Poll: can a beer be "the best"?

This is already in the running for best thread of the year!

 

LOL. I went with "no" for a lot of reasons. Subjective tastes = an obvious one. What if you prefer cascade and CTZ to citra and mosaic? That upends the IPA categories right there. When a lot of people throw around the term "I like stouts!" they mean they want a dark beer that's over 10% ABV, contains vanilla and coconut, and spent time in a whiskey barrel. What if you'd rather have something milder, adjunct/spirt free, and hoppy AF? There's also just the nature of trendiness. Remember when Westvleteren 12 was going to be the #1 beer in the world forever? I do. These days I dunno if new drinkers are even aware they should care about it.

 

So, to be more serious, best is subjective but it does have meaning, especially for yourself. Too many subtle variables for everyone to be talking about the same thing. But, for me, the best beer I've ever had exists in my mind.

For example, years ago in college, four of us spent a semester going after classes to the Beers of the World shop, where they supposedly had 100 imports. We sampled most all of them, and I ranked them. Pilsner Urquell was the best!

 

People can have their personal "bests," ie "I think fresh Pilner Urquell is the best beer ever." But there can be no "best" designation given beyond that. There certainly can't be anything universal, even within a style.

 

Best implies all candidates have been assessed, which AFAIK has not been achieved for all beers, nor any single beer style. OTOH it is possible to try all the beers from one brewery and choose the beer you think is the best of that brewery,, so I chose that option.

 

No. A beer like that is something that is specific which ties in everything. You have a good day going, or whatever. You can remember the weather. And you get to that taste. Usually the first of the day. And, boom. It's like the rug that ties the room together. It's just going to hit you the right way as this is good, and nothing can get in its way. And you finish it in under five minutes, and five minutes is really pushing it. You try that beer again, from the same six pack. And nope. You get that beer a week later, and hope it pushes all those buttons again. Can't.

 

I think it's personal. For me: Almost never, unless you get down to really narrow categories (like, "the best IPA I've had today" or "the best beer that I have in my hand"). I tend to talk about "one of my favorites" instead.

For me, it's also situational. What's the best IPA? Well, the last year or so I've been jonesing for kick-in-the-teeth bitter WC IPAs, but in years past, my attention may have been on soft and juicy hazies, and I would give different answers at those two times.

It's also limited to experience. I've only had one kvass, that's best kvass I've ever had, and it was terrible. It's the best kvass I know of, but I doubt I have the experience in that category to have an informed opinion.

I haven't tried all of anything (except for very narrow categories) so I would always have to include the disclaimer "...that I have tried"

Millions of Bud Light drinkers have the legitimate-for-them opinion that Bud Light is the best beer hands down. For each of them, within their experience, for their preferences, that's perfectly true. They may have only tried a half dozen different beers, or they may have tried a thousand.

I'm sure I haven't thought this all the way through.

 

Like others noted, it's much more realistic to discuss personal favorites than declaring objective bests.

But I do think it's also valid to dole out conditional "bests" based on more objective, aggregate data. For instance, a beer that wins a medal at a competition can fairly be called "the best x style at y competition". And I'd even go so far as to say it's fair to look at sales data and say something like, "Americans think bud Light is the best beer". Or even looking at large aggregate ratings it's fair to say "KBBS is the best rated stout in America".

 

“Maybe this is more complicated than a poll question, I think it may be..”

I agree with the above.

There is likely to be a fair bit of discussion about the subjective nature of beer appreciation. What may be ‘best’ to one individual will not be ‘best’ for another.

And yes, the large variety of beer styles will be a confounding topic. How do you compare the ‘best’ IPA vs. the ‘best’ Bohemian/Czech Pilsner?

And…

Permit me to propose an alternative viewpoint. Instead of using the word “best” perhaps a ‘better’ way of discussing this is via the term favorite(s). For example: What are you favorites when it comes to the IPA beer style? And inherent in that question is that more than one brand can be a favorite.

I recently started a thread which included a video review by Darwin which was entitled “Fat Head's Head Hunter IPA (THE GREATEST BEER OF ALL TIME!)” which may be one of the inspirations for this thread. I am a BIG fan of Fat Head’s Head Hunter IPA and it is very much one of my favorite IPAs. I would not claim that this beer is “THE GREATEST BEER OF ALL TIME!” which was how Darwin titled his video review but it is most certainly in my top 5 of favorite IPAs.

Cheers!

 

I did not vote because the choices don't reflect my opinion. "Best" is not defined here. "Best" could be based on what beer gets the highest numeric ratings (a consensus-based approach), or "best" could be my personal preference....which could change from day to day depending upon my mood, the weather, with food or not, etc. My personal definition is that the "best" beer is what I would select at that moment in time if all the beers that I have ever tasted were put in front of me to select from.

 

I would change that to: "judged to be the best x style at y competition."
That might seem like splitting hairs, but to me it's a tremendous difference in meaning.

 

I'm saying within a style, yes. But.

There are a few beers that define the style, and therefore are the style.

Duvel is the best Belgian Golden.
Anchor Steam is the best steam / California Common*.

Otherwise it is subjective.

*Anchor Steam was a fine beer made by a legendary brewer who owned a legendary brewery that was ran into the ground by some Corporate asshats. Now you know.

 

Seeing a couple posts about Pilsner Urquell made me realize that it's a fantastic example of why there can be no "best."

It tastes like butter to me at least 1/2 the time. That's no accident, either. Yet there are plenty of similarly styled beers from the same area that have 0 diacetyl. There are also claims that PU's diacetyl is a (relatively) recent thing, too.

 

I'm the foremost expert on what I think. It doesn't go any further than that. I've had a lot of world-class beers, and I wouldn't presume to use the word "best" in describing any of them: not "best" in style, and certainly not 'best" overall. I wouldn't even say a particular beer is the best I've had of a particular style. It might be the one I've enjoyed the most, but that could change tomorrow. When it comes to matters of taste, it just doesn't make sense to describe something as "best." Too subjective and, dare I say, pointless.

 

Wait, hold my beer......

 

I chose the first option because of the subjectivity argument as well as the fact that how can you ever prove (even to yourself) that you have evaluated all possible contenders.
I was confused by the "only when applied to a brewery" answer. If it means "best brewery", then no. If it means a single brewery's best version of that style or thier best beer overall then at least it eliminates the infinite possibilities argument, but it's still subjective.