problems to the drinker. The sort of beer when you finish one and then ask for another, and another and so on until you leave. The sort of beer where every pint tastes better than the pint before.In my view that are the pinnacle of brewing because they enable the drinker to do so much.

 

very true!

 

It all really comes down to WHO adds the beer. If I were to add a saison with peaches I would add the beer as a saison and put "brewed with peaches" in the notes. The type of person that would add the beer as a fruit/vegetable beer is a nihilist.