Porters: why bother?

People enjoy different things? "Why have a pale ale when there are wonderful DIPAs out there?"

Closing remarks: Founder's Porter.

 

I am not "settling" when I reach for a porter.

Closing remarks: Odell's Cutthroat Porter.

 

A stout is a porter.

 

Please keep us updated.

 

“ …but with only a few exceptions I'm just not a huge fan of porters. If I'm in the mood for a deep, dark, roasty beer, 9 times out of 10 I'll reach for a stout instead.” In today’s beer market there really is no genuine distinction between a Stout and a Porter. The reality is that the brewery picks one name or the other (Stout or Porter) based upon some whim. If you are really bored you can read the innumerable threads where folks have asked: What’s the difference between a Stout and Porter? Lots of folks participate on those threads but the simple answer to that question is that today there really is no difference (there was a difference between a Stout and a Porter in Britain in the 18th/19th centuries).

The porters that I would recommend: Founders Porter, Deschutes Black Butter Porter, Great Lakes Edmund Fitzgerald.

Cheers!

 

WTF?

I prefer porters to stouts. Sometimes I want a lower alcohol, full flavored beer. Porters provide that. I'm actually not the biggest fan of imperial stouts, but would never ask "Why stouts?"

It's rather narcissistic to assume the beer word revolves around your tastes, don't you think?

 

Thin and watery porters are definitely drag but just avoid those and drink better ones. Im gonna be drinking a lot of the Narragansett Porter (winter seasonal) this winter because its 16oz tall cans for like 8 bucks a sixer and its not thin and watery and pretty decent.

 

Do a blind tasting between, Founder's Porter, Edmund Fitz, and Black Butte vs. Sierra Nevada Stout, Obsidian Stout, and Shakespeare Stout.

If you can accurately tell me which ones are the porters and which are stouts, and also find no merit in the Porter's, I will be impressed.

 

You're not wrong. I think there's semantics involved with blurred, cross-over between the two. Just drink what you enjoy. People will have different likes and dislikes, and that's quite okay.

 

Since when did porters get type-cast as "thin and watery?" I have seen that a few times on these boards in just the past few days. So stouts aren't thin and watery then? Ever had a Guinness?

Regardless, this is all silly as porters and stouts are one in the same. If Founders called it Kentucky Breakfast Porter instead of Kentucky Breakfast Stout, I doubt we'd be having this conversation.

 

porters are stouts.

 

Why bother with Pales and IPAs either?! amirite

 

> 9 times out of 10 I'll reach for a stout

As if there's a difference....

 

Because victory at sea.

 

Some are that way and some are roasty and robust. Stouts same way.

 

I don't think anyone who has tried Smuttynose Baltic Porter could ever agree with the sentiment of this thread!

 

Get some real Baltic Porters and you will never doubt porters again.

 

That's my point, it's not that porters are watery and thin, all beers can be watery and thin. "The watery (insert any style of beer) can be a drag."

 

Mad Guinessez yo!