Do you care about beer awards?

WBC has a large pool of judges from the US, UK, Germany and so on. Of those there are high level BJCP judges, professional Brewers, beer writers, brewing educators, and so on. Some might have multiple credentials, i.e. a pro brewer that is BJCP.

It comes down to what the judge panel decides what is the best beer on the table.

 

This is how I largely feel too.

I tend to drink a lot of traditional styles, particularly German-style ones. In this year's Munich-Style Dunkel category, Exile Brewing from Des Moines, IA, won a silver. It just so happened that some family were in Des Moines last weekend. I had them pick me up a six pack.

It was solid--worthy of silver? Not sure, but I'm glad I tried it and wouldn't have otherwise known or sought it out if they hadn't won the award.

 

Good questions, Jack.

I won't provide a list of who has or hasn't entered my competition, but I can point out that Great Notion has won medals at our competition in the past, and I'd consider them in that group. Depending on who is included in your personal definition of "hyped" there may be lots of others too.

Your logic tracks that a medal has diminishing promotional returns as a brewery moves further up the hype hierarchy, and knowledge that a hyped brewery entered but did not medal could be detrimental in some eyes. My response would be that their entry fee gets them a blind tasting assessment by multiple trained Judges and a frank evaluation where their entry sits in relation to the rest of the flight. The flights assembled in a large competition probably provide a more diverse cross-section than a typical brewery could reasonably assemble for their own panel, and I think there's upside to the entrant in that context.

I also think a relatively obscure brewery winning a medal is not guaranteed a tremendous upside, either. I know of an instance where a medal resulted in increased distribution and paid for some additional FVs, but I think direct results like that are uncommon. Entering competitions should be a component in a brewery's overall quality program alongside regular sensory, batch signoff before release, becoming Judges themselves, and other training opportunities. Likewise, a medal on the wall is but one factor among many a consumer should take into account when assessing whether a brewery is "good" in their opinion.

A few other trends I've observed:
- Breweries who regularly enter competitions and pay attention to the Judge feedback tend to win more medals in future competitions.
- Enthusiasm for and participation in competitions has a pretty decided Western US bias. The further east you go, participating breweries and average number of entries per brewery decreases. Some of that is the location of the larger competitions being primarily in the West and shipping costs, but there also seems to be an attitude shift regionally and the reasons for it are still kind of a mystery.

 

Thanks for that insight. I was heretofore unaware of this 'trend'.

You may have noted that in my prior reply to you I mentioned as examples of hyped breweries: Tree House, Hill Farmstead, The Alchemist. These are all eastern located breweries and perhaps they just fit in the disinterested category like other breweries east of the Mississippi.

Also, given that breweries from the east have less interest in entering competitions may be part of the reason why breweries from the West Coast (e.g., California, etc.) are so well represented as medal winners?

Cheers!

 

Sure, it's fun to see the awards. Do I spend a lot of time researching or reading the awards? Not so much.

Is it a factor in my drinking decisions? Yes, but not the deciding factor. I tend to factor the BA Judges more than anything!

 

Since I have repped a brewery at the 20126 WBC, I will weigh in.

From a BA stand point, I do not think it is really necessary to think too much about who gets what award, though seeing who is making the best can make you expand your horizons or try a brewery you would not otherwise.

I am sure most BA's know this but I feel the WBC is most a night for those in the industry to recognize their peers and to keep pushing their own boundaries and to raise standards in the industry. Also this is a night od debauchery on a whole new level and that is all I will say about that...

 

If I see that one of the locals win something I'll go have a sip.

 

I like it when our local breweries get them. It makes me believe that they are working to improve their skills and recipes to make good beer.
It also helps when I'm traveling and looking for beer.
BA reviews do as much of that for me as well though.

 

I think it is good to have breweries recognized by something besides the hype lords and check-ins. Especially in styles that many rate lower because they don’t rate to style

 

I don't go out of my way to buy beers that have won medals, but if I'm at the store on a vacation or otherwise in a different market area, and am selecting between various options, I will generally select the unknown beer that has won an award over other options.

This, of course, assumes the beers are equally fresh and the style fits what I'm after.

 

For a national/large scale awards? Not at all.
A local or state wide awards I will probably glance at the winners to see who won.
But honestly some of the awards do not mean too much when plenty of the breweries I like do not even enter.

 

I'm indifferent. Do I care that I brewery local to me or one I like had won an award? Yes, its cool that they are recognized. Do I make purchasing decisions on beer awards? Never. And I've been a beer judge years back, but would never consider my palate or opinion "better".

 

Beer awards are really only relevant if I win one.

 

I think I care less about the WBC than I do what people on BA think about a beer. That said, if I see one on the list I can get and haven't tried yet, I will certainly try to get it. I mean, it can't be too bad, right?

 

no

 

I view beer awards as being a bit random because of the nature of judging so if I look at a quality brewery I look at those that are repeat winners before I put full merit into things. Now, if a beer has won an award I take more interest in seeing what its about but that doesn't bring me into the brewery itself.

But yeah, if you can win more than a couple of times that speaks to quality. if you win once, its nice but I suspect it can be a crapshoot.

 

When looking at a winners list, I get more value in seeing how beers are categorized instead of using it as a shopping list.

A brewer's "Oktoberfest" entered in and then winning in the "Scottish ale" category... a "DDH pilsner" a "West Coast pilsner" and a "Cold IPA" winning the three medals in the "IPL" category... a "Pre-Pro lager" medalling in the "cream ale" category... Gumballhead winning an "English ale" medal - I like that stuff.
_______________

When people say that they would put more stock in awards if the entrant lists were larger... I don't see it that way.

If a large competition is open to brewers throughout the entire world, and there are only 30 beers being judged in a category, then the value of the results are clearly less than ideal. I understand that critique.

On the other hand, if there are 300-500 beers being judged in a category, then the practicality of judging and ranking is less than ideal. I don't understand why someone would put more stock in the results of that situation.

In other words, from the consumer point of view, the value of results in one situation isn't clearly higher than the other. It's always a compromise.

 

As someone who has been at the GABF medal ceremony, watching people jump into the air and cry when their Brewpub in Nowheres, Montana win a Gold for their Red Ale and it looks like years of blood, sweat, tears, and cash pay off into this medal it doesn't matter what I think about beer awards, the brewers care. And as long as they care and as long as this is one of the few ways one of 9000 breweries in the US can get some recognition, keep the awards coming.