Could Session IPAs Be Given a Separate Style Category?

It ok if they drop the word session and call them what the are Lite Ales!

 

Session is a useful term. We can avoid it without having to read the rest of the label.

 

Totally agree. What about NE IPAs, are they "session IPAs" as well?


Also, Squire123 has hit the nail on the head - hilarious!

 

I agree....I believe people, especially on places like untappd, are comparing sessions to IPA's and DIPA's which is totally unreasonable...

 

I agree that a separate style category should be used for this type of IPA, and @Squire123 made my point for me. If a person purposely 'avoids' a beer that is (currently) within a defined style because it is so different, then that beer should be given its own category. I don't think choosing between an IPA and a NEIPA presents the same avoidance situation that Squire123 raised. I could choose an IPA as easily as a NEIPA from the store shelf, but I might avoid a session IPA because of what it is if I am not wanting that style right now.

 

It's just a new marketing term for the pale ale, nothing really new here that warrants a separate style.

 

Lite would work just as well.

 

As long as the word session is on the label, yes. NEIPAs, at least the one's I've had, do not have the word session on them, but still will have it's own category, and they should.

Cheers!

 

I think the term is too subjective. People will start adding IPAs as "session" because of their opinion of the ABV.

 

Personally, as long as we are arguing to separate the styles for rating purposes, I wholeheartedly agree that "Session IPA" should be considered its own style. I can see it raising a little trouble as to how to qualify a session vs. a regular vs. a light NE IPA, etc. For example, would Narrow Gauge's Hoppy Water fall into the NE IPA or Session IPA style? Of course, we have to the create a new style before we can really dive into those semantics.

Are you're saying NEIPAs should be included in the plain IPA umbrella, and separate out the session IPA style based on avoiding beers by label? There are folks avoiding beers with the "NE" tag in front of "IPA".

 

Yep. Separating the NE IPA from the IPA style category is still a battle being fought, but if I have a vote in that decision, I'd say NOT to separate them. I have only had two NE IPAs that are proclaimed by the brewery to be in that category, so my experience is obviously limited, but neither seemed to be much different from a defined IPA to justify any style differentiation (and M-43 is highly-hyped here in Michigan). Consequently I wouldn't avoid buying a NE IPA vs. a regular IPA like I might avoid buying a session IPA because of its definition of being an IPA wannabe with a low abv. A session IPA is a 'purpose' beer, i.e. drink a bunch without getting crocked. There is no special purpose to a NE IPA other than supposedly a 'kind of unique' look and flavor.

 

I think if the brewer labels it as a session IPA, and it's under 5% abv, it belongs in it's own style, the Session IPA.

 

"Look, guys: we can get all the marketing benefit of labeling this an IPA without paying for all that extra malt!"

 

Not according to It's Official: New England India Pale Ale Is a Style

 

And he drags out his soapbox... Session is too subjective, irrelevant, and this only promotes further discombobulating an already chaotic beer style classification system. Beer styles are already classified by; brewing method, color, ABV, taste, country/region of origin, country/region of target market, ingredients, etc ad nauseam. There are an infinite number of possible styles, given all of those classification variables.

While I suspect that a rework and simplification of beer style classification is about as likely as the cooperation of political parties, I advocate for a simplified style system where we would have a very limited number of primary styles, and a slightly less limited number of sub-styles. As this will never happen, can we at least resist temptation to make it worse?

Sessionability can be determined by considering the style, ABV, and possibly IBU. Each person needs to determine their own subjective definition of what is sessionable for them. If you label beers as sessionable, we'll need a new forum here for the arguments that would ensue. And then we'll need Sessionable IPA, Sessionable Gose, Sessionable Stout, Sessionable Porter, etc. Then Sessionable Smoked Brown Mild Bitter Pumpkin Ale. ...And he puts away the soapbox and awaits the inevitable WTF responses...

 

How about High, Middle and Low sessions which would allow a brewer three more in the lineup separated by just a few ABV points.

 

How about another BA "list" similar to "Top Rated Beers" or "Most Popular Beers?" The Brothers could program a new list that shows us the top rated beers below 5% ABV or whatever ABV is consider sessionable (no matter the style). I would also exclude the lambics, goses, gueuzes, etc., which would probably fill up the list because many beers in these styles are already lower ABV. Institute a minimum number of reviews. Due to the relatively higher ratings for certain favored styles, it would probably have a automatic bias towards those session beers many of us are looking for (dependent on the statistics used).

Definitely an oversimplification, which is automatically faulty because it mixes style categories, but it would still allow someone to come to the site and quickly locate a great list of sessonable beers. And it would not require Congressional approval to create new style categories.

 

Excellent suggestion - you could allow individuals to tailor the list based on their own preferences - kind of like shopping for things online. Show me Saisons and Hefeweizens under 5.5% ABV, ranked by number of reviews multiplied by average review score. Even more useful if they could consider your location and distribution there, but I don't believe BA tracks what is distributed where.

 

I want this to happen. Please.