Poll: Why I Don't Review Beers.

So are most of the rest of us.

 

That is how I feel ... and I review for my own benefit, taking an "average joe" approach.

 

I've only done one review and that was for a beer I thought was pretty unique and up to then wasn't added to the site. In most cases, i don't review because I don't have anything to say that hasn't been said a 100 times before. That, and I'm lazy. Do like to contribute to NBS now and then, though.

 

I enjoy reviewing beer as it challenges me to discover the beer's different notes and nuances. I believe it makes beer more enjoyable and it enhances the tasting experience.

 

Those people don't want to share their thoughts about sharing their thoughts!

 

I try to review all beers that I rate, but mostly for my own benefit. I don't really expect anything I write to be read by someone out there in cyber-beerland. So I use it to keep notes on where I purchased, how much I paid, and some general tasting notes so I can determine if I'll purchase it again.

 

I didn't vote, as I do review, but like this thread. Interesting to see the different reasons.

 

I picked other. I value the reviews people write. But for me, I know whether I like a beer or not, but not great at describing why. I do review, but stopped using the standard format.

 

Trying to get better about writing reviews. I don't for festivals or if I'm too drunk to be a little more objective or if I just don't have the time.

I really didn't before because, as I voted above, I don't think I write reviews well enough. I don't have the tasting vocab that I see on other reviews so it can be a little intimidating at first, as it was for me. Now though I just write what I feel about what I experienced the way I want to. I have definitely learned from reading reviews to broaden my review vocabulary and better understanding of how to write them.

 

I've seen a lot of people say "Untappd" ... I will agree that it's great, but too brief for my liking... everybody seems to say the same things.

"Hoppy. Solid. Good."
"Mm."
"I like this one."

The comments that I see on my friend's list are too commonly pointless. Honestly though, I do the same thing a lot of the time due to the character limit, so whatever.

 

I find that interesting and I've heard others say the same - that you can't review a beer based on just a taster. In my experience, just for my own tasting, most of my reviewing is done within the first 4 oz. or so, half dozen sips at the most. I don't need a full bottle's worth to smell the beer, and I usually actively taste the beer for the review for the first several sips, and then just sit back and enjoy the rest without thinking too hard.

Mostly the only time I review beers is if I'm drinking at home to deliberately taste the beer, or if I'm at a low-key gathering, drinks with a friend, etc., and it isn't awkward or lame to break out a phone and start taking tasting notes real quick. But a lot of beers I drink are at parties, dinner with people, festivals, and that is hardly the time to start geeking out.

 

Reviewing is fine.
Ticking is not.

 

Voted "other" I like writing reviews of beers i particularly like or detest, the ones in the middle I just move on from. That's why my rDev is so positive. So for me it's a mixed bag.

 

I picked "destroy my enjoyment", but "don't have time" or "too lazy" would also apply. I already rate the beers in my own mind, and haven't really needed to write stuff down to hone in on my true preferences. Would it help if I had a written journal of my experiences? Maybe a little. But ratings are a different thing. If I were to do ratings, I would want to do a really good job so that it would be useful for others. But in order to do such a good job I would have to pay so much attention to little scoring details, and listing all the flavors, and paying attention to crap i really don't care about like appearance.... it would take my attention away from the beer itself. Not worth it in my current estimation.

 

depending on the circumstances I have different opinions of the same beer, reviewed Even More Jesus last night and had to update it a bit because did it halfway through the bomber and by the end almost drain poured the last couple drinks... cerebrally analyzing beer takes away from the enjoyment for me, contemplating the difference between what I consider 4 and 4.25 on mouthfeel seems like a chore, just my 2 cents but enjoy reading reviews to clarify what I am tasting, just don't consider it my forte

 

[I don't review so this is hypothetical]

@drtth

I would of thought that ABV would come into play in terms of an acceptable sample size for a review. For example, nobody would insist on someone having to drink half a bottle of whisky before forming a proper opinion. So for something like Black Tuesday, I'd say 4oz is probably getting close to being about right. But a 3.2% ABV bitter, perhaps even 12oz isn't enough

 

Well, taken literally someone can review a beer after taking just one sip and sniff. The could review without ever tasting it at all based on what it says on the label and never sample it at all. But how much good would such are review do you? For example, one issue for me is that the beer flavors and aromas change over the course of tasting the full portion. As a quick illustration, consider temperature. A a chilled beer fresh the fridge isn't going to taste the same as it will when its warmed for 15-20 minutes. The cold affects the tastebuds and reduces the complexity of the flavors (some suggest that this is why beers like Coors stress cold beer, you don't notice that there isn't much there to taste.)

And you could sip 20 different beers and review them in all the same evening. But the taste buds are slow to recover from use and so by about the 3rd sip, you're not tasting the 3rd beer, you're tasting the 3rd beer plus the carry over effects from the first 2 (particularly if lots of hops are involved).

So I've had sixers of the same beer bottled on the same machine from from the same batch that can taste different depending on what I've had to eat or drink that day or for dinner. There's been more than one beer where I like the first bottle, thought the second was only so-so, and then thought the third was really good.

TL;DR: Your sense of smell and taste are easily impacted by other things and are actually easily fooled as well.

 

With the changes, I've tried to start reviewing most of the beers I try. When I began using the site, I liked being able to give beers a number rating as it helped me maintain my own little database on beers tried. As I progressed, I would judge current beers against others in the style already tried. I actually preferred being able to simply write in a number score. I won't review beers from 4 - 6 oz sample pours, or beers consumed as the fourth or fifth of a night of 'tasting.'.

I see the value in reviews, and appreciate the efforts of those who compose them. I would say though, that I find that just as many reviews I read are helpful and in line with my experience as I do reviews that are poorly written (unhelpful) and others that are so different to my experience of a beer as to be next to useless to me. Telling me that a Pilsner is light golden in appearance is like telling me the sky is blue. It simply is not necessary. Telling me that a Czech Pilsner has a hop presence that strays far from the expectations of the style is useful. Describing the ways in which it strays from the listed style is even more useful. In short, the formulaic quality of many reviews, including some of mine, does little for me.

When I decided to start reviewing regularly, I chose to follow the common breakdown of Apperance, Aroma, Taste, Mouthfeel and Overal Scorel. I think I will move away from that and simply highlight what I liked and did not like about a particular beer while taking into account the style under which it is listed.

 

Beer reviewers are all beer geeks, and I am just a casual enjoyer.

I hated picking this because it paints beer reviewers in a negative light, but it's the closest for me. I'm impressed with reviews that I read. People put a lot of time into them. I've never had the nose for picking out unique scents in a complex bouquet though, and I have a hard time describing the tastes in steps.

I know what I like and I can usually articulate to the person next to me why I do or don't like something. Trying to review it though? That's intimidating by comparison to the reviews already out there.

 

I've selected "other". I like writing reviews but I don't think I am particularly good at reviewing even though I have a pretty good palate and a fair amount of training. I don't always have the vocabulary to pick out the "nuance" and communicate clearly.

I've also gone through a cycle. When I started on BA, I was scared to death about writing a review - it "seemed" to be a very important part of this web community and I didn't want to screw things up. It seemed like a serious responsibility. Looking back, some of my reviews are definitely poorly written and unrefined. But I was tasting and taking notes anyway, so I ended up with the damn the torpedoes approach and did a whole bunch of reviews from my notes. What slowed me down - many times I was finding my reviews didn't come close to agreeing, especially on some of the popular styles (meaning IPA's and barrel aged everything). Started thinking well, I must be wrong - these beers must be really fantastic but I just wasn't getting it - in some cases that was certainly true.

So now I pick and choose a bit and I do use the numbers only just to keep track. I've never written a review from a single taste or a single "sampling". I think, for someone with no formal training in dissecting beer taste, it is unfair for me to be posting comments without giving the beer a fair shot. I'll "tick" a quick score from a tasting, but not do a review. I'll also tick a score and come back when I've had at least a couple of the same brew to form a better opinion. I will also admit that sometimes the "overall" category for me equates to "how much do I like it", so I have to watch out there in some attempt to maintain objectivity in a subjective undertaking. I do need to watch rating to style as well - while I am not an ardent style ****, I do believe a beer should resemble what it is labeled or it should be labeled otherwise. Would I say habanero Sculpin is an IPA in the strict interpretation of the style - no, but neither is it a "fruit/vegetable" beer. I can find the IPA elements easily enough, and it would be hard to ignore the fruit/veg component. True to either style?

I think reviews - whether formally written or just in general forum discussion - do add value depending on how you use them. I certainly want to see what other folks pick up for flavors and compare to what I can find on my own. But when I do review a beer, I sit down with that intent, so it doesn't interfere with anything from my perspective.