Three Chiefs (2019)

Once again, scarcity factors into how people rate beers. Posting said ratings is not a "gotcha."

 

Yeeeeep.

Time for work. I expect at least two more pages here to get me through the day. Get to work, gents.

 

Rrrrrrright.

 

Can disagree all you want. Untappd scores corroborate my opinion. People sound like flat-earthers in here saying that 3 chiefs is manipulating untappd to get higher ratings.

 

Great, now I got beer in my lungs from reading this.

 

Not on the beer website of record it isn't.

 

Is that the site with a sample size of 107 or the one with a sample size of 1,737? Cause id say the one with 1,737 is the website of record.

 

The earth is a triangle, ok? Anyway, most of those Three Chiefs beers have less than 150 check-ins. How are you even comparing that to the thousands of Check-ins that the BL Stasis beers have? And yet all still rate over 4.50?

 

Using untappd ratings to talk about a beer is like citing wikipedia in a college paper.

I get that there isnt much else out there to quantify something as subjective like beer but that doesnt mean anyone should be using something as flawed as untappd to support an argument.

Also, werent there only 100 bottles of FAHA? How are there 469 reviews? Did everyone with a bottle share theirs with 5 people and did everyone of those people rate it on untapped? I havent been following this brewery so maybe theres an explanation but that definitely seems like manipulation to me.

Also, i love the stupidity of this argument. You got one guy shitting on the brewery saying theres not enough ratings and another guy saying there are too many ratings. Love it!

 

I think they sold 100 bottles. It has made a number of festival appearances though. So between that and shares the numbers seen reasonable.

 

O/T but this is another area where BA's take themselves too seriously. Our 100 ratings should carry more weight than the 1700 on Untappd because we're such serious advocates as opposed to those noobs and frat boys using Untappd. Nevermind that the scores are often quite similar. Please.

 

(none of the ratings matter)

 

I dont think this was directed toward me (assuming o/t stands for off topic) but in case it was, the point i was trying to make was there is no good source for beer ratings. But yes at least with BA you have to rate individual components like appearance, taste, mouthfeel etc so while i use neither for rating beer, gun to my head, id probably trust BA just a little more.

 

Nope, not directed at you. Just a general observation.

 

In actual news, looks like a Three Chiefs collab with Barrel Theory is getting released soon. Unfortunately it is being released there instead of locally.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/barrel-theory-cocomac-bottle-release-tickets-58654505204?aff=eand

Sounds good

 

Hmmmm, maybe this Eventbrite, one per person, with no proxies release is a sign of things to come?

Which might mean this highly entertaining thread will finally run out of fuel.

 

By "ridiculous product," I mean silly, poorly executed sugarmurk (of the dark variety for the pastry stout fans, of the light variety for NEIPA fans) that just happens to be almost always in the styles that produce lines out the door and Instagram posts and is designed for people who don't have the palates to appreciate the flavors historically associated with beer or to tell the difference between high-quality and low-quality product.

I'm okay with some pastry stouts in practice. In theory, I think they're generally pretty stupid, as they rely on 1) familiar flavors from outside of beer to distract from beer-specific flavors in order to appeal to people who don't much care for genuine beer flavors and 2) residual and added sugars to appeal to the sweet-toothed preferences of underdeveloped palates. They're almost a different type of beverage altogether, technically beer but functionally liquid dessert. That said, the disastrous and severely flawed Three Chiefs beer that earned my lowest-ever rating (at the other site) was a New England Double IPA (a substyle of which I have similar criticism).

I, like many brewers and fellow long-time craft beer enthusiasts, don't have much respect for the palates of people who enjoy those sorts of beers (they may be great folks; beer criticism simply isn't their forte), so their enjoyment of the product doesn't impress me. But I do strongly suspect, regardless of their palate preferences or skill of discernment, that their favorite flavors are "hype" and "rare." I think to deny that sort of influence is incredibly naive, perhaps actively dishonest, and certainly self-serving.

People seem not to want to be included among the hype-prone scenesters and instead wish to portray the quality of the product and their style preferences as what is driving their interest in beer. If you're going to make that case about yourself, it's a lot more powerful to acknowledge the rule and claim that you're an exception to it. If you stick your head in the sand and fail to acknowledge the rule, I'm generally going to assume it's because it applies to you in a way you consider unflattering (I'm using the generic "you," not referencing anyone in particular in this thread).

For the record, I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with being involved in something mainly because of the hype or scene around it. I think that's the explanation behind a lot of fads and other cultural phenomena. To acknowledge that, however, is to give away the game, and it does seem to make some people inordinately upset when I raise points of this sort (I suspect because I'm hitting uncomfortably close to home).

By the way, linked are the Untappd ratings of Barrel Theory / Three Chiefs Powerglide, the single-batch, sickening monstrosity of a beer I referenced earlier. It's hard for me to have much respect for other people's ratings, or to assume that I received a rare bad example of a Three Chiefs beer, when a beer that I am utterly convinced was fatally flawed and disgusting gets a 4.17 average.

 

Guessing that's more of a Barrel Theory choice.

 

An interesting thing about those special Barrel Theory releases is that the beer tends to stay available on tap for a good amount of time (weeks) despite long lines for the bottles, which sell out essentially instantly on the day of release. People go in, buy a bottle, often don't try the beer on tap even at a lower price per ounce than the bottles are, and leave. They certainly rarely seem to come back later to enjoy the beer on tap. Sure, any individual might have some place to be, and perhaps many of those folks are more drink-at-home-and-parties types than taproom enthusiasts, but I do find it noteworthy that there seems to be consistently so much more interest in the bottles, with their high prices and very limited availability, than for the same beer on tap, with its relatively moderate price and easy availability.

Any explanations?

 

why does monkish beer attract lines for cans when its readily available on draft and in growlers?