Poll: Do you tick?

well I guess you have to define tickers better? LOL.

Sure all ages want new beer, but a true ticker to me is one that will pay anything, get the 1 beer they HAVE to have anyway they can. Say you get a list of 100 beers do you go to ANY length to get them? I never met anyone who has but I don't know everyone....

Most of us are not really like that.

Some years I got to have me some Westvleteren, so we journey over and hang out till I can get it, but since I had them all before and there not new beers, its not really ticking? plus we do more than drink westy on those trips.

To me the nuts are the ones that see a rare beer and have to have it anyway they can, those folks are a tad more devolved than I am, and I bet its a function of youth. as most of old folks know better. Just my 2 cents.

Not to say they are not crazy folks of ALL ages, there are. I seen it first hand.

 

I've only ticked a few here, can't remember all the beers I've had and don't want to go back in time.
But twice a week I will write a full-fledged somewhat humorous review for my blog on a new beer. I figure I can do it for the rest of my life and never run out of beers to review.

 

I review to track what I have had. Often I like to try as much of a line of a brewery that I like. With the exception of Sam Adams, Abita, and a couple other breweries I will usually try the new stuff.

 

I believe ticking has a good/bad connection. If you call ticking taking a 1oz pour and slamming it and calling your review this.

App- Clear Yellow
Smell- Hoppy
Taste- Hoppy and Bitter
Mouth- Bitter
Drink- Tasty

(I dont do that)

I try to sit with at least a 12oz and the proper glass. Reviewing it properly and notating as much as I can about a beer. Am I guilty of doing a 4-6oz pour, Yes. Is it a habit or a constant way that I review no.

I review all new beers to me and am proud to do so.

Cheers!

 

I'd rather have a variety of good reliable beer than to indiscriminately drink beer for the sake of saying I tried that beer already!

 

Untappd ticks for me, and I'll check in to every beer I try, regardless of sample, as long as it's 2 oz or over. I feel ok with rating 1-5 scale based on that sample, considering I'm not rating head retention, clarity, mouthfeel, or any of that other self-serving nonsense. I just rate the flavor, and move onto the next brew.

Just opening the app on my phone, tapping a rating, snapping a pic, and maybe typing out a tweet about the percentage of mouthswish I get from it is quicker than the bartender pouring my next glass.

FWIW, I rate to style on the mouthswish.

 

How then -- if at all -- do you account for the "Pepsi Challenge" effect?

http://beeradvocate.com/community/threads/pepsi-challenge-effect-on-beer.8502/#post-96989

 

I'm not really sure where I fall, honestly. In a bar setting and whenever possible and/or reasonable, I will try a new beer over one that I've already had, even if that means turning down a pour of a beer I know I love. However, I don't really keep records of all the beers I've tried.

Sometimes I'll mark down a few "hads" here but what BA says I've tried is probably 20% at best of what I've really tried. Probably less.

 

Because my rating is not comparing to other beers, it's regarding how much I enjoy the beer, whatever sample size, I just tasted. I'm not averaging my scale based on the volume of unique beers I try, and am not using some sort of bell curve based on how much I enjoy a certain style over that of another. It's a purely subjective rating, using 1 standard criteria: How much do I like the beer?

I can utilize my own subjective criteria categories when formulating my overall, such as if a beer has robust flavor and scent, yet is thin in the mouthfeel, that can pull my own score down, but if I'm having a smaller size, I can simply say whether I enjoy it or not, and you can do the same with any beer otherwise.

I could drink Coke and Pepsi side-by-side, and could give both a 5-out-of-5 rating, because they'd both be prime examples of the style of a brown cola.

I don't think that I need to put all unique beers I've tried on Untappd (500+) in order of best to worst, but I can individually subjectively rate them based on what I drank of them.

 

It's all about the percent carbonation on the mouthswish, for sure.

 

Pretty much my driving factor on my rating. Can't have enough mouthswish

 

Not trying to load your experiences down with any extra baggage. Your criterion is perfectly reasonable. Still, some people like to know why they like the beer, and if sample size is affecting that judgement it might be something worth considering.

 

"I tick and I'm proud". Wasn't that a James Brown song?

 

I agree, and some people certainly like to maintain more in-depth data logging regarding their libation than others, but I feel that if I feel any aspect stands out as enjoyable or deplorable, I can make note in the comments section. Otherwise, a 1-5 rating will give me a pretty good idea of whether I'll like it the next time I drink it.

 

Since ticking has become slightly derogatory, I propose we refer to beer tasting as "mouthswishing."

Dude, went to Bend last weekend and did some serious mouthswishing.

 

I review all the beers I drink because it's fun and I enjoy it. If that's ticking then I tick.

 

My beer's rarity is solely derived by the percentage of mouthswish on the regurge.

 

That's not really ticking. A ticker cares only about the tick. Say you're in a store that has only two kinds of beer, Steel Reserve 211 and Founders CBS. That's it. You have already tried Founders CBS but have never tried Steel Reserve 211. Which one do you choose?

 

This is me exactly.

I also keep track of my cellar, but I assume that's a bad thing on here too.