Which beer do you numerically rate when comparing a fresh vs a vintaged version?

Discussion in 'Cellaring / Aging Beer' started by HopsAreDaMan, Dec 12, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. HopsAreDaMan

    HopsAreDaMan Initiate (0) Jul 28, 2015 Missouri

    I recently reviewed and rated Lagunitas Hairy Eyeball, doing a side-by-side of the fresh vs the one-year old version. Both were good, and I gave details about the differences in the written review, but I had to decide which version to give the numerical rating to (there were definite differences in some categories); I decided to give the numerical ratings (the ones that count in the overall score of the beer) to the vintaged version, because that is how I prefer to drink it.

    On the one hand, I don't know if my numerical ratings accurately represent the beer, as my guess is most people will drink it fresh. On the other hand, some (like me) will want to drink it with some age on it, and so for people like me, those scores matter.

    Perhaps there can be some numerical rating that gives weight to the ability of the beer to improve with age? I realize that is complicated, especially as most probably won't care about this. Yet, since creating a separate listing for each year of the beer is too problematic, how can we give some weight to the numeric score of a beer that ages well?
     
    #1 HopsAreDaMan, Dec 12, 2015
  2. Sweatshirt

    Sweatshirt Initiate (0) Jan 27, 2014 New Hampshire

    Nothing could matter less. Review the vintage you want with the numbers you want and note the differences in the review and which you preferred if you want. Rating beer should be fun and to your liking, not something to fret over.
     
    #2 Sweatshirt, Dec 12, 2015
    rjd722 likes this.
  3. jmdrpi

    jmdrpi Grand High Pooh-Bah (8,989) Dec 11, 2008 Pennsylvania
    BA4LYFE Society Pooh-Bah

    Either way, note it in the review.

    But I would typically score the fresh, and just note in the review my thoughts on the aged version. Unless it's a beer specifically brewed for aging, like JW Lees Harvest Ale
     
    #3 jmdrpi, Dec 12, 2015
    BrewsingBuffalo, drtth, TrojanRB and 2 others like this.
  4. cjgiant

    cjgiant Grand High Pooh-Bah (6,584) Jul 13, 2013 District of Columbia
    Society Pooh-Bah

    Agree with @jmdrpi in that is rate the fresher, as that is likely how more people would try it. That said, if the beer has enough ratings that my rating is a drop in the bucket, I'd feel more free to rate it however I liked. In both cases, good you noted the nuances in the review.
     
    #4 cjgiant, Dec 12, 2015
    drtth, thepenguin and StoutElk_92 like this.
  5. thepenguin

    thepenguin Savant (1,215) Aug 8, 2010 Massachusetts

    It's usually whichever I actually have since I sometimes lay a beer down without tasting it fresh but ideally I'd do a side-by-side comparison. For example I have a bottle of 2010 Old Horizontal, before Victory discontinued it for awhile, and plan on comparing that to a 2013 and a fresh one.

    But if I'm reviewing an aged bottle, I definitely note it and if age clearly made it worse I either don't post the review and just keep it for my own records or take it into account with the scores.
     
    #5 thepenguin, Dec 12, 2015
    HopsAreDaMan and cjgiant like this.
  6. rjd722

    rjd722 Initiate (0) Nov 17, 2013 Maryland

    I wouldn't worry about it...if a beer has the potential to taste good fresh or with age then just note it in the review and move on. Let the variety of reviews average out to represent the beer as a whole and hopefully your review will be something that eventually helps out someone else hoping to try it with age.
     
    #6 rjd722, Dec 12, 2015
    HopsAreDaMan, cjgiant, MikeySea and 1 other person like this.
  7. utopiajane

    utopiajane Grand Pooh-Bah (3,982) Jun 11, 2013 New York
    Pooh-Bah


    You could submit the rating for the first one then edit and give the rating for the other. Copy the first rating into the review =)
     
    #7 utopiajane, Dec 12, 2015
    cjgiant likes this.
  8. HopsAreDaMan

    HopsAreDaMan Initiate (0) Jul 28, 2015 Missouri

    Thank you all for your responses. : )

    I admit I am a bit of a stickler for doing things the right way, and yet, as some have mentioned, the actual numeric score I give a beer will probably only be a drop in the bucket anyway, so I agree it's probably not worth fretting over.

    That said, I still prefer to numerically rate the vintage of the beer as I prefer to drink it (which will sometimes be the aged version), not as I assume others will drink it (which may or not not be fresh). I see the purpose of reviewing beers as rating them as they are at their best (thus, as one person mentioned, if the aged version is worse when doing a side-by-side, I may note it in the review, but not ding it in the numerical rating).

    For the sake of thoroughness, I like to note as many things as I can about a beer--good or bad. Yet, the beers 'best foot forward', so-to-speak, is ultimately what I want to celebrate out here.
     
    #8 HopsAreDaMan, Dec 12, 2015
    StoutElk_92, rjd722 and cjgiant like this.
  9. rab53

    rab53 Initiate (0) May 1, 2005 Washington
    Trader

    As has been said, rate however you want and note the vintage/year tasted. I keep a log of ratings separate from BA (for when the site implodes during the Apocalypse I suppose), and have a separate tab for certain beers and vintage ratings.

    I just made note of vintage, year sampled, and #years aged (difference between them). It satisfied my OCD nature, and allowed me to see how things changed over time. Very few beers improved with age. It also allowed me to see how a beer changes seasonally (like SN Harvest Ale). Thing is, even if the 20XX vintage was great, you'll never have it again.
     
    #9 rab53, Dec 12, 2015
    drtth and HopsAreDaMan like this.
  10. drtth

    drtth Initiate (0) Nov 25, 2007 Pennsylvania
    In Memoriam

    Ignore the "drop in a bucket" issue since the major person who benefits from doing a review is you. A year or two from now when you look back at your review with the thought of buying more, you'll want to refresh your memory about what you thought of the beer and why. What is it like fresh compared to others? Do you want to try aging it again?

    So, that said if I'm looking at your review to help decide if I want to try the beer, which am I most likely to be having a chance to buy, fresh or deliberately cellared for a year? Being selfish and tight with my money I want your numbers and primary description to reflect what I'm going to see on the shelf in the store. Your additional info will help me decide if I might want to invest the time, money and storage to try aging the beer for a year. Your thoughts as part of the review of the fresh beer will be useful to both of us.
     
    #10 drtth, Dec 12, 2015
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2015
    StoutElk_92, HopsAreDaMan and dennis3951 like this.
  11. dennis3951

    dennis3951 Initiate (0) Mar 6, 2008 New Jersey

    That's just about what i was going to say. I don't know of any store that ages beer to sell at a later date.
     
    #11 dennis3951, Dec 12, 2015
  12. tillmac62

    tillmac62 Pooh-Bah (2,859) Oct 2, 2013 South Carolina
    Pooh-Bah

    I suggest write the fresh review then add to it as you age the beer. Structure it like a trial and contrast the differences.
     
    #12 tillmac62, Dec 12, 2015
  13. MostlyNorwegian

    MostlyNorwegian Pooh-Bah (2,236) Feb 5, 2013 Illinois
    Pooh-Bah

    Don't overthink it. If you want to rate the vintage. I'm sure people wouldn't mind knowing how it handles with some age on it. Note the year, packaging date and review away.
    It provides balance and perspective that beer is a living vessel.
     
    #13 MostlyNorwegian, Dec 12, 2015
    HopsAreDaMan likes this.
  14. Scott17Taylor

    Scott17Taylor Initiate (0) Oct 28, 2013 Iowa
    Trader

    I usually numerically rate which ever one I enjoyed more.
     
    #14 Scott17Taylor, Dec 12, 2015
    HopsAreDaMan likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.