NBS BIF #15 Hints and Hauls: Was it Over When the Canadians Bombed BIF #14? HELL NO!

Personally, absolutely not. I only revisit a rating if I've got a really good reason, such as an infected or very stale beer, or if I feel for some reason I did not give it a fair shake.

All reviews are the product of a specific time and place, from our individual palates to our experiences over time. I don't know how many of my nearly 4000 reviews were one-offs (beers I have only had that one time), but that has to be factored in: it wouldn't be fair to adjust a beer's rating (up or down) simply because I've had it more than once.

After all, the same principle applies: maybe you wouldn't review Westy XII the same now as you did the only time you had it (just using a rare beer as an example), but can't re-score it simply because you haven't had it again, whereas it would be easy to re-score Boston Lager.

The only way to be fair and consistent, IMO, is to stick with your first review (again, barring exceptional circumstances).

Is that perfect? No, but I don't think that imperfection is restricted to someone who has had a beer hundreds of times, and in fact affects someone even reviewing a beer for the very first time. Even the vaunted Heady Topper is far less likely to blow someone's socks* off if they grew up in a beer world dominated by Tree House or Monkish (or pick your own WC brewery ). Back when it was King of BA, however, most of us had never had anything like it.

Do beers deserve more "credit" for being trailblazers - for being Pliny, Westy XII, Heady, Urquell, for being something not only exceptionally well executed, but novel? I think if they're both (not just new, but also good!), then yes, but how do new reviewers approach an old beer that was innovative at the time, but is now, if not old hat, at least no longer unique?

BLAB: no, I do not revisit ratings, any more than I tell the young whippersnappers, "Well, if you'd had Heady back in my day, you'd be giving it a much higher score!"

*Excepting the bias @BBThunderbolt mentioned. I suspect a good many BAs rate Heady higher - or lower! - than their "pure" experience, simply because they are expecting a world-beater. That bias works both ways.

 

I'm still in.

 

@Beersnake1

That's the much briefer version of what I said.

I do think a significant recipe change might warrant an updated review, if there is no corresponding database entry. Think: legacy Hoptimum versus modern Hoptimum. Unlike Stone's approach, who released the 2.0 series, Hoptimum only has one entry (I thought we had separate entries, but I appear to be incorrect).

When the beer changes that significantly, I think it warrants an updated review - sadly. If someone else were scanning BA for beer reviews and deciding whether or not to buy the beer, it would be misleading to leave a "stale" review for a beer that, essentially, no longer exists. That's assuming a pretty significant recipe change, however.

The way I approached it for Hoptimum was I edited my review, leaving the legacy review in the notes (which is still relevant if they release special batches of the OG recipe, as some breweries are wont to do), and added my updated review after a break. I may have tweaked the scores - I can't recall. But again, I would only do that if the recipe change was, IMO, significant enough to warrant such a move.

https://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/140/55939/?ba=Roguer#lists

 

I think plenty of people disliked the Expos, and even more people dislike the team they became (in particular ownership and management). But generally, the Marlins are more irrelevant than disliked ...

 

Haul Hint #1: Between today and Sunday, I am hitting up two semi-local breweries known far and wide on BA. One does not distribute at all, and the other has very limited distribution. I will be driving a total of about 4 hours to collect these beers.

If you think you know these breweries and don't want anything from them, you shouldn't like this post, and I'll drink it all myself.

 

Haul Hint #2: As I usually do, I will be representing a number of states in my box(es), including at least four New England states and my home state (which is not a New England state).

 

I have yet to give any substantive hints, so here we go - official no kidding hints!

Hint #1: My box will travel West - at least 1100 miles, but no more than 4000 miles (direct distance, not driving distance).

Hint #2: My box will also travel either North or South by 10% of the minimum and maximum distance West - at least 11 miles, but no more than 400 miles.