New Rating System Feedback

I wouldn't get too worried about it. The ratings system will most likely change again in 6 months anyway.

EDIT: But I guess to give you a real answer, I do think it's kind of annoying. It's much easier for me to use an app like untappd while I'm drinking and then come back once a month and input all my ratings onto here. I think I have enough experience at this point to know where I'm rating and why I'm rating without having to do the attributes. It seems to me that these forced attributes are a result of too many 5's being thrown around or something. I dk.

 

I give the new rating system a 7.5 / G

 

I am in a bit of the same boat, I like it in some ways, but not in others. I only ever used the quarter intervals for my ratings anyways (3.25, 3.5, 3.75, 4, etc.), so the removal of exact scores does not bother me. I don't like the fact though that I want to put a 3 on a beer that I find just okay, yet it gets a 4 because while the flavor was only okay, I put that it smelled nice and the final score went up. I use the ratings in the same way that I think the OP does, as a way of rating what I like and don't like so I can reference it later. I do not rate based on how good the beer is in reflection to it's style, I rate by if I liked that beer or not.

Also, I understand trying to detect outliers on scoring, but now when I find a beer that I didn't like or one I really loved, I am forced to write a review? I don't care for doing many reviews, because it becomes work to me. I am trying to enjoy the beer, not analyze and write down notes on it's carbonation content and head retention.

 

I like the scoring system but prefer the other system of "precise" scoring better.
That being said, I've always thought the percentages were a little offskew and that appearance and smell should lose percentage points and taste have more of a rating.
As already posted by some, a mediocre to just alright tasting beer should not score as close or equal to a beer that looks/smells blah but tastes great.
I know there are some chefs/brewers about to remind me that you eat with your eyes/sense of smell is greater than taste but bottom line, I'll take taste over appearance/aroma any time.

 

I want to just enter the rating in quarter point increments and be done with it. More detailed ratings should be for those who choose to write a review.

 

This thread should really be called, The "new" old rating system, and yes I love it, I understand the desire to want to just enter one arbitrary number and be done with it, but actually putting some thought into it is so much more useful to the members who read reviews or breweries looking for feedback. I'll admit and I say I hated the quick reviews because I felt people were way too generous and too quick to give something good a 5 and all it did was encourage ticking rather than encourage honest reviews.

I am very happy.

 

Several reasons I'm very disappointed by the removal of the precise scoring and single scoring in .25 intervals:

• I don't weigh look, smell, taste, mouthfeel and overall the same as BA.
• Myself and others (including at least one BA moderator) will just end up tweaking certain category's scores to end up with the final score we desire, thus the individual category scores don't reflect how we felt about the beer.
• It takes too long: I've written 76 full reviews and will continue to do so when the beer is exceptional. If I'm at a bottle share and want to rate 30 new beers, it will be a huge inconvenience.
• No new functionality, they simply removed one aspect of a very flexible system.

I pride myself on using BA instead of Untappd because the ratings actually mean something on this site, I'd hate to see the new scoring system drive people away.

 

Just a suggestion, but I think one very easy fix for the scoring issue, would be to still keep it the way it is, but have the overall score that you give, be the score that shows up for your rating. Not taking a mathematical number from the scores you gave to taste, smell, look, feel, overall. This way you could still break down your scoring of that specific beer, but still be able to mark an okay beer with a 3, instead of it being marked with a 3.87 because you gave it the redeeming quality of look or smell.

 

I am kind of lazy, so I like to taste a beer, and give it a grade on my phone quick.

 

The precise scoring had it's appeal but there's something to be said for how the rating comes out after you have observed each category. Without doing that the rating seems more arbitrary. I like the current system but I was happy as long as it was an option and I did use the precise feature more than once.

 

The main reason I don't write reviews is because when I sit down to an enjoy a beer, I want to do just that, enjoy it. I have tried writing reviews and found that it takes much of the enjoyment of out drinking a beer for me, turning it into a homework assignment.

I also rarely read other people's reviews. So I don't feel like I'm taking without giving back.

Rating on the other hand, is something I have been doing for years, on almost every beer I drink. I maintain my own spreadsheet with all my ratings going back many years. As a BA/Hobbyist, I enjoy crunching the numbers different ways to give me more insight on what I like and what I don't.

I too enjoyed the single rating and the increased precision. I also think the new system will discourage some people from rating. But to some degree, I think that's the point. They are looking for ratings with a bit more thought to them. So people that don't want to provide the extra information will stop rating.

Others, like myself, will adjust and keep rating.

Since I maintain my own ratings, I don't rely on BA for my own data. Instead I rate here because I want to contribute to a site that I have enjoyed using for many years and has contributed so much to beer enthusiasts over the years.

 

It's not a 'new' rating system but the re-implementation of what was in place just two(?) years ago. This method forces you to think more about the beer rather than a seat-of-the-pants overall score (which I think if a study were done would show that most scores are overly generous), and then a precise score get's calculated from your input by the BA formula. (At least that's what I remember.)

 

I'm not sure what you mean. I can remember plenty of changes to the system in the last few years. If I remember right, it was the addition of the quick rating, then the inclusion of quick ratings into the overall ratings of the beers. Then didn't we get rid of full reviews and attributes while adding precise ratings and then within a few weeks reinstate the full reviews? And now these most recent changes. I understand that maybe the overall way of calculating ratings hasn't changed, but there's been plenty of changes from a user's viewpoint.

 

I'll address a few things here.

First, each user weighs each attribute differently and that is encouraged, remember, one review won't drastically alter the overall scores of the beer, but it still equally as important as the others. Much like voting in a Presidential election.

Secondly, yes, the BA algorithm is somewhat arbitrary, but does focus on the two most important attributes, taste and smell. If you find yourself tweaking to circumvent that, I don't see it as a huge issue and I do think that .25 intervals are better, and would help alleviate this problem.

Thirdly, if you are at a beer tasting with 30+ beers, you should absolutely NOT being reviewing them. Palate fatigue is a big issue and unless you have multiple stomachs, I can't imagine you are getting anything more than 1-3oz of a single beer, and that is by no means enough to truly evaluate a beer properly. I'm sorry, it has to be said, it's even clearly laid out in the Beer 101 page for reviewing, that reviewing at festivals or from samplers is poor form. This is exactly what untappd is for.

If the reviews actually mean something here, it's because people are taking the time to do this thoughtfully, not on a whim.

 

Well said, I agree. Going back to the old system is a major positive. In my opinion, too many "5" scores seemed to be a problem with the quick ratings.

 

You shouldn't be rating beers on 2 oz pours.