Want to place an ad email luke@realbeer.co.nz
$50+GST / month


The results of the 2008 Capital Times Beer Necessities survey, including brief judges' notes, are posted here...


Views: 87

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

So if i read this right Monteiths Black and Mac's gold were judged better beers than say Emersons Bookbinder, Renaissance elemental porter, Smokin bishop or Emersons Pilsner....?
Is that what the article is saying?
Beer judging is subjective i know but really?
Here's a list of the judges' highest scoring beers (4 and above)

4.5 points:
Founders Fair Maiden
Renaissance Elemental Porter
Emerson’s Bookbinder
Green Man Wheat Beer

4 points:
Mac’s Great White
Tuatara Hefe
Renaissance Discovery APA
Founders Showhopper
Mac’s Spring Tide
Mac’s Gold
Invercargill Smokin’ Bishop
Monteith’s Black
Emerson’s Organic Pilsner
Green Man Enrico’s Cure
Renaissance Stonecutter Scotch
Three Boys Oyster Stout

It certainly seems odd that second and third place overall were given to lower ranking beers!
Seems like a load of commercialised crap to me >:o( How does a lower ranking beer get a higher place? Unless they pay for their place?
I thought you were one of the judges Geoff?
I was!

While I certainly have no issue with the scores, I am totally opposed to the second and third places being given to lower scoring beers.

I can't remember the discussion on overall placings; by the time we'd finished judging I was running late for my flight back to Blenheim.
Sounds rigged to me :oP
Good to see Green Man continues to get some credible placings in blind judging. Are things on the rise down south?

And Founder's showhopper???? Where can we get some?

Who were the other judges? Usually the articles states who they were.
Judges were:

Aaron Watson - Capital Times editor and wine columnist
Kylie Harris - Brewer, DB Mangatainoka
Alastair Clem - Brewer, Mac's Wellington
Colin Mallon - The Malthouse
... and myself.
The problem with this sort of thing is that while i have the utmost respect for Geoff and Colin's palate this sort of irregularity unfortunately really strains the credibility of a survey like this :0(
Here's a reply from Aaron (to an email from myself)...

Interesting. I may have to sign up and defend the panel. The top three were
judged blind and we (sadly without you) looked for integration and balance
in what were already good examples of style.
Fair Maiden was as good as I have ever tasted it. It and the other two were
pleasant even after a tough 100-beer day.
The question from a judging perspective is why we didn't give a 4.5 in the
golden or dark larger category - more chance of prejudice at that end of the
decision than when we took the top few beers next to each other, methinks.
Monteith's Black in particular was a surprise, but Kylie says the guy making
it on the West Coast is very proud of it and it really was better than I
have come to expect from that brand.
This survey used to pick a mixed dozen... methinks that was a better option.

But I've got nothing against the picks. I know how these things work and the results are always surprising. Always. And I know it is bloody hard work (this isn't the first time that Geoff has had to rush for a plane).

I've had a litre of Fair Maiden tonight. Very buttery - a little on the nose and a lot on the palate - but quite outstanding besides.
A brewer who brews for DB... as a judge... hrm. Issues? Name me one good DB beer, anyone?


© 2021   Created by nzbrewer.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service