I try to put a lot of thought into my reviews and their corresponding scores. I think I have a decent grasp. A particular BA here likes to poke fun at me for "over-rating" beers, which always surprises me. I know other people who rarely rate below 4.5. My question is... What warrants a 5? My highest rated beer is something lile 4.68, and that was a stop-me-in-my-tracks, dear god this is the best "insert style" I've ever had beer. I often peruse reviews, and I'll see these 4.7-5.0 scores, with reviews like, "it's pretty good, not the best, but enjoyable" or, "I've had better, but it's still great", or even people pointing out genuine flaws, while still slapping a 4.9 rating on it. I don't normally equate 4.9 with "pretty good". "Pretty good" to me is like a 3.8. But that's me. Are people just handing out world-class scores to protect hype and value? Is anything under a 5 just not amazing to them? To me, a 4.5 is an insanely great beer, and a 5.0 is almost hard to imagine - let alone if I can point out flaws. Are some people afraid to deviate too much from the overall score? Surely that's a thing. I'd love to hear people's perspective on this, and what you think warrants these higher bracket scores. It's all so subjective, and there's no right or wrong rating - I just find the idea of all these 5s to be...interesting.