BJCP guidelines and Beer Competitions

Many of the winners of BJCP-sanctioned competitions don't fall into the defined ranges either.

 

BJCP guidelines are used for homebrew competitions, and you were probably looking at the 2008 guidelines. The Brewers Association has its own guidelines for WBC and GABF.

When judging beer, one smells, looks at, and tastes the beer, writes the evaluation and makes recommendations for improving the beer in 12-15 minutes. Alcohol is not measured, and if close it will not be called out. If the IBUs are in the ballpark of the guidelines, it will work, as those too are not measured. For the Stone IPA, or a homebrew, 50 vs 45 specified will not be a problem, as one can only start to tell a difference of 4 or 5 IBUs, and residual sweetness and flavor ions in the water can also change the perception up or down. If the beer was 70 IBU for the APA category, the beer would probably get dinged.

In competitions one enters the beer into the category where it best matches the written guidelines, not what you brewed. The guidelines are, well, guidlenes.

 

for the 2014 update to the guidelines the BJCP is cutting the commercial examples in half if not more on most styles. Per Gordon Strong (President of BJCP) on the commercial examples reduction:

They change too often; it makes it harder to maintain the guidelines.

We're looking at a way to have a web-based supplement of style examples. Something new we'll be able to try out now that we're on a new server. Will likely take some development and might not be ready when the guidelines finally launch, but something we'd like to do.​

 

Also note that the commercial examples are in order in which said example is most "to style" per the guidelines. For instance in the Tripel sub-cat the Westmalle Tripel is more to style than Victory Golden Monkey. http://bjcp.org/2008styles/style18.php#1c

 

Don't overthink this. No matter how scientific and objective beer competitions seem, with guidelines based on SRM, ABV, and IBU, and beers systematically scored and ranked, it always comes down to subjectivity. Did the beer taste like the best example of a particular style, to a small group of judges, on that particular day.

 

Peter, your last sentence is dead on. The 2-3 beer judges are tasting a number of beers and they will tend to give higher scores to the beer that best represents their thoughts of a given beer style on that particular day. They are also 'attuned' to looking for classic beer flaws (e.g., too much diacetyl, too much astringency, etc.) and will dock points accordingly.

Cheers!

 

But most BJCP competitions also seem to reward beers brewed closer to -- and frequently beyond -- the upper levels of the assigned ranges for ABV, IBUs, etc. Why don't they dock points for such "flaws" as falling outside of the set guidelines? Instead they frequently do just the opposite, award them medals.

 

Some things I have run into with homebrew competitions.
-judges are subjective and personal taste absolutely factors in to their rankings.
If a judge likes malty beers, they will probably give higher marks to a malty ipa than they would to a hoppier ipa, all other things being equal.

-beers brewed to the extreme of the categories tend to stand out from the crowd.
When I'm drinking beers of the same style I find the ones that stick out in my mind are the ones that taste different than the rest.

-don't enter specialty category unless the beer you are entering is obviously different for whatever reason.
Case in point, brewed a red ipa and entered it into comp. I put it in specialty because it was a bit dark for IPA style guidelines. All three judges commented that it was a great ipa but not far enough out of style for it to be specialty and dinged me for it.

And the last thing... its supposed to be fun. Don't sweat the small things. As long as you like your beer, who cares?

 

Scoring and perception is relative to the individual judge.

Make the best beer you can and use the guidelines so you don't stray too far and let the judges do their job.

Slainte!

 

I probably should keep my mouth shut, because I never have judged or stewarded a comp, but I would guess it depends on the style. A hefeweizen with high IBUs might not be rewarded if IBUS are 25% higher (this number is just for the sake of example) than the guidelines, but an American pale ale might be rewarded. That bitterness might always feel like a clash with esters and phenols in the hefe, but with an APA, it might help the beer stand out in a flight where palate fatigue has doomed the other entries. Palate fatigue robs the objectivity from the competition. If your beer is late in the flight, being delicately balanced probably will not get you a medal.

 

There's a reason that the BJCP Guidelines are called 'guidelines' and not 'rules'. That was not by accident. You can fall well outside the guidelines and still score well. That doesn't mean you fooled anybody. It simply means that your beer drank like a fine IPA, for example, regardless of its vitals. I think this is one of the least understood aspects of the guidelines and one of the biggest sources of confusion among those who would reflexively trash the whole concept.

 

Have you seen any examples of medal winners that fell below the assigned thresholds for things like OG/FG, ABV, etc.? If so could you provide some examples? Everything I have heard and/or experienced has said to brew to the upper end of the stylistic spectrum if you want to get noticed and/or medal.

And, although anecdotal, this has proven true in my (limited) BJCP competition experience, too. A balanced Rauchbier I brewed that everyone who had been to Bamberg and drunk the stuff at the source said would fit in nicely in that tradition placed lower (34; with the ding coming from one judge for it being "not to style" because the maltiness wasn't intense enough) than a beer we intentionally brewed at the absolute upper limits (39; with said judge praising its dark fruit flavors and roastiness...both out of style for the category and the latter resulting from slightly scorching the malt during a decoction).

 

It depends on the judges you get, their knowledge, and have they been to the source as you often say.

Sometimes an Ordinary does well in category 8, English Pale Ale. Not brewed to the lower end of Ordinary, but cat 8 has Ordinary, Special, and ESB, so if an ordinary wins against the bigger beers that is cool

If you look through the Homebrewer of the year awards from the last 5 or 6 years, there have been many wins for smaller categories. Look at that fact as that the BOS round has Master and Grand Master (+) judges, and those judges can really judge to style, and realize that some styles are hard to brew spot on even if the beers would be panned on Ba.

 

I agree that a lot of smaller category beers seem to be winning BOS lately. There are some of these detailed here: https://byo.com/stories/issue/item/2436-the-big-chill. Still, I've brewed a few of these myself, and find them to be at the higher end of the stylistic spectrum.

 

Higher end of the style would not be a surprise. An AAL winning best of show against the other 22 categories was a little mind blowing, as it was on the table against all of the Barleywines, RIS, IPAs, Sours, and whatever the current Beeradvocate darlings are.

 

OG/FG, ABV, etc. of the beers are not stated, so there's no way I could give you any examples. But I've seen some apparently very light beers win medals. In a recent competition that I judged, second Best of Show was a Cream Ale that I didn't perceive as pushing the limits of the style.

 

I can recall a petite saison winning a gold medal in the Belgian special category a few years back. Here's a category that seemingly gives license to over the top brews, and the category is one by someone who made a small saison. I was surprised, too.

 

+1
The BJCP guidelines do not represent a "rulebook" of any kind. They are certainly not by any means the last word with regard to what a "style" should or should not be (not to mention that most of the "styles" they list are merely subsets or variations of true traditional styles). It is a set of opinions (both open to interpretation and, in some cases, to question).
Most importantly, they were designed merely to provide a common language for people judging homebrew competitions. In that context, they do serve some purpose. But beyond that, they should not be taken too seriously.