Controversial Beer Opinions Thread

I saw someone post an IPA next to a plate of manicotti. If that is not controversial than I don't know what is.

Beer doesn't belong everywhere.

 

@jtodeasa , I hope my post above didn't come across as condescending. I'm not going for that at all. Just trying to add info. Cheers.

 

This. And, for the record, still ISO the Cuvee Dry Hopping.

 

Yeah - I feel the same about the Dark Lord deal. Several of my relatives used to stand in line once a year to buy a bottle or two. Then we'd share at our Thanksgiving beer tasting later in the year. Never did much for me and I like stouts. Always thought it was more about the standing in line deal and status of having the beer vs. the actual taste. Just my opinion.

 

You need it for the BIFs.

 

Good save! I'll keep it up. Thanks.

 

Some beers maybe; saisons seem to go with everything.

 

Reminds me: I just checked the Dystopian State FB page after not visiting for a month or so... it seems like the furor is finally dying down a bit.

 

Some are more versatile - but Italian food warrants wine, IMHO.

 

People who call it 'Utopia' should be banned from this site. Its UtopiaS, there's an S on the end, please recognize and spell correctly. Just because people from Boston drop R's does not give you the right to drop the S

 

It's probably not that controversial, but there's a reason I don't look at scores before I review a beer. I just did a review, and noticed it only had 10 Ratings, and 4 reviews. One of the Ratings had this comment: "Disappointing. No flavor." Rater gave the beer a 3.06 score. Really? An above average score for a beer with "no flavor"? SMH.

 

3.06 with no flavor could mean it's just okay. 3.06 means okay to me such as Budweiser. Not great but it is okay.

 

If additives can get you closer to perfection, how are they unnecessary?

Also, Saison Dupont is not perfect, nor does it get to define perfection for other saisons.

 

He gave Appearance a 4, and all the others 3s. Most raters/reviewers just won't give a low score, even when they think the beer deserves it. If he thought the beer truly had no flavor, he should have gives Taste a 1, and likely Smell too. Things like this are why I just can't trust scores.

 

3.06 isn't above the average of any style. Maybe it should be in some theoretical universe, but no one actually rates beers that way.

 

On a 1-5 system, 3 is in the middle. Average.

 

Only if people use the scale that way. They don't. If you see a product rated 2.5 stars on Amazon, do you think "ah, an average product. I will buy this secure in the knowledge that it will certainly not burn my house down."? Probably not! 2.5 stars on Amazon means it likely causes birth defects.

 

I've had similar experiences. Beer looks good and smells good but flavor is just okay. Can't think of anything offhand but makes sense to give a 3 vs. 1 in flavor because 1 would mean horrible taste so not flavorless but nasty. 3 is neutral. Anything below 3 is considered bad. Since it's bland and not horrible then 3 is the proper rating. I rarely give a 1 in flavor and would never give 1 for flavorless. Flavorless deserves between 2.5 and 3. So this rater you're criticizing probably rated the beer correctly.

 

Well, I clearly liked the beer much better than he did, and my final score was 3.27, and the overall score for the beer is 3.75 (only 14 total scores, so small sample size).