Should we split up the Top 250 Rated Beers?

I’m tying my own hands to a degree with this analogy, but…

Is it more like, “let’s let Cleveland/LA fans decide if LeBron is the best”?

Edit: I just realized comparing greatest across different sport’s “eras” could apply here, as well

I personally couldn’t care less about finding the items on the list. And I will separately question the way it’s constructed - it’s a list I don’t trust has the meaning it claims.

You seem to be leaning to the fact that it does. I think both opinions are valid. You could find something useful I do not, and vice-versa. Should BA not try to provide me something I find useful that you do not?

 

Don’t necessarily disagree with this, but I believe it’s already factored into whatever formula BA uses to rank beers. Not sure which beer your referring to specifically with 12 reviews, but don’t confuse ratings with reviews. A beer that I’d consider top 5 hardest to get for example, SR-71, only has 73 reviews, but 542 ppl have rated it.

 

I was thinking of the top beers by style. My bad

 

There are plenty of "everyday" beers that are plenty interesting. If I could get Yellow Rose regularly, it's likely I would find it consistently interesting, much as I do Bodhizafa from Georgetown, which is almost always in my fridge. Just because a beer is easily available does not make it less interesting than a RARZ. Orval will never be not interesting.

 

While I enjoy the current format of the top 250 list as a kind of 'best of the best' regardless of scarcity, etc., it has become fairly stagnant. It would nice to see some movement on there and some fresh faces, so-to-speak. I think the most notable things I've seen on that list in recent memory are the addition of KBS Maple Mackinac Fudge and the drastic plunge of Ghost in the Machine (#98 to #221 within just a couple months).

Speaking of top 250, I think it would be cool to have a badge or signifier of some sort for beers that have once been part of the top 250. Maybe like a veteran status badge signifying the highest spot they reached on the list..? Something to think about, at least. Cheers!

 

I've been an advocate, not to infringe, of an all-time and recent (maybe last five years, maybe last fifty reviews) delineation between beers. This is prompted mainly by the tweaking of recipes by many labels over the years, but also by changing tastes. To stay current, I'd like to see an additional rating system which separates the most recent reviews from reviews that are over a decade old. I don't want the older ones discounted, I just feel the recent ones are more accurate in describing what is offered now, regardless of the label.

 

Hell yes it should. It's valueless as it stands for a regular beer drinker. Beer advocate has no compiled list of actually attainable top current beers.

It's antiquated and skewed so terribly towards limited beer from limited breweries that its comical to regard it as a resource on the whole.

 

Seems like what's been ID'd is that the top.250 list has a serious value but people would also like a list of more available beers too. What would happen if you made a top 250 (or 100) with a much higher minimum number of ratings? That might create a list that's more accessible without having to fiddle with the particulars of "year round v. seasonal" or whatever

 

Pretty sure @Bhubbard34 has actual shelving installed in his home to display the empties of the Top 100's like little trophies of his achievement. I'm fairly confident people like that would be upset, and see it as sort of crushing to have worked super hard on "ticking" this legendary list, only to have the list essentially nullified. I think it has a greater meaning to some people, and it's seen as a sort of goal among many BA's. A lot of people here have invested years into trying to sample the Top 250. The widely accepted "cream-of-the-crop" - as voted by us. It's fun and rewarding. The super exclusive whales do play a key role in that.

I'd be lying if I said that I too, don't have my empty Top 250's lined up... It's a thing.

 

I think exactly so.
Also because I don't think that criteria such as availability, quality / price ratio etc. were taken into account in order to end up in the list of the best 250 beers.
At least I hope they used evaluation criteria focused exclusively on the quality of the product.

On the other hand, a ranking with the best beers available on the market or in some way accessible, would certainly be an extra piece to add interest.

I conclude by going off topic, only to point out once again that, instead, the ranking of the 250 best beers in my country is disastrous: very far from reality (even in the past) and absolutely lacking in masterpieces that instead have marked our school in a positive way (internationally).
It would almost be better to remove it if there are no means to make it plausible.
Sorry if I was long-winded.

 

Absolutely.
I believe the list will have considerably more value if it appeals to the masses.

 

add filters to the top 250 to show top beers with more than than 500 ratings, with more than 1000 and more than 2000.

 

Absolutely not. “Top Rated” is already divided into 5 categories, including “Beers of Fame.” That’s enough. The Top 250 SHOULD BE difficult to acquire whales. Few people will ever tick them all. That’s totally fine.

 

What are we looking for here, distributed beer, or just beer that is produced more than once a year and you still have to travel to a brewery or smaller distro footprint to acquire it? Seems like that would be hard to nail down.

If you just take the beers added here on BA as year-round or rotational, I don't think that's going to be good enough, considering so much of that is draft only, or could even be entered incorrectly.

I'd think you'd want to keep the Top 250 and then make a separate list for Accessible or Distro or something, like you have for Fame, Trending, New.

If this has been covered, sorry, I haven't read the whole thread yet. 3 whole pages in less than a day already, damn!

 

I think many people see the top beers as top works of art. The difference is works of art can be experienced and appreciated by seeing representations and reproductions, and without needing to go through whatever difficulties are involved to experience the original

Beer needs to be consumed to be enjoyed. As an intellectual exercise keeping the "purity" of the list as it is seems obvious. As an exercise with any actual value, splitting it up gives us a list of the finest "art" we can reasonably hope to experience and enjoy.

 

I fell into this and didn't think about the other side, so thank you for pointing it out. Top 250 means nothing to me and I agree with the logic of the proposed change.

But as you point out the top 250 is very important to people and if it brings people joy to try them all and complete the challenge who am I to say "the hell with it."

I'm with this, there is no reason to get rid of something people find enjoyment in. But adding an extra list would allow for all to be happy.

Sorry I haven't caught up with every post but would at least a close to national distro be a criteria to make it on this new top 250 (or 100 list). Has this been discussed?

Not really, take a look at the german pils list. For some styles it may work but for the popular ones its very skewed to "rare" in most cases that I have cared to look at.

 

You can sort the Top 250 list based on country, and when you select USA, it gives you the option to sort by state. It's not quite as broad as regions, but may help you within a specific state or two.

 

What states other than your state and VT is Heady Topper widely available (or available period)?

Building off of this, I've always wanted to see some type of list that shows beers that have held the top spot, and for how many days they held it.

I think it would be cool to see how the landscape of craft beer and tastes have changed over the years.

 

100% agree with this approach.