Review Skunked Beer?

If it comes in a clear or green bottle, i say review it. The brewer did not do their best to protect the integrity of their product.

If it's in a brown bottle you should give it another chance before reviewing.

 

It is the brewers fault if the beer is in a green or clear bottle, as this is a known risk of packaging a beer in such a manner.

 

While I understand that the color of the bottle and initial storage, brewing and shipping does come into play, if a beer is skunked it's skunked - IMO it should not be reviewed-period UNLESS the reviewer is certain that it came skunked from the brewery. A second bottle, if possible, should be obtained and tried. Too often a skunked beer is the result of a consumers or a stores improper storage; age; light, etc.

Unless one is sure that the bottle is fresh from the brewer and a "new batch," I say don't review a skunked beer - not fair to you, the other readers or the beer. (Of course, if you have a new bottle, right from the brewery and a second bottle is equally skunked, that's another issue).

 

"Skunked from the brewery"? If they put it in a green bottle it is skunked or will be most likely before consumption. I have no tolerance for hopped beers coming in green bottles. To me it is tantamount to brewers arrogance ("truth be damned we are putting it in green bottles!"). We must punish green bottlers with no patronage and poor reviews when deserving.

 

If a beer is in a clear or green bottle and it's skunked it's because the brewer decided to put it in that bottle, yet we shouldn't blame the brewer? Every skunked beer I've had has been in a green bottle (most recently Tripel Karmeliet), and I've never once had a skunked beer in a brown bottle, but yet we shouldn't blame the people who decided to use the packaging that allowed this to happen?

If a dairy farm put their milk in a type of carton that allowed the milk to quickly sour, would you blame the farm, or the supermarket?

 

I would blame the dairy that packaged the milk, it goes from the farm to the dairy in a SS tank truck. Edit - refrigerated SS tank truck.

 

Did you guys read what I've said? I said that if you are sure that it came from the brewery skunked then blame the brewery. Could I be any clearer? I agree with you. However, regardless of bottle color or anything else, if it's an older bottle, or from another person, collector, store shelf etc and you are not sure of age, don't blame the brewery. Pretty simple conclusion I reached. One more time,....IF you're sure it came from the brewery and it's a new bottle and it's skunked....blame the brewery. (Hey, even Corona in the clear bottle is "fresh" for a moment. Right? We'd all only review one if we got it right from the dark box! lol....)

 

Did you read what I said? Who cares if it "came from the brewery" skunked or not? The brewer made the decision to package their beer in a way that makes it prone to skunking, that's THEIR poor decision, so I don't care if the beer skunked at the brewery or somewhere else, if THE BREWER hadn't made that poor decision, then I wouldn't be stuck with a damaged product. Why should I NOT blame the person who made the bad decision?

If a dairy packaging facility knowlingly put milk in poorly designed cartons that made it sour faster who would you blame for the sour milk, the person who chose the packaging or the supermarket?

Also, if I buy a bottle of beer and it's skunked how the hell am I supposed to know of it "came from the brewery" skunked or not? All I know is I have a bottle of beer and it's skunked, because someone (the brewery) knowingly put it in a package that would allow the beer to become damaged.

 

This. If you put your beer in a clear/green bottle, you obviously don't care too much if it gets skunked so I will review it as such. Same thing for undated IPAs. I'll happily review a crappy, old IPA if it's not dated. If the brewery doesn't care enough to take the steps to ensure as many people get an optimal product as possible, I don't care enough to keep gambling by buying their bottles in hopes that I get one in its prime. That being said, I've enjoyed pretty much every Fantome and d'Achouffe beers I've had, even when they're a bit skunked.

 

We seem to be talking about apples and oranges. Blame the brewer if the beer is skunked. Don't blame the brewer if it's skunked because of someone else's poor storage etc. (A beer in a clear or green bottle does not leave the brewery skunked. Although, if that's your point then I suppose I'd have to say that we just disagree). I simply refuse to believe that every beer in a clear or green bottle is skunked by definition. That just makes no sense. But, hey, perhaps I'm wrong. However, by your logic you get a skunked beer in a green bottle, say an IPA, that's been held by someone for three years, stored in sunlight at 80 degrees and you're still going to blame the brewer? Sorry.. that just doesn't make sense to me. But, hey....let's just say I'm wrong and you're right .....by the way, with your logic (see your penultimate and your last sentences) it would seem that a beer in "the proper" colored bottle would not get skunked. Yet, if in a proper (by your definition) bottle and you got it skunked, would you still review it? (That get's more to my point....) Even "proper bottled" beers get skunked for various reasons - they should not be reviewed. I'm done....please, take the last word.

 

Ticker gotta get that tick. Think of the disappointment of buying a bottle but not getting public credit for it on a beer website.

 

If the review acknowledged it was skunked than I say fair game.

 

Plus there's a lot of people who are clueless about skunking, especially if a Bohemian Pils is involved. They'd review draft or canned Pils Urquell as being skunked, and probably speculate it was in a green bottle or something before it was kegged or canned.

I've seen the same complaints about Pils Urq from green bottles that came from opaque cardboard sealed 12pack packaging too.



See the Bros:
http://beeradvocate.com/articles/527

 

Every skunked bottle of beer I've ever had came from a green bottle that was purchased at the same stores where I've purchased hundreds if not thousands of beers in brown bottles, none of which have ever been skunked. The reason these beers were skunked was not because they were "stored in sunlight at 80 degrees", it's because they were in green bottles that didn't protect them properly.

In other words if I buy 500 bottles of beer from the same store, 498 of them are in brown bottles and they're not skunked and 2 of them are in green bottles and they are skunked then who is to blame for those skunked bottles? The store for their storage conditions, or the brewer for putting the beer in a green bottle?

And never once did I say that beer in a green or clear bottles is skunked by definition, I said it's at a much higher risk of becoming skunked. Would you dispute that fact?

Thanks for the last word.

 

Siebel tells me that Heineken's choice to use green glass was a very deliberate marketing decision. American tasting panels associated the taste of light struck beer with 'import.' They went for the green in an effort to solidify their classy, somewhat exotic reputation. Not sure how true this is, but I consider them a pretty reliable source. Interesting nonetheless.

On a related note, they also said that red glass would be the absolute ideal in avoiding the skunk - but it's much more expensive.

 

Review everything. Spare no feelings.

 

I could go both ways. Part of me always feels like I ought to review what's in the bottle. The brewery/distributor ought to be checking in on how their product is stored, handled, etc. Green or clear glass and traditionally skunky beers (such as some European import lagers) deserve to be reviewed as such as skunky is par for the course. For craft that is usually a much less common issue though.

My hard rule is that if it is obvious that a beer is significantly out of spec and it is an issue that is certainly not the brewery's fault, I won't review it. When there's doubt I'll often go ahead and review, and revisit that review/edit/replace it later if I get a better example of the beer.

One other thought - being a saison are we sure that the reviewer actually had a skunked bottle? Maybe they are unfamiliar with the style and mistook the funkiness as skunked beer... In which case just flag the review since they don't know what they're talking about.

 

The brewery is responsible from the start to end pour of the product. They picked the distributor, who picks the retail chain. Everything should be done to make sure your end product is what you want it. Unless you intentionally skunked the beer with light, it's a service to others to review it properly and let people know of possible skunking. If your distribution sucks, your beer reviews should reflect that. If your distributors are selling to shady retail chains, it should reflect that also. I'd hate to spend $20 on a bottle of beer only to find out it has been mishandled somewhere in the distribution process.

 

This is a good point. Some people are advocating buying another bottle to try before reviewing. What happens if the second bottle is skunked? The third? How much money do you pump into a sub-par product in search of a good one?

Again, if a brown bottle is skunked there's a real problem going on as beer in brown bottles is much less likely to skunk. But I have heard stories where people will buy bottle after skunked bottle of Fantome to get at a good/fresh bottle because of how good the beer can be. Yeah, it's great to review the beer as it was intended, but if the brewer allows their product to be shipped in green bottles that skunk easily then they certainly are to blame. I want to see the reviewer who tells me that yes, this beer can be wonderful, but that they get as many skunked bottles as they do non-skunked. This information tells me to either buy something else, or that if I do buy the product in question there is some risk, and thus my own fault for wasting my money if the bottle is no good.