Styles - The chains that bind?
A few things have come together recently, and provoked some thoughts on beer styles.
I was listening to a podcast rant from Peter Bouckert (brewer at New Belgium in the US) on how he finds styles constricting, and an impediment to his art. Luke also posted that he couldn't enter Epic in many competitions because of style constraints, and now the thread here on defining the NZ Strong Pilsener or whatever it might become. It made me wonder if the tail is starting to wag the dog...
Styles were/are a great way to get people into beer. They show people that beer is far more than the narrow definition they may have had, and open people up to a new world of exploration. For beer nerds like me, they give something to tick off in our quest to taste every style available, and contrast examples of styles from different breweries. They provide a great way of simplifying competitions by providing an objective set of parameters to judge a given beer against. It's this last that is probably the most useful in the world of beer competitions, and competitions drive creativity and innovation in beer.
However, I wonder if styles have now served their purpose as a focussing/educational tool and are beginning to constrict the creativity of the brewer? An award from a recognised competition is a great way to promote your beer, so many brewers will try to brew beers to a style so they can enter, in the process, perhaps not brewing their "dream beer" which we as consumers then miss out on. There will always be brewers who, through creativity and passion (or sometimes just style ignorance/apathy) will brew great unique beers which fall outside the accepted styles, but I do wonder how much more creativity we would see if brewers weren't so constrained.
What does everyone here think? I'm particularly interested in the opinions of commercial brewers, but homebrewers also, as we have to enter competitions in style categories too! Are there any alternatives, especially to facilitate fair objective judging, without having to constrain brewers to specific styles?
I was listening to a podcast rant from Peter Bouckert (brewer at New Belgium in the US) on how he finds styles constricting, and an impediment to his art. Luke also posted that he couldn't enter Epic in many competitions because of style constraints, and now the thread here on defining the NZ Strong Pilsener or whatever it might become. It made me wonder if the tail is starting to wag the dog...
Styles were/are a great way to get people into beer. They show people that beer is far more than the narrow definition they may have had, and open people up to a new world of exploration. For beer nerds like me, they give something to tick off in our quest to taste every style available, and contrast examples of styles from different breweries. They provide a great way of simplifying competitions by providing an objective set of parameters to judge a given beer against. It's this last that is probably the most useful in the world of beer competitions, and competitions drive creativity and innovation in beer.
However, I wonder if styles have now served their purpose as a focussing/educational tool and are beginning to constrict the creativity of the brewer? An award from a recognised competition is a great way to promote your beer, so many brewers will try to brew beers to a style so they can enter, in the process, perhaps not brewing their "dream beer" which we as consumers then miss out on. There will always be brewers who, through creativity and passion (or sometimes just style ignorance/apathy) will brew great unique beers which fall outside the accepted styles, but I do wonder how much more creativity we would see if brewers weren't so constrained.
What does everyone here think? I'm particularly interested in the opinions of commercial brewers, but homebrewers also, as we have to enter competitions in style categories too! Are there any alternatives, especially to facilitate fair objective judging, without having to constrain brewers to specific styles?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Greig McGill on
-
Hrm... I just noticed this: http://www.bjcp.org/2008styles/style23.html
I guess that goes a long way towards solving the perceived problem. :)
-
Permalink Reply by Stu McKinlay on
-
I basically think this is a nonsensical argument. Styles are a base, a history of beer, from which new styles can be created (as is shown in the BJCP category you link).
I work with data standards every day. These standards are built up, over time, and thoroughly tested during development and in real world use. People who do not adhere to them always end up with a major headache (and a large bill attached) somewhere down the line. The standards are not set in stone, they can and do evolve when (relatively rarely, given their widespread use). Importantly, they form a common language, from which we can discuss problems. Beer styles are much the same.
I also think that, rather than an argument against styles in themselves, Peter Bouckert brought this up (tongue in cheek) more as a reference to his thinking that some brewers are attempting tp blindly brew to certain fashionable set styles, rather than learning about all styles and the possibilities beyond them.
The World Beer Cup also has some experimental categories (see 11, 12 and 13 @
http://www.beertown.org/events/wbc/competition/reg_info/style_descr...).
-
-
In saying that I disagree with his argument, his NHC keynote speech is interesting and thought-provoking (and funny - especially where he says he's that we have a lot to thank Charlie Papazian for "even though I'm crushing him now").
http://cdn3.libsyn.com/basicbrewing/bbr06-28-07nhckeynote.mp3
-
Permalink Reply by Tony on
-
Agreed Stu. Although I empathise with Greig's view that competitions do tend to polarise styles. Thats fine, I guess if recognition is important for marketing or whatever, then it will steer a brewer. But there are so many brewers and breweries out there that are brewing to their own standards and enjoy success without ever getting any beer judges recognition. I refer to the original debate on the SOBA thread- how far do you change a style and still call it by the same name? There has to be some kind of definition that we adhere to, or we will start calling a stout a lager before long? I think there are enough loose styles out there to label any kind of beer today.
F*%k the judges, there's is only one or more opinion, let the continued development of good beer continue regardless. Some brewers do tend to brew to a style because that is the style they like, I don't think it stops others from brewing to their own style and standards.
" Build it and they will come"
-
Permalink Reply by nzbrewer on
-
As I raised in an email to Stu last night I had a discussion with a couple of WBC judges about a judging style where the beers are tasted blind with no information about them and it is up to the judges to decide whether it is good.
Any way from my recent experience at the World Beer Cup I found that all styles aren't created equal. Where some style guidelines are super specific and defined to the nth degree, others are too wide and sloppy to be of much use. These wider guidelines are generally styles that are new and still being defined as more brewers brew that style of beer, or it is a catch all. But again guidelines do help when judging.
Another observation from the WBC, I had the privilege of judging the American Strong Pale Ale category, which is where I would have entered Epic Pale Ale if entered. 80% of the beers judges were very similar to EPA, but the other 20% were at the top end of the style approaching the American IPA style, and it was these beers that moved forward to medal round.
So EPA not hoppy enough for American Strong Pale Ale, and too hoppy for American Pale Ale. What is one to do? I did have several WBC judges taste EPA and they all commented on how great the beer was and all agreed the issue with finding a style to enter it under.
I am thinking how to change the way we judge so the guidelines are just a guide and fantastic beers can be awarded Gold even if not true to style. Nearly every time I judge there will be a beer that is just so great it kicks ass over everything in that category but is kicked out cause it doesn't fit the guidelines. Not a perfect world.
-
Permalink Reply by Horace on
-
Yes - style guidelines pose some constraints on a brewer and a beer produced for a compettition. But without guidelines or style categories all entries would have to be judged as "beer". That would be like puting all athletes at the olympic games in the same competition and judging them all together.
For competition, comparison needs to be made against similar competitors, and against what the brewer was trying to acheive. How can you judge something as being good with no reference point??
One thought is that the best judge is the consumer where the medal achieved is reflected in sales ........ but I guess that medal goes to the marketing man rather than the brewer.
-
-
The consumer is obviously not the best judge as they are driven by price, advertising/marketing influences and availability. So ultimately the winner is the brewer with the biggest budget.
-
Permalink Reply by Alasdair on
-
Interesting discussion.
In a competition with a high standard overall, is the aim to brew a great beer that also stands out from other great beers? Is there an incentive, at least for some styles, to brew to the upper end of the style guidelines - a sort of stylistic arms-race? For example, see Barry's comment elsewhere about brewing a NZPA to "knock the judges' socks off".
I'm all for style guidelines, but I don't think they should be dogmatically enforced and unchanging (they are guidelines after all). But when it comes to competitions, I think brewers should be able to feel confident that the great tasting beers will do best, no matter where they fall within, or at the margins of, the guidelines. That is to say, I think guidance such as the notes to judges in the preamble to the BJCP guidelines is fundamental.
Or am I being naive?
-
-
Luke, am I correct in assuming you are either:
1. Looking for a style definition to define EPA internationally?
2. Looking at a way you can enter EPA into current guidelines for beer comps?
I empathise with your frustration, but I am a little confused as to your motivation?
-
-
I'm not so sure it's my view. :) Personally, I quite like styles, and can't imagine them going anywhere. I was just interested in thinking about alternatives. It's never a good idea in any field to have only one mindset - that way lies stagnation and death! ;)
-
Permalink Reply by Edward Siddle on
-
isn't the problem partly that instead of having classes at competitions where prizes are awarded for being the best, 2nd best and 3rd best beers in that class, we operate competitions where beers in a particular class are judged against a style description which instead of being a guideline becomes a 'standard' against which a beer is to be judged. but if you judge against standards, suddenly what were guidelines have become too entrenched, and possibly limiting to those beers which play around at the margins (eg Epic) of two (or more) styles.
wouldn't it be better to have slightly wider categories and then actually only award a limited number of prizes in each, which really would reflect the 3 best beers in that category? then the guidelines function simply as a way of deciding which category to enter the beer, and then after that the judges job is to decide the best of all the ones they are presented with as being in a particular category, rather than worrying about whether it is true to some style guideline. ie. without thinking, "oh, this IPA is clearly meant to be a historical one, and hence has been matured for ages and has little hop aroma but is bursting with bitterness. however, i can't give it a gold even tho it is fantastic, because the style guideline demands big hop aroma. i better put it aside".
Help Fund This Site
FRESH LIQUID YEAST!!!
DIRECT FROM THE LAB
AMAZING VIABILITY
Luke's Beer+
Events
© 2024 Created by nzbrewer.
Powered by
