Beer Reviews with time....

Here's the way I see it.

A review should rate how one feels about a beer at the time they are drinking it.

That would include all the variables that go into the specific batch of beer that is being consumed,
as well as, all the variables representing the consumer's state of mind, palate, experience, etc.

Many things change over time, on the beer side this includes inconsistencies between batches,changes in recipes, changes in brewers, changes in the source of ingredients, etc. On the personal side, experience is always expanding which is likely to influence how one feels about any given beer.

But since the review represents a snapshot in time, an opinion of that beer at that time, it remains accurate.

Of course, if you have doubts, you can always revisit the beer, and adjust your rating accordingly. In other words, take another snapshot.

But adjusting from ratings from memory is risky business, IMO.

Bias is hard enough to fight when rating a non-blind tasting as you drink it. Doing the rating from memory gives personal bias the upper hand and puts that accual experience of tasing the beer in the back seat.

 

I will also only re-review when I find myself liking a beer I previously gave a low score to. I keep a separate database with my favorites in each style that gets adjusted more often though.

 

When looking at your old reviews do you find a lot has changed or you were spot on?

 

I've found that my opinions of the beers are largely the same, but my ability to articulate what I was experiencing when drinking the beer has vastly improved. Of course, the language in many of my reviews comes from a finite list, because when I find a term I like that suits what I'm trying to express in my reviews, I tend to run home to mama.

So yes, my palate has been fairly consistent but my expression of my palate has changed.

 

My palate hasn't altered but now that I read freshness codes I've gone back and upped some ratings when I tried a fresh bottle.

 

I actually like to re-review beers from time to time. I have found I rarely move ratings too much (but do on occasion) - especially in some cases where there may be a scenario like @Squire123 states: my initial review was on an unknown freshness. A few beers I have 2-3 re-reviews on.

Ususally I get my impression before I go into BA to write my re-revisit of a beer. I have found, to my surprise, that I perceived many of the main qualities I perceive currently in that initial review. In some cases, I am shocked. I also have gotten a little better at describing things (I think), so sometimes my rewrites just clarify my older thoughts.

So, to answer the question, I am closer to spot on that having a lot change - but noting the differences can be interesting.

 

Another rule I've made is only review the first beer of the day.

 

More often ill rate the beer lower than in the past. Certain beers were more special back then and most likely influenced ratings.

 

You're way too experienced to be living with 'rules'.

 

Rules! Rules! We don't need no stinkin rules.

 

I like to revisit beers too. Especially if I find myself drinking them again that tells me I liked it. Maybe I should buy it more often. As far as changing a review I will change it right up until I am done with the sixer or the bottles of that beer. I am sure that my reviews are all too high and do not deviate enough. I would not change them for that reason just like the others. I was that excited, that corny, that enthused. It reflects the moment as much as the beer.

 

Why not re-review if you retried.

This is not life and death--come on folks!!!!!!!!

 

I often revisit beers, in fact I simply don't have the money to try as many new beers currently as I did when I first picked up the habit. I'll reread my reviews often, and drink old standbys more than once a week. If I think an old review is unfair one way or the other, I'll change it.

 

I can see the no change technique you use and you are welcome your technique as are all. But I will use your post as a springboard to this thought:

If you are drinking/reviewing a new[er] brewery/ beer, there is a chance that the beer may change outside of that first try (though likely if they're at 6-pack production this is less likely). Change the rating or don't, that's a personal preference - but why not add notes on any new, specifically different, experiences. The review section has fairly unlimited (or high threshold) for words. Don't change that initial experience, add to it!

 

I change my reviews often. I wouldn't worry about it.

 

it's a continuous revolving door. You'll always find a beer you like better, or worse, than what you're currently drinking.

 

Its hard to set the bar and a few weeks later you have a beer that blows you away and raises what you thought a high 4 should be. One mans 4.5 might be another's 3.75, I guess it depends on what your expectations are or your personal taste preferences. Ratings are so arbitrary, like Olympic figure skating, 10.0 10.0 10.0 and 5.0 from the Russian judge.

 

Yeah, I go back and look at reviews I did earlier and wonder what the hell I was thinking. I think it's natural that as we try new examples of a style, we realize that some we thought were excellent before are only mediocre. Tastes change too. When I got into craft, I read on the BA forums that the better cult stouts are bourbon barrel. I tried a couple and didn't like them, but now I do.

 

Most of my reviews change with time.

 

good rule.