Infected Barrel Aged Yeti

If you want to find a pattern you would need to find out the storage conditions of every bottle of both infected and not.

Pretty much all anyone can know now is there is a problem and there is no way to anticipate if the bottle you hold is part of that problem. Keep in mind that the fact that some people report no infections doesn't mean that some of the remaining bottles aren't infected, they all might be bad and there is no way to know.

 

At the least it will tell the smart among us what kind of infection it most likely is, and the smart among us includes many brewers who also need to know what the problem is. There is a very good reason to post exact descriptions.

 

I will also add that descriptions can help discriminate between true infection and what jackasses might call infection (old/oxidized/skunked beer).

 

a recall though probably would not cover those who decided to take the risk and open the bottle. i think this is much more favorable. if i open my last bottle and it is infected i will write them, but if it is as delicious as my last bottle i will do the jig. i feel that the current situation is win/win for us.

 

I want reviews of infected beers
I wants to use BA as a resource
When I see a beer on the shelf that I never heard of and I check BA and no one reports its infected, is that really a good idea?

 

No, win/win would be having an uninfected beer in 100% of the bottles that were released...

 

All beers released will have a certain amount of issues, which should be less than the problems associated with wine...mainly because of corks being more prevalent with wine and TCA is a bad thing with wine (trichloroanisole). Brett and other yeast strains are offputting in most wine and welcome in beer. The problem exists on the cork. This is the main reason to store beer upright. With wine, the cork contact is crucial to preserve the wine and prevent the cork from drying out. With beer, yes its true you could lose your carbonation, which has happened to me quite a bit and the beer becomes more viscus...however, you want to avoid contact with the cork to avoid any chance of contamination. That aside, to me Yeti is one of the best stouts ever made. My personal favorite is the Belgica version, but all of them are amazing and they are some of the most age worthy beers I have ever had.

 

I had bottle 2300 Thursday night...very delicious beer. No infection here!

 

That they know better than us doesn't mean they can do much about it. The only real fix there is flash pasteurizing everything that comes out of a barrel but those machines are expensive so its not feasible for many breweries. Thats also why I drink barrel aged beers fresh usually...no risk at all of an infection developing.

 

The Rogue comment is totally subjective. I liked the voodoo beer. Not liking it is basically stating you don't like bacon. I never personally met anyone who didn't like bacon. I'm not sure I would want to meet someone like that.

 

Way to miss the point.

 

I love bacon, but most bacon beers tend to be smokey, and I cant stand smoke smell/taste in my beer.

 

I previously reported that bottle 460 was infected.

Great Divide's customer service was awesome. They promptly shipped me a bottle of BA Old Ruffian. I wasn't going to disclose that, because I didn't want people to take advantage of them. However, it looks like the cat is out of the bag. So I may as well at least vouch for how awesome Great Divide was in reimbursing me!

 

I get your point. I just don't see where voodoo donut fits into it.

 

I still don't see why this is an argument for giving the breweries leeway. If you know you're likely to fail, and you try anyway, then I think you're even more culpable when you do, indeed, fail.

 

But they mostly don't fail...also 99% of the time the beers released are fine and the brewer intends you to drink it then. The reason the bros don't have listings by vintages on here is because the brewer's intention isn't for the beer to sit for 5 years. If it was tasting fine when you picked it up, its also your fault for not drinking it when it was good. You know the same risk the brewer does. I think we're both liable and as such if what comes out of the bottle around when you buy it is infected, the brewer should be responsible. If you're the idiot that kept it long enough for bugs to go crazy in there then you're at fault. Of course, if the bottle has a best after date like deschutes, by all means its their fault when you hold on to it till after that date and its infected.

 

I opened up bottle #2825 the other night with dankbeers619 and a couple other friends. It was great. No signs of infection at all. And I had this one in a box in my closet, so I'm sure with the high 60's to low 70's temperatures, the infection would have manifested by now.

 

Plenty of barrel-aged beers have (Age for up to X years) on the label. Is it fair to judge it then? You use the "everyone should know" argument, but doesn't that go the other way for aging as well? I like my barrel-aged beers with some age on them. I think the mellowing generally works in their favor. I know I'm not alone in that opinion.

Some brewers pasteurize their beers, others have length, flawless records of success. Why are we giving the others a pass here? It's clearly not a complete gamble, where the only way to get good barrel-aged beers is through good luck. Some people are clearly just better at it than others, so the ratings should reflect that.

 

I opened bottle #1683 last night with no infection. Awesome beer!

 

My thoughts exactly