Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Support & Suggestions' started by Gutes_Bier, Jul 2, 2013.
Don't rank a beer you haven't tried?
Who said we shouldn't? For the record, I didn't say anyone should grade to a 3.0, but if that happens to be one's personal philosophy I think it could be useful to track how you're grading, and if your results are in line with your philosophy. This stat would show the difference in our grading philosophies - i.e., my average rating would most likely be lower than yours, and based on what he said earlier, Mudbug's would likely be lower than mine.
I do think overall averages would be higher than 3.0 just because people are likely to not buy a beer they know is bad. I understand it's a very broad stat, but I also don't think it's totally useless.
Look at my reviews/hads. I have tried a few beers. I do respect the opinions of my friends and I am inclined to try beers they like than those that are crap. Rarely do I love a beer that most people tend to hate.
The real question is, who give a flying fuck what I drink, what you drink. I do not have to drink, think, or have the same opinion as anyone else. Enjoy beer, respect beer, discuss. You don't need to influence me or others to have a similar beer experience. We each have our own journey.
This and a personal deviation used to be here. Hopefully they come back again.
That's the wrong attitude. Until you have tasted a beer, you shouldn't judge it. Suggesting that reviews typically suggest the beer is very good, is okay, but saying that a beer is great without tasting it for yourself and being able to discuss the attributes of why it is great (in your opinion) is poor understanding of beer. Let's look at one of your reviews:
"Pours a hazy orange color. Thick off-white head. Good retention, amazing lacing. Smells like... I don't even know. Hops, but better than I could imagine hops smelling like. Cigar City beers smell so good. Tastes not quite as good as it smells, but almost. Very floral and citrus like. Lots of grapefruit. Has the power of a DIPA, but feels much more subdued. In a good way, of course. Rich mouthfeel with a good amount of carbonation.
My favorite regular IPA. The smell and taste are just too good for the competition."
You failed to really pick up the actual characteristics of taste and smell. "Smell like...I don't even know. Hops, but better than I could imagine..." doesn't help anybody. Characteristics of hops range from sweet, lush, and subtle to bitter, dry, chalky, resinous, and overpowering to grassy, rind, piney, citrus, lemon, grapefruit, orange, mango and so on. You need to explain that in a review and to a potential customer, because if they like IPAs and you don't ask what characteristics they typically enjoy, you could sell them on a dry, resinous, grapefruit, piney, in your face IPA when they like soft, sweet, lush, crisp, juicy, orange/clementine-like IPAs. Saying "hops" doesn't mean anything and if you're willing to give a beer a 4.88 out of 5.00 (0.66 points highers than its average), you should be educated enough to tell us why.
Food for thought.
I think this is useful, at times, and i'd like to see it again.
I wrote that review a while ago. Maybe I should go back and rewrite all my old reviews. Not being able to pick out how you feel about different hop flavors doesn't mean anything about whether or not you're able to say you love a beer anyway. Looking at old reviews of mine and posting them on here has nothing to do with the conversation.
If it makes you feel better, I'm going to delete my review of Jai Alai and review it again later today when I drink it, since I have a few cans in my fridge. I just drank one last night too, and I can guarantee you that it's still just as good as when I last reviewed it.
Because I already tried Wild Blue, and it was the worst swill I ever drank. Because I like the taste of big IPAs and I highly doubt that Heady Topper, with all of its rave reviews, would be a bad beer. I'm sure it might not be my favorite IPA ever, and I might even be disappointed if I have it, but I know it will be at least decent.
I mean, do you just buy random beers and try them before you judge them? Come on, we all know you don't.
Ummmm vision? The fact that I can see.... and read the consensus of upwards of thousands of other reviews?
So, you tried the beer, then judged it? Good, that's how you know you don't like Wild Blue. And yes, I do just buy random beers to try them. Usually, when I go to my local bar/store, the first thing I do is look for a beer I've never had before. I have never once looked up a score on either BA or RB before buying a beer. I don't read reviews very often either, and when I do, it's generally after I've entered my review and I'm curious about what others thought.
I have witnesses to the fact that I do, indeed, buy random new beers to try. I mean, how else will I know if I like them or not? The reviews tell me how others feel about them, but that doesn't affect how my tongue will react (check some of my rDevs for reference).
I will vouch for him here. Dude drinks some random ass stuff.
I don't agree with the "general philosophy" that we should try to hold to a 3.0 average.
If all I drink are superior beers, I don't feel the need to rank some low just to keep my average near 3.0.
That's my philosophy and I'm sticking to it
I dunno, I can't see myself really critiquing someone's beer ratings or following someone who's just right on the money with their scoring all the time. I read the ratings and reviews when I want to try something new or verify something I've had, and I'm more interested in a descriptive review than whether someone typically rates low or high. I'm a high-rater, by the way.
The question should be, "don"t you buy random ass beers just to try them?" Who doesn't do that, I'm baffled by those who don't.
Well, if the worst a beer can possibly be scored is a 1, and the best it can be scored is a 5, doesn't it mean that most will be around 3? I drink a fair number of very good-to-excellent beers, yet, when we had our average score on the site, mine was around 3.5. I suspect it would be lower now, but not because I'm drinking a lower quality of beers (in general), but because the more beers I try, the more similarities I find beers to have. There's only so much brewers can do with 4 base ingredients, so it seems that a lot of beers are going to be very much alike, thus more beers being closer to the "average". Or something.
good idea, but what would be just as handy is "average score for beers in this style"
You do see that by not trying and rating the lower quality beers that your score only reflects an average for you? In other words if you drank/rated all the lower quality beers your scores on the higher quality beers you have already tried would go up, not down.
My bad, I wasn't real clear. I do drink a fair bit of crap as well (Ticker gotta tick yo!), so they probably bring my average down a bit. That said, I find that a lot of beers that people give high scores to, I like as much as they do, but I tend to score closer to my average. Because, as I said above, the more you try, the more near the middle most beers will be. This is making me thirsty, I'll go grab an average beer.
Not to mention the "Average Score For Beers In User's State/Geographic Region", which I think a fair number of people would find interesting.
I agree that I'm not sure what it would really show. I seldom review beers on here, (use it more for reference), but when I do it's usually only beers that I really enjoyed. As such, my avg rating would be reasonably high.
There are two kinds of mistakes to make with a beer I have not tried. I can pass over one I'd enjoy or I can buy one I wind up not liking. Living in a state where I buy most of my beer by the case, the most expensive mistake I can make is to buy a case of a beer I don't enjoy.
Consequently I choose to use the information provdied by others (e.g., the reviews and ratings) as *one* source of information in making my decisions. (Just as we all do in many other circumstances in life.) Since I am completely free to use or not use the ratings/reviews as I choose it has nothing to do with letting others tell me what I should think and one hell of a lot to do with making an informed choice. With over 90,000 beers in the database I have to learn from the mistakes of others. I don't have the time or money to make them all myself.
Id have to agree. Seems quite useless to me. Everyone who's for this idea seems to be missing the fact the people use the system differently, making the stat effectively just as mysterious as guessing people's techniques now.[/quote]
But you see they don't all use it differently. Thare are actually, compared to the over 3,000,000 reviews and ratings in the database, relatively few different ways in which people use the system. People are much less varaible that you give them credit for.
Move to PA where most beer is sold/purchased by the case and you'll not be puzzled or baffled by that. As I said in another post in this thread, with over 90,000 beers in the database I have to learn from the mistakes of others because I don't have the time or money to make them all myself.
*Visits site known for its vast library of beer ratings*
*Derides beer ratings as pointless witchcraft*
Awesome mode activated!
I say provide every stat under the sun (given that it's easy enough to implement from the database). Stats for geeks who love them. Easily ignored numbers for people who would rather not poison their brains with the devil's handiwork.
I'd give a list of stats I'd love to know about but it would take an eternity to list them. Suffice to say if I could see scores split across several dimensions I'd love it.
redunk, what a poor poor excuse to try something new...I feel for you...and I've drank plenty O' beers while in PA. It is a hassle to get beers, but still no excuse to look up everything before you try it for yourself. God forbid you actually reach for a beer off the shelf and buy it before looking it up online. Enjoy your smartphone and beers apps mate...cheers!
I cannot possibly tell you how FRUSTRATING it is trying to decide whether or not to buy a beer based on a nearly endless list of "reviews" like this. I want to know what the hops taste like, whether the dry is Columbus heavy or Simcoe heavy, whether or not the aroma carries over in taste. This is the very reason why I held off for 2 years from writing reviews on this site. My palate just wasn't educated enough.
Given all the incorrect assumptions you've made in writing your post, I'll just say enjoy how you spend your beer money, mate.
The number of beers reviewed by one does not mean there opinion outweighs anothers. There are people on here that have reviewed 500+ even 1500+ beers and never given a 5/5 overall. To me that is sad since those people have looked for there perfect beer for so long that they will not recognize it when it shows itself. New user, old user it is all the same. Cheers!
Your palate was and is just fine. It always was/has been. Anyone who thinks otherwise comes across to me as simply insecure. No palate is perfect/experienced enough to know everything, so all you can/should do with your review is tell me/us how you feel about the beer at that moment in terms of your senses at that particular time/place/whatever-else-is-left.
So.... based on the millions of consumers, Budweiser really is the King of Beers. Cool.
Budweiser doesn't have millions of consumers. They have about 17, that drink a shit-ton of horrible tasting beer.
Thank you. The fact that a review i wrote OVER a year ago has been brought into this thread is infuriating. I re-reviewed jai Alai and my rating is almost the same. I enjoyed the beer the same way i did then. Sure, i can describe it better now, but i don't see how that gives me any more of a right to review beers now. It's not like I'm writing for a fucking magazine or something
Seriously. Well said. The idea that one should only be reviewing if they can describe characteristics with a PhD level of sophistication regarding specific hop varieties is absurd. I can understand one's frustration with reviews that don't offer much in the way of descriptive characteristics, but as long as one can name flavor profiles and use descriptors that anyone can understand for comparison, that is all they should need to do.
There are more than enough reviews on this site to skip those that might not satisfy one's minimum level of descriptiveness.
I personally have plenty of comfort describing the way a beer looks, smells, tastes and feels, but most of the time I'm not going to be able to identify specific hop varieties, unless they are highly accentuated. I guess I should have waited a few years before I started reviewing beers
Even if it had been written yesterday, it seems a little petty to bring it into a thread for someone to call out what was correct/incorrect about the way you wrote it. It would be one thing if your review only consisted of highly generic terms like "it smells like hops" or whatever was written, but yours had plenty of notes about specific flavor profiles interspersed with the other commentary. I personally like the reviews that mix specific descriptions in with the personality of their writing style. It's what makes reviews more interesting.
I realize the point of this site is advocacy, but sometimes I think that not everyone understands that people can advocate for something in different, unique ways. That's part of the beauty of it, and a big part of why I would love to see stats on user's individual rDev average as well as overall score average. They are just additional details to enrich the experience of enjoying, sharing in others' enjoyment of, and advocating for beer.
Agreed (I only have 24 Hads myself). A high number does give more statistical weight to an average rating, though. Someone who's rated 1,000 beers to a 3.25 average reflects their personal scoring style more accurately than someone who's reviewed 5 beers to a 3.25 average on a statistical significance level. But I didn't mean to say that any opinion is more or less valid than another.
Dude you are asking way too much from your average BA member lol!
Yea...no, but thanks for playing
Please, clue me in on where you see non-generic terms followed by notes of specific flavor profiles in this quote:
Speaking as someone who has only done Hads, I would never criticize someone who actually took the time to write out a full review. It can be pretty daunting to write something up as an amateur beer reviewer, knowing that people from all over the internet can/will look at it. What's more, it's counterproductive to the entire point of this website really to hold public reviews out for ridicule. What he wrote is better than anything I could come up with.
Anyway, none of that is really even germane to the point of this thread so hopefully we can all move on...