Even wondered whether you systematically under or over rate compared to the average?

I highly over or underrate a style that is new to me.

 

I tend to rate lower than the averages on Beer Advocate. I try to review based on the categories that BA just took away (appearance, aroma, taste, mouthfeel, overall) and judge how well the beer heeds to BJCP guidelines. I used to do most of my totally subjective rating in the "overall" category.

How that BA has taken away the individual category ratings, I think I'm just going to start ticking for the most part.

It makes me sad to see the change.

 

I like that so many people really bother to rate beers and be part of a group that quantifies results. I understand how folks have passion for their avocation/vocation (whichever it is), but reviews to me are a highly subjective endeavor. At the end of the day, and I try tons of new beers and re-taste familiar ones regularly, I know what I like. I also know that what I like really doesn't matter. I do not feel the need to contribute my tastes to the public record. In no way do I disparage any rating system, I just wanted to describe an individual view. Sometimes I read reviews, and the comical ones are my favorite. Some people just take themselves too seriously. Beer to me is a passion that should be fun at the least.

 

i don't intentionally rate either way, but when it comes to the very highly rated beers i tend to go lower because my expectations are so high that i'm let down if it isn't fantastic. i should probably wait a day to rate Belgian quads and scotch ales, which for some reason get absurdly high reviews and i find often just taste like alcohol.

 

So, I got some interesting information from OP:

 

Share your code!

 

I take a much simpler view and keep regular tabs on my median rDev.

Right now that number is a +0.3% which I think places me right about the middle of BA reviewers (more or less).

We are all going to have individual beers where our rDev is high to either the + or – side. These are outliers that don’t tell us much about how we rate beers relative to the BA community.

 

I always seem to rate a bit higher than average. This is because I only rate beers that I really like. If it is just OK, I don't rate it.

 

Is there an easy way to export your ratings to a text file?

I don't know about the average, but I my rDevs are all over the place (+22.5% down to -63.5%). I like to use the whole range, and someone is bound to appreciate the beers that I don't.

 

I don't under-rate, everyone else over-rates.

No, seriously, go look at the bottom of the Top 250: "C = the mean across the current list (currently 3.77)" (The "current list" being all beers with more than 100 ratings.)

I found it interesting to look at some of my biggest outliers on both sides:

High rDev:

Heineken Lager Beer 3.5 +29.2%

Yeah, the old, green, skunked bottles we get in the US suck. Fresh and not skunked... it's okay.


Low rDev

Civil Disobedience #4 1 -75.6%
Civil Disobedience #8 1.5 -64.5%

Sorry, but those beers were seriously, undrinkably bad. And not just one off bottle, I've had the misfortune of trying CD4 more than once.

 

I am certain I overrate almost everything.

 

I over rate, this info used to show up on your profile page...

 

Most of mine seem to be under by a small percentage, except on a few beers that just hit the spot with me that I have overrated considerably

 

My scale is 3.0 is drinkable and everything under that is not worth consuming. I've only been disgusted by really one or two beers ever. In my eyes the drinkable working scale is 3 to 5.

 

I think about it, but only when I've submitted review on a beer and see that my rDev is surprisingly skewed one way or the other. The highest positive deviation I have is +15%, and most of the beers near the top when I sort based on rDev are stouts because that is what my palate tends to favor so I don't find that surprising. On the low-end, the two worst rDevs are -39.8% and -42.1%. The -42.1% can be explained away because I had what was later identified as a bad bottle, so that review should probably be discounted for fairness' sake. The -39.8% came from a beer that I just didn't really enjoy - what flavors I did pick up were artificial, the beer was thin, almost watery, yet also had this chalky "kids chewable vitamin" quality to it... just not pleasant.

I guess the only beer review that stands out on my list where most people would suggest I seriously underrated a beer is this one. I just didn't get the hype surrounding this beer. I bet alot of people would just tell me my tongue is broken, so be it! Haha

 

I got about tree fitty above and over 800 below. I always check in beers to Untappd first and then roll those over to BA at some point so I don't see the BA rDev before I go in to give a score.

 

I never rate 5 overall (5's across the board) - it implies that nothing at all could be improved that no other beer in that style could ever be better... and we don't know what will come.

 

I have never had a beer so bad it is undrinkable, so for me:
1 - I would prefer water
3 - Just satisfied paying full price
5 - Best I have ever had

I guess everything will change if I try something too terrible or amazing.

 

Oh, they are out there. Tick a couple thousand beers and you'll almost certainly run across a few.