inconsistant judging?

I find lots of disparity in the scoring and off flavor judging. I tend to find that the less experienced judges try harder to prove themselves by panning beers and in the process show how inexperienced there palates really are. I submitted the same beer to 2 certified BJCP comps 2 months apart. The first comp was full of noob judges who gave me a 25 out of 50 and ticked a bunch of "off flavors" on the scoresheet. The same beer was judged by national level certified judges and scored in the high 30's with no off flavor tick marks. I haven't had any disparity with something as straight forward as color though. In response to your second question, I never give my recipe or artistic intention. In a specialty category I'll list the special ingredients and rarely mention a base style.

 

What were defects the first time? Did they age out after 2 months? I often will save a beer to drink while I read the score sheet, and often I find what they are dinging the beer for. Sometimes I just say the judge was not correct, and move on.

Edit - yes there is judge variation. If you haven't done it give it a try.

 

I'd have to find the score sheets to tell you, but I sampled the beer at the time of both competition submissions and the flavor was consistent throughout that time frame.

 

Man, this is exactly why I haven't entered any beer in competition.

Outside of some local non-BJCP comps.

 

It's all subjective. I entered a Barleywine in the IN State Fair competition 2 years ago and it got slammed...but a buddy of mine and certified beer connoisseur/snob from Palo Alto said it was hands down one of the best he had ever had and wanted to bring a couple of bottles to a competition in the Bay Area...go figure. I had a DIPA in this years competition that was ranked nearly flawless by a master judge...he likened it to Zombie Dust on steroids...but a junior judge noted "flaws" and an aroma expert harped that there was a piney, resinous character to it...no kidding on that one...clearly had a Sherlock Hemlock there. Just take it with a grain of salt and occasionally you might get lucky and win a category.

 

BJCP judges, like any kind of judge, are human. Some definitely have better palates than others. Some days are better than others. Entering the same beer in more than one competition if helpful, because you can look for commonality. If one judge detects something that others don't, and you don't either, ignore it. But pay attention to the common themes.

 

This is why I only enter one comp per year. I realy dont care what some stranger thinks of my beer. I brew for myself and am my own critic.

 

And in many cases, probably your toughest critic. I know I am.

 

The last competition I entered my Belgian style imperial stout. It was a bit of a rush to get it into bottles and ready for the competition so it hadn't conditioned as long as I would have hoped. I had two judges score it and while I agreed with the one's opinions, I almost completely disagreed with the other's. It was entered into the Specialty category, so it was very open to interpretation, but the one comment that really stood out was that it wasn't hoppy enough. Seriously? For a Belgian influenced beer? I understood going into it that I was opening myself up to people’s individual preferences since there’s really loose requirements for the category, but I was never expecting something like that. I haven't entered into a competition since then, and this was a couple of years ago. FWIW, it developed quite nicely after several months of conditioning in the bottle and is still drinking great. Not to toot my own horn, (usually I'm my harshest critic), but it's the best Belgian style imperial stout I've had to date.

From what I remember I didn’t enter specifics on the form, just that it was a Belgian Imperial Stout. I’d always tried to keep descriptions to a minimum so as to not create expectations in the judges’ minds. My homebrew club collaborated on a clone of a popular beer that, while scoring well in competition, didn’t place as high as hoped. It was described as a clone so in my mind that instantly made the judges expecting something exact and noticing every difference. In my mind it would have been better to submit it as the basic style and forget specifics, such as what it was based on.

 

I am glad I am not the only one. I entered a beer once that everyone seemed to really enjoy- a founder's red's rye clone, I suppose it should have been entered in the IPA instead of wheat/rye category, but it got judged harshly for whatever reason. I chalk it up to what Vikeman said as everyone has their own palate and avoid competitions now -especially ones where judges enter beers in the competition they are judging in because I didn't like the way one judge 'eavesdropped' to hear how his beer would be scored.

 

First, you have to enter the beer in the right category otherwise no matter how 'good' your beer is, if it doesn't fit the category, it will not core well.

For the OP, it was a category created for the local competition so I have lots of questions on what guidelines the judges had or if it was just what the judges personally liked the best. Did you enter it with a BJCP style? Did you enter it with any description? Or was it just a beer on the table in that broad category? Were they BJCP certified judges? Was your feedback on a BJCP scoresheet or just written notes.

Some of the competitions that have broad categories don't really follow styles or scoresheets so what you get back is really variable and winners really depend on what the judges like, especially if they haven't gone through the BJCP training and testing.

People may not care what others think about their beers but it you want to identify flaws, problems and house flavors, competitions with good judges can be a great help. You and your friends may like a beer and be very happy with it but most friends don't criticize free beer and if you are not experinced in tasting flaws yourself, then an outside judge can help.

To get the best feedback, you need the best judges so check out the competition before you enter. My local homebrew club runs a competition every October and we do everything we can to make sure the feedback we give is the best it can be. Every beer is judged by a panel with at least one BJCP judge and often they all are and many of our judges are at the National or Grand Master level (ie lots of experience judging). We go over judging and the feedback you need to give at a meeting before the competition. Beers are kept and the right temperature and all judging is done with glass tasters, no plastic glasses. We do get comments from entrants after the competition that they really appreciate the quality of our judging and the feeback that they get.

So if the competition you enter is not a BJCP competition, you don't have to indicate a specific style and the form you get back is not a BJCP form and the judges are not BJCP certified or a professional brewer, then it is more likely that you can be a bit more sceptical about the feedback you get.

 

I only enter my beers in the competitions that I will be judging (obviously, I exclude myself from the categories I've entered, even if that wasn't in the rules).

Personally, I view a competition largely as a social event. Not that that's how they're organized - it's simply how I approach them. Judges can be fickle - particularly with the high ABV styles that are traditionally judged in the afternoon session (it can be a struggle when you're buzzed after all the free beer you drank during the lunch break ). That said, the same brewers keep winning the ribbons, so there is, evidently, some validity to the overall process.

Regarding consistency, I take the judges' comments with the proverbial grain of salt. I know my beers well enough to know which comments are valid, and which were clouded by inexperience, late-day blurs, or simply faulty palates. More importantly, I know which criticisms/recommendations are valid, and I learn from them. My beers have definitely improved as a result of entering competitions.

 

The feedback from the one BJCP competition I entered was inconsistent in that one judge deemed my beer slightly not-to-style and the other thought it was to-style. The "common theme" I found among both judges was that my beer "needs more Maerzen-type maltiness." The Rauchbier I brewed had a bigger Maerzen-like maltiness than any from the Bamberg area, save perhaps Schlenkerla. What it didn't have was the maltiness of U.S. "craft" Maerzens...or, apparently, the other entries. I would later find out from the "winning" brewer that his Rauchbier came in at 1.067 OG and finished at around 1.017. Maybe it was just the (bad) luck of the draw, but this type of thing seems endemic to the current U.S. "craft" culture.

 

Thus my advice to enter the same beer into more than one competition.