How Have Your Ratings Changed Over Time?

New Beer Sunday has helped clarify how I assign ratings, myself. I used to just rely on the 'Pull Down' choices, but since they have changed in meaning a number of times, the older review numbers don't seem to mean the same thing these days. For example- if a 'Taste' of 4 was assigned as 'Good', and I thought it was a little better than good, I'd give it a 4.5. (I don't even think there were .25 increments at that point, but don't recall exactly).

Now I'm just going with my own (hopefully) consistent assignment. As are the 4s (A- is 4.3 or less, and A+ is 4.7 or more), Bs are the 3s, Cs are the 2s and Ds are the 1s. So far it's worked out, even when breaking down attributes.

In my own head, though, I still take style and context into account. As to trends, it's impossible for me to say due to all of the changes in the system.

 

This is exactly why I do not like it when BA makes changes to reviewing standards. I love to go back and read my reviews and look at the dates and rDev's.
In response to your post, I think my palate has narrowed a bit over time. I know what i like and tend to buy that. Even if I haven't had the beer before, I know which styles or breweries I will prefer and my rating (I know it shouldn't) will reflect that. It's difficult. As an example: I am not a fan of Belgians. Is it no surprise that Belgians have a lower rDev on my ratings? However, that is a lot of the fun in reading other BA's reviews.

 

It is not an easy task to take style into account when chili, sriracha, or some other wild ingredient is involved. What's next, worcester sauce in beer?

 

That's why I also use 'context'- is it a sipper, a quaffer, a change of pace, etc.

Just don't call me when the anchovies and tamarind beers come around, though. Well....maybe just the tamarind...

 

My overall rating has dropped with the more beer I drink. While there tons of great beers out there, in all honesty, there's not much difference between them. If I try 10 new IPAs, they probably are going to have a hard time being notably better than the hundreds I've already had, so their scores will likely be in the low-to-mid 3's.

My personal guidelines:
5s- I can't see this beer being any better for its style
4.5- A rare level of greatness
4- Excellent beer, would drink it anytime
3.5- Way better than average for its style
3-Solid, nicely drinkable, pretty typical for its style
2.5-Not truly "bad", but needs some improvement
2- Lots of help needed.
Below 2- Terrible, no redeeming aspects.

 

I am in a downtrend as well. I think it's the result of having a greater contextual lens to look at beer through. I rate about 65-35% in favor of style to enjoyment, so the more beers I have from a given style, the better I can understand and critique the next beer I rate in a style. Early on, I had no context, so I would rate everything a lot higher than it really should be because I had nothing to compare it to. My palate has become more refined as well. Nowadays, it's different.

 

I am definitely more friendly to Belgians nowadays than I was previously.

 

I honestly lurked on this site for a couple years before I created my account and started rating because I thought I would overrate beers from inexperience. I think it was a good decision to let my palate catch up with my zeal because I can think of a couple dozen beers that I used to love, but now only like because I've had better examples of the style. I might adjust some scores in the future, but I've got about 1,000 different beers and homebrewing experience under my belt now and I know what I want from different styles so I think the trend will only be narrowly downwards moving forward.

I pretty much rate:
5: Perfection and I never give this for every attribute.
>4.5: One of the best of its style for me and something I will seek out.
>4: A great example of the style and something I will drink regularly and recommend to everyone.
>3.5: A very good example of the style and something I will gladly drink with reserved praise to others.
>3: A good example of the style and something I will shrug and drink if no other options present themselves.
>2.5: A substandard example of the style, but not bad enough that I won't finish a six pack if I took a risk.
>2: A poor example of the style and if I have multiple bottles I will try to find someone who likes it. Usually a macro drinker who doesn't care.
<2: I hope I never experience this. I wouldn't even give it away if it was that bad.

I don't foresee anything moving between these once I have had a pint.

 

My ratings now are lower than when I started because I have had some amazing beers and am more demanding of the beers I drink.

 

I applaud you. More people should be like you. The amount of BA folks who freely give out "All 5's" to beers and places is truly appalling.

 

LikeSteveD, over time I think my bar is a little higher for the most part. One of things that really plays into that is the lack of faithfulness to the style is so pervasive that it usually has me in a negative frame of mind even if I like what that did from a pure enjoyment standpoint. Hell maybe even more styles are necessary...

 

Turn that around & look at the ratings of certain styles, there are no "world class" examples of more than a few styles, that is just insane..

 

interesting topic.

I've noticed that when the rdev subject comes up a lot of my extreme reviews are from when I started reviewing.

24 of my top 50 +rdev reviews are from 2007 (8 of top 10)
16/50 of my bottom -rdev are from 2007 (still 32%)
so 40% of extreme reviews from 2007 (about 20% of total reviews from 2007)

 

I find it interesting to look at which of my rdevs are +/- more than 10%. I have a lot more minuses in that category than pluses.

 

Sex the first few hundred times was all 4's and 5's and the beer sucked, now? Let's say there's more 2's and 3's but the beer is better

 

Someone else said that his palate has narrowed after trying lots of beers. I think the same is likely happening to me. I'm getting better at determining what I like and this is trend is finding its ways into my ratings. On the other hand, when I have determined what I like, certain beers go up against the average. For instance, I originally rated Allagash White highly compared to its BA average. I haven't re-rated it, but I now consider it to be very close to a five. I wouldn't change a thing about it.

 

I generally rate towards the mean. Don't trash any beers, don't find many that are the best in style I've ever had. Over time I think (looking quickly at my rDev%) that I'm less hype driven and more bullish on style. If its true to what I expect in the beer I'll rate it well.

 

Hypocrite. You were one of those people once. Looks like between November of 2011 and February of 2012. Nice 20+% positive RDevs for 5's. This is exactly the point of the thread. People's tastes and ratings change - there is no reason to bash people for rating a beer as a 5 if the beer is special to that reviewer.

I have some 5's myself that if I drank them again would probably come down. Same with 4.5's. However, at the time I hadn't drank as much and they were special beers to me. Dreadnaught from FFF for example. It was once one of the highest rated beers on this site and to me it was special (I had it the month before I joined this site - so I hadn't heard about it when I bought it). I'd love to try it again, but who knows if that will ever happen.

 

They've changed the scoring in a variety of ways over the years so I'm not sure how fruitful a longterm look at it would be. Drinkability is gone. There was an overall category. Then for awhile there were no categories. The verbal descriptions changed. I could be wrong, but we might have even had alphabet letter grades too at one point.