Beer Rating Curiosity

Yep - I totally agree.
The best thing is that 90 of the 100 beers on the list are either readily available and on the shelf in my local big box liquor store, or are seasonal / once a year releases that at least make it to my home town and I could get without anything too ridiculous. I might have to stand in line on a Saturday morning or do a few trades for a few of them (for example KBS or BCBS) but generally have very easy access to most of the list.

 

Personally, I always try to keep style in mind, but lean toward general enjoyment in my overall ratings. The fact that this site features a list of the Top 250 beers across all styles leads me to believe that rating to general enjoyment is a more important component. This is not a competition where awards are given within each style. I've always looked at it as a resource for folks who are coming here to learn about beer and expand their horizons. Over time, the database of ratings will simply reflect which beers are found to be the most enjoyable by the most people--a very useful metric. In practicality, what good would that database be if PBR was rated a 4.6 because it is an excellent representation of an American Adjunct Lager? Does it "penalize" the simpler, more subtle styles? Perhaps, depending on your persepctive. Again, this isn't a competition. And if someone knows they like the kolsh style, they can easily sort the ratings to discover the highly regarded beers within that style.

 

I don't understand your logic. Everyone reviewing based on style would be just as different as rating on preference, because 99% of ratings/reviews are NOT from pro beer judges. By your logic, you're saying that every pro beer judge reviews every beer the same.

 

The bottom line here is that the ratings on BA work...and work very well, due to the volume of ratings. That means that the best beers of each style are at the top of the ratings for that style. The fact that most BAs reviewing beers on this site prefer big IPAs and Stouts is irrelevant when looking at reviews by style. It is helpful however as a point of interest in answering "which beer is better"...and as painful as it is to some people, some styles ARE better than others. Just like some grape varieties are better than others, and some cuts of meat are better than others...some styles of beer are just better. That doesn't mean that you can't have a preference for merlot over cabernet, or flank steak over filet mignon, or even American Adjunct Lager over Imperial IPA..if you do, great, look up AAL ratings and the best ones fall out at the top in general...so the ratings work, and work well as set up. If you can't bear seeing pilsner numerical ratings fall below IPA ratings for the top beers in those categories because of personal sensitivities, and you are incapable of calibrating in your head as to where the beer falls among like brewed peers, then you have the option to look at beer judge ratings or GABF results and you will see ratings for the style. That way you are not offended that most beer advocates reviewing beers prefer bigger styles that the American craft crowd prefers.

 

I try my best to rate on the style alone, but I will admit that taste is quite subjective, and style probably affects people's reviews (if only on a subconscious level) no matter how careful they are.

 

Here's the thing--If there were a style of beer that was (and forgive me for this) liquid fermented from garbage, with malt and hops and whatnot added, would I be expected to rate the most "pure, true to style" versions with a 4.5+? I can't get on board with that.

I have no issue with people rating to style, because there are certainly times when that's appropriate. But in general, if we're rating on this site, aside from doing it so that we can see what we've liked, we're doing it so that others can get a general sense of a beer. If a beer tastes great, it should have a higher rating, period. If not, what's the point of rating?

Stone recently released (well, not here yet) their Old Guardian Extra Hoppy, which, from what I've seen, seems to be closer to a big DIPA than a barleywine. By that measure, it should receive low ratings, given that it's not super true to style. However, it sounds delicious from what I've read, and I look forward to trying it. I'd rather try a great beer no matter what the style, than drink one that's very true to style, but isn't particularly interesting.

American craft beer blew up because brewers were doing interesting and daring things with beer, not because they were faithfully recreating 500 year old recipes from the English countryside. I'd prefer to rate based on what the brewer is doing, rather than what they claim to be doing.

 

Do habenero hot wings taste better than steak?

 

I pretty much ignore most special release one off flavored / barrel stouts for exactly this reason. The wow factor is what drives the high rating, and they have disappointed me far too often.

I am firmly in the camp of rate within style, and I typically ignore the rating for any beer that has less than a few hundred ratings. This doesn't mean I don't drink them, I just treat their scores with a grain of salt, and usually a very heavy discount!

 

That's like comparing orange juice to milk...we are all talking about beer here..so maybe a better analogy in keeping with assessing style quality of the same category would be "Among steak, is skirt steak better than filet?". In that case, the answer is no, and can be answered definitively. A similar question can be asked in regards to beer: "Is American Adjunct Lager better than traditional German Lager". Again, we can answer definitively: No. That is okay to actually answer...not all styles are equal.

 

So comparing a hefeweizen to an imperial stout isn't?
Don't get me wrong, I don't care how you chose to review, and if you follow the BA guidelines or not (there are guidelines; I suspect a lot of people have never even read them) but if you think all beer is beer and is comparable, then I have to disagree with you.

Even comparing an all malt german lager to an american adjunct isn't the same thing - the fact that corn and rice are in the grain bill completely changes the nature of the product - it is comparing 2 different things. Would you compare corn bread to whole grain bread?

 

You're correct in the limitations @pagriley, but I also don't swear by the 90 rule, to quote Brian Fantana, 60% of the time it works every time. I'm very open to trying whatever is out there, regardless of rating. It just is a basis that makes the decision easier when you’re somewhere big like Total Wine, BevMo, Whole Foods, etc. that may have hundreds of good offerings and I’ve only got a budget to buy two or three at a time.

 

The funny thing is that I would actually prefer a skirt steak. Tastes are personal and subjective!

Most of us on Beer Advocate may not like it, but 90% of beer consumers do indeed prefer the "flavorless" taste of American Adjunct Lager style.

But I think American Adjunct Lagers and Light Lagers are kind of a separate argument than @gcamparone 's statement that any Imperial Stout is better than any Brown Ale. Because Brown Ales are also brewed to highlight certain flavors, not a "lack of flavor".

 

http://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/style/32/?sort=avgD

I see a 5. see link and will chat. lol

 

I think there are valid points on both sides.

Would I compare corn bread to bread? Depends. Are you asking me what my favorite bread is, or how a specific restaurant's corn bread holds up against typical batches of the same.

The thing is, some people on BA are comparing beers to beers (BCBS is better than SN Pale Ale), and some are comparing beers within the type (Founders Imperial Stout is better than Sam Adams' Imperial Stout). In some ways, the latter comparison is obviously more helpful (when you're deciding which stout to go with), but in other ways, the former comparison is more helpful (if you just want a great beer). And no, I'm not trying to argue whether BCBS is actually better than SN Pale Ale.

 

That's an impossible question to answer. I have had some pretty freakin' good habanero wings that taste better than your average strip steak. I've also had some pretty terrible habanero wings that taste worse than low end ground chuck. In general, I prefer stouts to hefeweizens, but I'll take a Weihenstephaner over a Guiness any day. The fact that some styles have a larger number of highly rated beers than other styles just shows that collectively, there are more examples of that style that more people find more enjoyable.

 

True - it does help, but I find focusing on 90+ in the store in the past (because I do tend to do the same) means I often only go home with IPAs or stouts! More recently I have tried to decide what kind of beer I want to get, and focus within a style to pick up the freshest / best offering is in the store and not be as focused on scores.

I might decide I want a 6 pack of something hoppy, and a 6 pack of something lighter and lower in ABV, so look for an IPA and a Lager. In particular the freshness thing has made a big difference in my selection of hoppy beers and I have been enjoying them more too.

 

Not necessarily. For styles which are not known for "bigger, bolder, badder", you will find that the top-ranked beers tend to be the ones that are experiments in adding "bigger, bolder, badder", like barrel-aging, extra dry-hopping, and so forth. This is problematic for people who find a style they enjoy, and then look for other good beers in that style.

If by "best", one means "closer to a BA RIS or IPA/DIPA", then perhaps the ratings work well for every style.

 

I think its the sum of all parts, that equal a overall good review! Many hands make for light work.

 

Fair point. I guess it really depends on what you want out of the site and the ratings. Like you say, if you just want to have the best beer from a tap list then overall scores are good. If you are trying to find a few great examples of a Helles Lager at the store, then within rating is obviously much better.

I generally try and decide on what sort of beer I want beforehand so style tends to come first for me - it is pretty rare for me to be thinking 'i just want a beer'

I do think that the ratings across styles start to mean a lot more once you get into very similar styles of beer. For example, I think the ratings of Pils, Helles Lager, American Pale could all be collapsed into a single category quite reasonably.

It is the 'all stouts and IPAs are awesome' thing that gets me going more than anything. Bigger is only better if you are looking for big in the first place!

 

Actually that is a really good point. American Pale Lager is the perfect example:

http://www.beeradvocate.com/lists/style/155/

The top of the list is dominated by bigger ABV and hoppier beers...

Edit - for example look where New Glarus Totally Naked is on the list - barely makes the top 20, has an 83 rating overall from BA's but a 97 from the Bros.
Making a really good pure to style, perfectly crafted beer means you are just 'good' to a lot of people...