How do you rate beers?

First couple sips I usually have an idea where the score will land and by the end I've got the score down exact. I'll tinker with the score too compared to where it stands in relation to other beers with a similar rating, and when I've consumed more the beer on different occasions.

 

I generally know where the ratings is going to end up about mid-way through the glass.

 

I used to just score the numbers as I went, and then adjust from there but now with the new system I can pretty much call it right upfront. I might go up or down a notch, but I think that makes sense as we're talking about a more limited gradient scale now, meaning a beer that I might have given a 3.85 in the past now has to become either a 3.75 or a 4.0.

Unfortunately I think that's a little unfair to the brewers as I'm either down-grading them, or in my opinion, even worse, giving them a better number than their beer actually deserves!

Additionally I personally find the new scale less helpful in deciding what beers I should (or should not) try because it's really that cusp that makes the difference, meaning that I know a beer is good enough if it's got a 4 or 4.25 - or maybe not worth trying if it's only got a 3.5 or 3.75. I used to use a 3.85 as my median point but now I can never be sure of where it really stands.

 

If we're taking about untappd ratings then for me a 4 would be something I really enjoyed. I would give a 3.5 to a good beer, enjoyable but probably won't buy again. 3 and lower is just piss.

If I drink something that wowed me then a 4.5 is in order. And of course a 5 is reserved for those very special brews that are flat out ridiculous.

 

I've got a spreadsheet that calculates the rating like the old way on here. i usually rate early, but of course if i decide i wanna change something i will.

 

I generate a feeling towards a beer about halfway through, that's when I like to rate and review. My system basically looks like this, rounding to arbitrary decimals as I see fit:
5 - Mindblowingly excellent beer, world class nectar of the gods
4 - Outstanding, delicious beer, I'd happily buy and drink this again
3 - Not too shabby, just an okay beer, wouldn't buy it, but wouldn't turn it down if offered
2 - Sub par swill, most BMC ends up here, could be offensively bland, or just plain offensive tasting
1 - No man's land. Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no beer...except for this one. Be very afraid.

 

Feelings. I use feelings.

5- does not exist
4- really good, would seek out
3- Average, would drink again
2- Meh, would drink in certain situations, but would prefer unless worse beer available. But sometimes water would suffice.
1- Would drink just to talk mad shit about it. If not in the mood for shit talking, water.

 

I start giving scores to the 5 categories and forming my review at first. I then let the beer warm up naturally and sip it over time to see if scores or words need tweaking.

 

Unless I'm using the phone app for here, the recent tweaks have forced me to think in terms of .25 intervals (which I don't care for at all because my geekiness comes through) and too many times I firmly believe the beer I'm drinking is somewhere in between on that scale, with enough reviews, it could skew the beer up or down since it's a rounded number. To answer the question, depending on if it's the first beer or had a few others prior, it usually takes me about 1/2 the glass to draw a conclusion once my 'buds adapted to the transition, and sometimes a "full glass" (which is arbitrary) because of temperature changes.

 

I don't really take ratings all that seriously. Generally I try not to rate until I'm 3/4 of the way through a beer though, giving it a chance to warm up a bit as well as giving my palate a chance to adjust.

 

Old BA rating system: I tend to review in the beginning so I can just get on a enjoy the beer.

 

You're not limited to divisions of .25 when rating, B... select "precise" and fine-tune it to your liking. It took me a few times through the new system to pick up on that. But I'm with ya on being able to call it upfront, though I can't help but maintain one foot in the old approach, for now. Never quite figured out the old algorithm, though it might've been based on something similar to the BJCP... who knows?

Just a rating. Ballpark it. Not much different from before. Opinions still abound.

 

I've decided that I hate the new rating system. It takes a very organized process and screws it up. I used to be able to review a beer and cone up with the precise score before I was half-way through the beer, sometimes 1/3 through. Under the new system I'm prompted to come up with a general score after a few sips, then review it and wonder if my score is even accurate.

 

5-Amazing, well crafted beer. Would buy again and again. 4-Very good, chances of buying again very high. 3-Not bad, would have again if resources were limited. 2-Bad. Would only drink if offered. 1-Nope.

 

5. Can't miss. Would buy, would recommend, would share.
4. I like it but it might not be for everyone. Will buy again.
3. Not bad but not for me. Might drink again if someone else buys it for me.
2. Would not drink again, would recommend alternative to friends in same style.
1. Would drain pour. Would not drink. Did not finish. Would not let a stranger purchase without dire warnings about possible gastrointestinal consequences of consuming.
- Will not rate. Infected, Skunked, Unfit to make a slug trap for my hosta plants.

I still review based on the old formula, so if anyone wants to read me rambling about how something reminds me of fabric softener they are free to do so.

 

5 - perfection
4.5- outrageously good
4- excellent
3.5- very good
3- good, could have some minor flaws
2.5- has flaws and is not so good
2- really bad
1- impossible to have a score this low unless the beer is solid, pink, and tastes like rubber

 

Iv'e always had 3 as okay, 3.5 as good, and 3.75 as very good, as I've thought I saw those matched up with number in the rating system when I first started (or maybe I'm seeing things). Anyways I like yours a little better, using the array of the number system more efficiently.

And out of curiosity what scores do you matched up with good, very good, etc? By that I mean is a 3 and 80? or 4 a 90? Just curious...