Stone 1.1 has me thinking about this as there doesn't seem to be a review for the 1.1, separating it from the superior, imo, original. But I've also seen this with some greenflash beers as well as other stone beers (crime and punishment). So I wonder if there is a time or a place when a beer is a "new beer" and when the slight tweaks don't justify a new one? For what it is worth the new stone ipa 1.1 is a new beer imo, and would receive a drastically lower score from me. However they get huge props on the bottle dating, they upgraded that part! I guess the next part is, should breweries be asked to label these differently as stone has done, green flash didn't and how much information should we the consumer get on changes? It seems silly but since we review these things and our reviews last forever, it seems odd to have a review for what is essentially a new beer.