Michael Jackson's World-Class Beers

I will await for that to happen.

I suppose in the meantime we will continue to have lively BA discussions!?!

Cheers!

 

Its the "dependent on an invidual's peception for its existence" part that creates problems for most people, but that dependency does not mean it is impossible to objectify the evaluation/perception.

 

Given that either approach has its limits, if the single point of view is a valued one, I tend to find more use in such a list vs one derived from a very large group. I find more beer recommendations that I chose to act on from posts in the forums rather than the rankings list.

 

As I posted above "I wonder".

I will indeed be interested in seeing if the effort you referenced above is done.

Cheers!

 

Just don't hold your breath waiting... :-)

 

I've found both to be useful once one compensates for the inherent flaws in each. (And so long as one ignores the top 250 list and looks mostly at the "Beers of Fame" list.

 

I've brought it up in the past, but I don't find rankings of:
*Typical of its style and region
**Above-average
***Worth seeking out
****World-class
... to be eshewing the notion of competition at all. If he said that every beer was 4 stars and he loved them all equally, then I'd agree that he was eshewing competition.

 

Nor are the rankings eschewing the notion of "numerical value."

"1, 2, 3, 4" is "1, 2, 3, 4" regardless of whether you say it "one, two, three, four" or "a-deen, dav, tree, chyetirye" or "*, **, ***, ***."

 

Michael Jackson says every beer has its moment, so he would definitely grab a 1 star beer over a 4 star beer in many cases. I think the star system is more of about cultural importance, and a guide for helping you learn about beer. Noobs should hit up the 4 star beers (multiple times each) before getting familiar with the beers with lesser importance.

 

As for grabbing 1 in preference to a 4, I often do that as well. For a variety of reasons including that I don't want the full complexity often involved with the 4 star beers.

As for the star system being about cultural importance, my point was not to disagree with that idea but rather to point out that when one assigns 1-4 stars and talks about lesser importance on some dimension or set of dimensions, there is also an implicit use of a numerical evaluation taking place whether one uses the numerals or not. "Greater than" and "lesser than" are inherently comparative and numerical regardless of the dimensions being used.

 

Yeah, I agree, but while Michael's systems respect 1 star beers, rating sites don't use the ratings in the same way. According to his system, I would give Saison DuPont a 4, and Fantome a 1 or 2, but I think they are of equal quality (when Fantome is on point). I encourage to make beers like Fantome, that really deviate from style expectations, but beer drinkers should have a strong familiarity with the classics. This helps appreciate the innovative beers for what they are.

 

While I would tend to agree if I found the person's palate to be in alignment with my own, I've found way too much variance by comparing notes with one or two other people to really come away with a sense of what I want to drink (which in the end is what I care about).

I get what you're saying, and I'm not trying to downplay Michael Jackson's opinion (I haven't really read his stuff, but my dad has, and I know most people think he's pretty great). I'm just trying to say that generally for me, I've found larger groups of rankings to help even out individual's opinions, especially because ratings on here tend to lean towards "drinkability" as opposed to "accuracy to style" (the latter of which I don't generally care about).

 

And are not.

 

Comparing Michael Jackson's world class beers list to the top 250 is comparing cheese to chalk. The style bias in the top beers list is easy to see. Jackson's list is more about what beer best represents various styles.

 

Prima Pils is a nice one, been many years since I've had it. I believe it is at the liquor store by my new place, well at least I saw a few brew's from Victory there.

Cheers!

 

Those Tom Hardy's were very tasty. Also J.W. Lee's.

Cheers!

 

It was very bitter and dry, more so than Landlord. Of course it was a long time from my Brakspear Bitter to the first pint of Landlord.

 

I remember that now. And yep, pretty sure I expected the worst but found current Chimay Blue to be better than I expected though probably not as complex or as age worthy as I once was.