Do we really need the term Triple IPA???

I know right!

 

Can't believe you guys went three pages on this...

 

Mostly the pronounced alcohol flavor and "heat". I know, I know, a DIPA of the same ABV can easily display that characteristic as well. I would argue that those should be classified as triple IPAs, though. IMO, double IPAs shouldn't give an overly boozy impression, whereas triples should. This assertion in itself is the topic of discussion, though, so I know it is hardly definitive.

My main point was to assert that a beer that strong can maintain its identity as an IPA of some sort and not turn into a generic "strong ale" or a barleywine, not to convince everyone here of the difference between triple and double IPAs. Clearly, the latter will not be happening in this thread.

 

I may want a pils or stout sometimes but I downright crave and seek hops if it's been a while (couple hours...)

 

IPA... the “ocho”

 

Nope, not going to do it. I don't even like the term double IPA. Everything should just be referred to as an IPA with variances in ABV. I feel like the label double IPA instantly gives them the ability to charge more money for it when in truth some things take no more time, money, or labor to brew.

 

Really? You've been a member for 6+ years... I can't believe you can't believe it!

 

I'm okay with the term. It's informative. If we're going to get rid of the term "triple IPA" we might as well get rid of "double IPA".

 

You’re implying that barley wine and strong ale are two distinct things... but they’re not.

 

Now stand up, & say that.
Maybe you won't taste the difference , but you might feel the difference.

 

ipa))<>((IPA

 

This does make sense, and I'd agree with you in concept but... right at this moment, I am drinking a Triple Maiden Triple IPA from Foley Brothers and it is decidedly an IPA in flavor, full of juicy hops, and balanced in its sweetness despite the malts needed for its 10% ABV. I've had many sweeter, less hoppy "single" IPAs than this one.

Admittedly, this is one of the best ones of its type out there but it does prove the reasoning behind the name- without calling it a triple IPA, it could be deceptively and dangerously consumed en masse.

 

That will be regrettable, but not as regrettable as the equally inevitable Session NEIPA.

 

It's a useful descriptor of whats being offered. Single (?)= ABV below 7%, Double (?) =ABV below 10% but over 7% Triple (?) over 10%. IPA means a hop forward taste.
So Triple IPA is a beer with hop forward taste and an ABV over 10%

 

Just make sure to let me know when they come out with a Sour Belgian Black Session NEIPA, I think that would be totally in my wheelhouse.

 

I know of one brewery that has done both, though the owner agrees with this thread and refuses to call them a Triple, or a session on principle. Both beers are top notch delicious. Since they're in VT though, I guess they're kind of dead to you

 

Not at all, happy to see them brought down to the tasting table at my local Saturday release and bottle share. I love good beer, the idea that I can now get great beer made locally, and get to drink great Vt., Mass,.Maine, and New Jersey brought to share while waiting for the beer to go on sale is the greatest thing I can think of. Hope to try the beers you speak of though you didn't really give any good hints.

 

Especially if brewed with Belgian yeast so that there are fruity notes in the background.

@cavedave

 

They're spring/summer seasonals, limited release, so it didn't seem currently relevant. Not sure either will actually be made again, honestly... but it's been done well, so I have faith that if others do it, they too can succeed.

Did you know EQ is trying to get a foothold in VT? I've had some of their freshies and while enjoying them very much, I'll still take my easily gotten Frost and Foley cans instead. Wish we could have outdoor drinking in line shares here, but... well, it still wouldn't get me to stand in a line.

 

It seems like a marketing gimmick to me