Controversial Beer Opinions Thread

Wow, we should clear this up. Someone send New England a message about this.

 

What's the Frequency, Kenneth?

 

There is a stereotype of a CAMRA member, bearded and wearing sandals.Only the ladies' section is like that

 

82 full pages in, whoever started this thread's alerts must be ridiculous!

 

Check the date on that article:

Or the stats:

NOTE - The above link didn't work for me but appears to be this article

https://www.craftbeer.com/craft-beer-muses/ne-ipa-recognized-official-beer-style

 

They steal beer style credit and super bowls smh

 

Maybe we'll steal an nba championship this year too?

 

Another April Fool's joke, but on 9/11. I like it.

 

Yeah unfortunately a snake from the bay ruined the league that being said still better in my eyes than those bastards in green

 

Care to explain?

 

Base Victory at sea is better than it's variants, including the barrel aged version.

 

Mediocre brewers should focus one making their existing DIPA better before introducing three or four new ones.

 

AB InBev should fund The Space Force.

 

The Budweiser/Jim Beam collaboration is the macro whiskey barrel beer that we’ve all been waiting for.

 

Sure why not.

Firstly there is a lot of locals that will rate their local stuff high just to hype it up.

Secondly a lot of brewers tweak recipes or have off batches so a rating could be forever even though the beer is changing.

Thirdly palates change, something you may have had a dislike for years ago might grow on you later. But that one rating is forever unless you are vigilant enough to update every time you drink the beer.

Also folks rate beer that is out of date and expired which isn't a real rating of anything.

Lastly raters/tickers are the main culprit of the shelf overload. They have no loyalty to anything. I don't respect that.

Hence why they are the cancer of beer.

 

And if like me you drink little but cask beer then the skills of the cellaring and the time for which the cask has been opened are paramount.

 

A slight drift off topic.

While I've had the opportunity to spend a lot of time in the UK (and OZ) with cask beer and develop a strong sense of the importance of the skills of the cellarman, I've not yet developed a level of experience that allows me to walk into a new pub and identify much about when the cask of beer I ordered was opened. While I've had the experience of drinking the same well-cellared beer over several nights it was always in the same pub, etc. What would you identify as being the major cues that enable one to zero in on the "age" or time since opening when having a first pint in a new pub?

 

All of these things can happen when people review beers too, so how does that make reviewers better than raters on these particular points?

 

There are a handful of active members who review beer honestly and have good insight. The thing is they are the minority. Yes rating and reviewing are one in the same. So one isn't better than the other.

 

Yeah, I can see where you're coming from, and agree with most reasons, though I still think that "cancer of beer" is taking it too far. It seems that all of your reasons apply to reviewers just as much too. Probably even more so, since going back and editing prior reviews to account for updated recipes and palate changes requires even more vigilance.

The shelf overload point I get as well. But I will say this. I drink fairly infrequently (usually once per week, never more than twice), and though there are beers that I buy again, to me trying new recipes and new brews is part of the fun. I really don't see what this has to do with loyalty.

Anyways, thanks for replying. I wasn't trying to flame, so hopefully I'm not coming off as though I am. I also haven't been into craft beer for nearly as long as many posters here, so I understand that my opinion could change after another 3-5-10 years. Cheers!