End of Year Beer Style Updates (2021)

It wouldn't hurt, the more info the better.
Adding to the title might be easier than creating a new style. Cheers.

 

I second this. Been very vocal on this and look forward to being able to more easily check out these amazing beers.

 

You mean "Czech out these amazing beers"?

I'll show myself out

 

Haha I saw the pun when I typed it out but didn't want to make it too obvious.

 

All mentioned above
Imperial NEIPA
Golden Ale
Session IPA/APA
Oh and delete Brut IPA

 

Pastry/Adjunct IPA
Pastry/Adjunct Stout

That would take care of 80% of the new beers released the last couple of years.

 

Italian Pilsner - hot style in Ontario for the last year
Imperial NEIPA -

 

My $.02, I’d like to see Grisette and Table Beer (English and Belgian), Italian Pilsner. I also want to see lactose IPA clearly marked as a style so that I stay the hell away from it.

 

The whole thing of “Italian Pilsner” being a unique substyle is a bunch of nonsense; an “Italian Pilsner” is simply a German Pilsner which is dry hopped with noble hops which German brewers have been doing for generations and still do. As I posted in a past BA thread:

“And German breweries have been dry hopping their beers (including Pilsners) for generations:

“German breweries that dry hops their Pilsners/Lagers

“Kopp wrote via email that members of traditional family breweries acknowledge their ancestors were familiar with the technique. In some cases, those breweries are making dry-hopped lagers today. Ruperti Pils from Brauerei Wieninger in upper Bavaria is an example of one.”

https://www.beeradvocate.com/community/threads/brewers-perspective-the-origins-and-elements-of-tipopils.645790/page-2#post-70575

Cheers!

 

Liked for Table Beer

 

I agree about grisette, table beer, etc because we can give those styles their due. Instead of being lost in the farmhouse, they can be credited for their own greatness.

I think Italian Pilsners are communicated as being dry hopped German Pilsners, but there's more to than that to them. They're fermented at different temps. They're softer and more perfumey than German Pilsners. The malt character seems to be sacrificed as well. I mean, some "Italian Pilsners" ARE remarketed German Pilsners because the style is trendy, but I do consider it another style. I do think that they should be rated separate of German Pilsners too. They have different qualities IMO.

EDIT: to add, the remarketed German Pils are usually bad as Italian Pils.

 

My experience with the Italian pilseners (from Italy) are kind of chalky, due to the hard water they have there, and it seems some of the American ones have conditioned the water to get that chalky feel.

Please note: I not an expert. Be kind.

 

Agreed! I’d specifically like to see Czech Dark Lager.

 

I have never gotten chalky out of Italian Pilsners but everyone's palates are different.

 

Oye, oye....Get rid of Brut IPA, as a category and as a brew.

 

I still can't get over how instantaneously Brut IPA was added, especially with how long NE IPA took to get added, when Brut IPA barely distinguished itself as unique and no two breweries executed it the same way, and it's already extinct.

 

We had a quite robust conversation about this in a thread when the Style Council began. I think the consensus we came to was that putting beer in a barrel does not change the style, although it does change the character. Therefore we advocated for the current convention where a barrel aged variant of a beer is its own beer listing, ie XYZ Brewing Stout and XYZ Brewing Stout Bourbon Barrel Aged should be two separate beer listings.

 

Currently under the BA Wheat Beer grouping there is an American Dark style listed. What about just an American Dark Ale category to allow non-wheat recipes to fit somewhere? I just had a dark beer that is called Dark Ale by the brewer, but a description of the beer does not include wheat. I added it to the BA database under Black IPA just to fit it somewhere.

 

If we're running based on votes:

Imperial NE IPA
Table Beer
Czech Dark Lager
Czech Lager
Stout - pastry (more than 3 flavor additives)

I'm less than thrilled with breaking out coffee specifically, even as someone who seeks out coffee beers. For example, Founder's Breakfast Stout kept getting brought up for best coffee beer, but it has more flavor additions than just coffee. Likewise, then would you put BA Coffee Shop Vibes, BA Sump, Coffee Shop Vibes, and Sump all into the coffee stout category? They're hearty RIS beers. Not an even comparison with coffee beers such as Surly's Coffee Bender or Mother's Winter Grind. These two are standard American Stouts.

 

second what a lot of others have said here, for me italian pils, grisette, mexican specific lagers, and straight up kettle sour remain the most common "compromises" when i add new beers. also imperial/double new england style ipa, right not its a choice between double or hazy, i think having a hazy double category has become necessary as well. thanks for doing this!

 

If this entry gets any support to be incorporated as a style, it should also use the name 'Black Ale' along with 'Dark Ale' since both names get used when naming beers in this category.

 

Except many such beers you are likely referring to are not brewed with "adjuncts" as long-defined by the brewing industry (as opposed to the mistaken definition used by the geekery) as illustrated by these two definitions from The Master Brewers Association of the Americas' The Practical Brewer, 1947 and 1972 editions, respectively:

Brewers can (unfortunately ) flavor their beer with all sorts of fruits, vegetables, nuts, herbs, spices, animal products, kids breakfast cereal and other flavorings - even some with some sugar content - before, during or after fermentation, but that doesn't make those added ingredients "adjuncts".

The original Ballantine India Pale Ale, as brewed by P. Ballantine & Sons and successor, Falstaff, was an Adjunct IPA, brewed with corn grits. Adjunct Stouts would include varieties of Guinness Stout which are brewed with the addition of unmalted roasted barley along with barley malt.

 

I'm about to review a new beer from Source (Girard Jams Remix) and they describe it as an Imperial Sweet Tart Ale. Not sure where that would fall on here, so any changes that would make adding something like this easier would be appreciated!

 

What was it like? Hopefully your review can help place what the style is lol. Gonna assume a Fruited Kettle Sour

 

Good question! It's somewhere between that, and an American IPA with lactic acid since this has Mosaic in it too and is at 8.0% ABV.

I've had enough Sour IPA's from places like Hudson Valley and even seeing offshoots and variations such as this made me realize that there needs to be at least one category change or addition to accommodate newer brews such as this!

 

Totally agree Sour IPA needs to be a style!

 

I'd have to agree but like many on here, I don't want there to be too many divisions of styles as to render the categories excessive.

In this instance, I think it's overdue!

 

I have an excel sheet that I have as a backup (and I'm 450 beers behind right now), but I like adding:

New England Pale Ale
New England Double / Imperial IPA
New England Triple / Imperial IPA (10.0 pct. and above)
Triple / Imperial IPA (10.0 pct. and above)
American Pastry Stout (encompasses all pastries)
American Pilsner (hoppy pilsners that really don't fit into other pilsner categories)
Double Milk / Sweet Stout
Milkshake IPA
Sour IPA

 

Agree on a lot of this, but I personally don't see a need for a distinction between DIPA and TIPA. I say just list them as an imperial version of their substyle. Triple/Quadruple/etc gets redundant

 

I have a bit of crazy idea: What if there was a checkbox to make any style "Imperial" or even "Session"? Then you could nest styles into broader categories and yet retain the designation for any beer that fits qualification.

 

A perfect opportunity for a check-box for variation on the base style. Just like Session and Imperial could be.

 

B43 alive and well.

 

Any thought of adding a poll with the dozen or so options mentioned?

FWIW, the only style I'm really concerned with adding at the moment is NE DIPA. I suspect when the annual stats come out we'll see a significant number of "new" IPAs listed, with some listed as DIPAs and others as NE IPAs, when their correct style would be NE DIPA+. Having this delineation would be in line with other style separations for popular / high production styles. The "+" meaning it could be a double, triple, quadruple, etc. etc.

 

+1 for the poll idea. Maybe give out the options and let us rank our top 3 or so?

 

I think there were a lot of valid responses, and more than anything it's clear we are missing a good number of categories. As opposed to not having enough enthusiasm, I think the wide array of needed categories makes it harder to be passionate about a single one.

Honestly I'd be very excited to see splitting up saison for grisette and table beer, at least, as well as adding the official MT classifications for non-Belgian gueze and lambic.

Icing on the cake would include additional categorization for Czech lager varieties, Double NE IPA, milkshake IPA, sour IPA, and pastry stouts.

And again, we can't forget licthenheiner.

 

I’m in the camp that the amount of styles is unnecessary and so many are disagreed upon by lots of us. Looking back just over the last year alone, I have seen a number of disagreements in the forums regarding “what” is “what” and each time, it inevitably ends with an agree to disagree type of situation. At the end of the day, each of these styles and the beers contained within them is open for interpretation. Often times I’ve even seen folks disagree with the brewers descriptions of their own beer. That to me only reaffirms how silly some of it is.

I’m sure there’s plenty of naysayers but I also know there’s many who agree. I’m content using the styles just as they are now, nothing changed or added.

Cheers.