Belgian Stout Beer Style

I've noticed this, too, and I agree. A Belgian stout is not the same thing as a Belgian dark ale. They have different malt or sometimes even yeast profiles.

 

I agreestout and dark ale are different but ive heard brewers. For one example l, allagash about their black beer, that there is no true "belgian stout" its a belgian twist on the american stout.

 

Yep. Belgian stout is not a traditional Belgian style. It's a more recent American invention, but, even so, it's a different style of beer than Belgian dark ale or American/British style stouts.

 

Ahhh. I get it. If belgian ipa can be its own style then Belgianstout should too.

 

Please - just no. There are already too many styles based on too many criteria. Why can't it just be a stout, and the brewery can call it Belgian if it is. Otherwise let's just make every beer its own style.

 

Arguing about what should or should not be a style is pointless. The whole idea of what is a style is arbitrary (don't get me wrong, I love to think of beer in terms of different styles). But let's face it, Black & Tan is considered a style which is a bit hilarious. Same goes for Fruit/Veg beer (which in my opinion should be categorized under the base beer they're made and not on the fact that they contain fruit/veg). Belgian Stout, in my opinion, is more of a "style" than either of the above, even if it's a bit or a recent twist on an already existing style of beer.

 

Beer styles need to be tweaked on occasion. I think maybe we should get rid of some, and add some new ones. Beer styles are not arbitrary, they are based on specific defining criteria. I have this same argument with friends about music genres. No, not every band needs its own genre, but there's no need to try to throw out the concept of genres just because you get frustrated with them. Some types of music objectively are similar and comparable. You don't need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I don't see why everyone has to have such an "all or nothing" approach to style classifications. Beer styles clearly are not pointless, (no one is going to ever want to get a pilsner and a stout confused) they just need to be updated to reflect the changing times and levels of criteria.

 

I'm all for a style overhaul. One question is who is the authority that does it? Does BA do their own thing? Whomever does it, hopefully they see fit to implement a tiered structure with no more than 20 or so major styles, then everything is directly in one of the 20, or if it makes sense there could be sub-styles. Porter could be a major style with stout under that, and a few types of stouts under that. Also need to ditch some of the criteria - such as those that describe color or alcohol content. Those are irrelevant.

 

Belgian stouts were produced in Belgium before American "craft" beer was born.

 

Oh, really? Do you know of any examples? (I'm not being passive-aggressive, I just genuinely didn't know there was a such a thing)

 

Obviously the BA admins will have to work out the system that they want to go by. Personally, I wouldn't mind a complete overhaul. I like the idea of adding tags that function as links under a beer's profile that allows users to refine their searches to very specific levels. So, for example, Stone Go-To IPA could have the tags Ale, IPA, session IPA, and West Coast IPA to denote its specific categorization. That way if people want to find very similar beers they can search under all the precise tags, or if you want to search more generic recommendations you look solely under "IPA" or "session IPA" or "West Coast IPA", etc. That way it's up to the inquiring seekers to determine their own level of comfort for narrowness of criteria. However, users submitting new beers would be required to only use preexisting, admin-approved tags for beer styles, to avoid the clusterfuck of having every individual user defining their own beer styles. Then admins/mods can add or remove style tags if the initial ones are inaccurate.

 

I agree there are a lot of styles already but if belgian ipa is a style belgian stout seems logical. I dont think its splitting too many hair in that sense. I understand there are others pure styled that arent listed here and many to be created that wont be but i think the creation of new styles is a good thing. You need to constantly be moving and adapting to survive. Very few can thrive off repetition.

 

Porter was being brewed all over the world by the 1800s... including continental Europe. I wish I knew more of the history of beer like this in Belgium. During the two World Wars, British troops helped make English and Scottish ales popular in Belgium. Duvel's yeast has it's origins in Scottish yeast. One example I can give is Dupont's Monk's Stout which was produced in the 50s and revived much more recently. Perhaps this Dupont beer is a reflection of the comment regarding the World Wars. I have no idea.

 

Hmmm...interesting. Very interesting, especially about Duvel's yeast have its origins in Scotland. That's so cool.

 

But you don't need a style to tell you, the "Belgian Stout" on the label should be sufficient warning

 

But that's justifying a new needless style with a previous needless style - IPA should cover all IPA's - otherwise we'll eventually need Italian IPA's, French IPA's, North Korean IPA's, etc. Belgian stout is just a stout, or to split hairs, a stout porter.

 

I'm sure @jesskidden can impart some historical facts on this subject.

 

Weyerbacher Tiny is a great example of a Belgian stout, IMHO.