How often do you re-do reviews

Thank you very much for that. I recall reading some of your posts and have gleaned some good info from them.

 

Fairly often. If it has been more than a year (usually closer to 2 or 3) since my last sampling, and I re-sample the beer and find that my current opinion doesn't totally jive with what I wrote last time, I will consider updating my review (if the difference is significant enough to bother).

I'll also update reviews if I re-sample a beer from a style that I had little-to-no experience with on the original review date.

In practice this usually just means appending an "Updated: DD/MM/YY" to the end of the review, along with a couple of sentences explaining how I felt this sampling differed from my account of the last one.

 

Exactly. They are good data points to help make an informed buying decision. Obviously, you have to take into other considerations (whether you like a style, your own palette, etc.) to decide on your purchase.

I don't go back very often (may be once a year to review prior reviews and ratings).

 

I too am fairly new to the ever growing world of craft beer, and consider myself a noob. I disagree with you guys thinking your opinions bring nothing new to the table.

sidebar: I'm an old rock 'n' roller. I've heard the same songs from the 60's and 70's a million times. One night, my nephew and I were listening to some old tunes, and he started pointing out how he was getting heavily into the same old music (Aerosmith, Led Zep, Sabbath etc etc), and floored me when he started pointing out subtle nuances in the songs, that I had never heard before. Whether it was a little rythym riff sitting way way way in the background, or a barely audible whisper.. he was approaching the music with a fresh, totally unbiased, untainted enthusiasm.

Someone new to the scene, might bring in something new, or unknown by myself, that would cause me to say.. 'hey he's a noob too.. so, I'm going to try it myself'. Noobs have the ability to bring out these beers at the base level. I don't review all that often, but I do try to keep it as simple as I have understood each beer to be.

When someone says they taste things in a beer, that I was NEVER near tasting, it's okay.. one day I might be to that point, maybe not. If I don't, it's no big deal. I know ALL OF US have different opinions, but no one will know if we don't put it out there.

sidebar: Rock On!

Drink up! Tell us every now and again!

 

Rarely do I re-review a beer but I often do an updated review in Beerfly.

I like reading beer reviews but rarely use them on a purchase decision.

However, I really put a lot of faith on the Beerfly reviews when picking out places to visit.

 

I've done a few of these recently but only if my score really changes. I will put the original score and the date of that in the review for the second go-around. I haven't done that many yet but may for those beers that have annual releases (BBC, Fremont BBOMB, etc) just to highlight differences, but only the review/notes about it, not the scores unless there is a huge shift.

 

Rarely. Sometimes I retry a brew that I didn't particularly like but everybody else raves about because I may have gotten a bad bottle or something. If I do, I'll check my previous review and add the appropriate comment as an edit, keeping the old review intact. Example: today's revisiting of Blaecorn Unidragon.

 

Same as most. Unfortunately I have a lot of ratings/reviews because most of my beer drinking is in a social setting and not one to take notes or review it at the time, I simply rate it sometimes with a small comment about what I liked (< than minimum characters). I actually updated some ratings with reviews this past week while visiting my daughter (I went to bar while she went to school). I will redo a review if I have the beer again and found out that either a) my palette must have been blown on the original b) I think I have something else to add to it. But for the non reviewers I think it needs to be said, I would be more interested in what you picked up from the beer than your numerical rating. i.e. a lot of people slam an English IPA because it isn't an American IPA. If you do it in your review, I know to discard it, if you do it with ratings, I don't know to discard it

 

Like you and quite a few others, I like to add to reviews with new things I pick up. As some self-proclaimed "noobs" have mentioned, they aren't confident in their perceptions. I believe we all were there at some point, right or wrong, and I like occasionally to verify my thoughts. For instance, I wasn't as knowledgeable about checking dates for certain styles, so some of my older reviews might not have been on the beer's best day.

I also like seeing how my experience on a particular day with all its parameters compares to my experience today, with all its parameters (i.e. environmental conditions), regardless of when I reviewed the beer. I am always somewhat surprised that my original review was fairly close to what I felt today, and even more surprised when I noticed something in my original review that I missed this time, but it opens up my thoughts about this tasting. It's like I'm bottle-sharing with myself (and yes, that is a sad thought and probably means I need more [beer-drinking] friends ).

 

If I have space (given the 5000 character limit) and I'm having a beer again, I'll almost always try to add at least some brief impressions.

If it was an infected beer, I'll of course try to revisit it hoping future batches aren't infected, but sometimes the high cost of the beer precludes me from doing so after having been burned once before (Great Divide Barrel Aged Yeti comes to mind).

 

Out of my 530 reviews so far, maybe 10, less than 20.

It happens, but only when something about the circumstances surrounding my initial experience with that beer requires adjusting. And even then, I never do a full re-review -- I just tweak what's already there. Mainly this happens after I've tried to peck out a review at a bar or brewery on my phone but later get to drink the beer in the cozier confines of my home.

NOTE: I will often do one of these, a "NOTE:", and tack it on the end of a full review after a noteworthy drinking experience with the same beer months or years after the original review. I leave the full review in all its original glory but just add the addendum ... and sometimes I'll tweak the numbers, but if I do, I try to record the original numbers just for posterity's sake.

 

I always refer to my reviews to see how my palate has developed and update my original review when according...I RARELY (if ever) delete the original and compose a new one.

When it comes to a barrel aged stout like Sunday Morning Stout, I will add to the existing review with my notes from the current vintage, keeping the previous text intact.

 

On occasion, if it's warranted from a drastic change. For example a recipe change or if I try the beer again and realize that the first time round was drastically worse (happened with a 4 pack of Dragons Milk, 1st bottle was not good, the rest were great).

 

Often.

 

I only review/re-rate a beer if it seems as though it was marginally different than when I had it the first time. Honestly, this really only happen with the beers I originally reviewed in my first 2 years of rating/reviewing. Back then my catalog wasn't extensive. Simple beers seemed to blow my mind. After having some big dogs. It kind of put in perspective what was good to me.

That said, i would say 90% of beers fall into the 3.5-4.25 range for me. Unless its really good or really bad. Maybe its becuase I only hunt down the ones that I read on here are good. Haha.

 

Very rarely - maybe if they used a new recipe or changed something about the beer, or I've had a change of palate or perspective. I might, also rarely, change some scores to be more reflective of the beer relative to something similar I've had, but I tend to let old reviews stand - it was, after all, how I felt at the time.

 

Add me to the very rarely list. I will only usually do my review over if my opinion on it has drastically changed. When I do, it is usually due to me having more experience as to what to expect from a certain beer style.

 

What a timely thread. I just re-reviewed beer.

My take is this.

I re-review beers all the time. If my review of a recent batch is significantly different, generally a deviation of .25 or more, I'll update my rating to reflect the current batch.

But I never change a written review. I just draw a line in the review and put the new review above it, indicating the new vintage or tasting date.

My thinking is the old review is locked in and accurate for that batch and my tasting experience at that time, but. ratings should reflect the most recent review.

 

Every year or two when my palate, tastes in beer, and reviewing format have changed considerably.

 

From time to time I will rate a beer I've already rated without realizing that I already rated it(I generally do my reviews in notepad and then copy and paste). Makes for a good accidental little blind re-review. Funny thing is, I find most of the time the new review is pretty consistent with the old review.