Capital Times Beer Necessities

[Geoff Griggs]

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

http://www.captimes.co.nz/rev/37/Beer.boss

[Reviled]

"I often get the vibe of beer snobbery on here ...... but, hey its a free country..."

Youre probably right, I often forget the days when I used to order a Heineken or a Stella and be happy about it, but shouldnt we, as educated beer drinkers, be trying to enlighten the uneducated? :oP haha

[JoKing]

Just let people drink whatever the hell they want to! If you try to change their mind, they think you're a dick head. We all know whats the good stuff really is... one day they'll come around on their own just like we all did. There is a whole generation of people who have been brainwashed into brand loyalty.

You cant force a revolution.

[Kempicus]

Luckily because otherwise i'd get my ass kicked out....i'm probably a beer snob i certainly look down on what i perceive as lesser beers but then again i think everyone that drinks beer is a snob in some way, the lion red drinker wouldn't touch a pint of waikato similarly a waikato drinker wouldn't touch a pint of ranfurly even though the goal is to get boozed (oops there's my snobbery surfacing again)
I guess we all know what we like and therefore everything that doesn't at least meet that standard is viewed as 'lesser'

[Reviled]

the lion red drinker wouldn't touch a pint of waikato

:o) Haha, awesome, so true tho, my boss is a die hard lion red drinker, he calls green bottles poncy beers and thinks people that drink Corona with a lemon are queer... "give me a brown stubby of red any day" :o) haha, I allways give him heaps..

[Greig McGill]

Just catching up on Geoff's old columns and came across his comments on Beer Necessities. The last line seems a bit sad in view of the results:

"Let's hope Marlborough's more beer-savvy retailers pick up on the winners and we see some of these tasty beers making it into local shops and bars."

Yes, now they can all rush to stock... beers they already have. This competition definitely sent the wrong message I feel. Also sorry to Geoff and Colin, I doubt you can be blamed for the dubious results.

[Geoff Griggs]

Thanks for your vote of confidence Greig.

While I am confident in the judging process and scoring of the beers at the Capital Times Beer Necessities, I too cannot understand how the second and third placed beers were determined.

Aside from the issue of whether or not the survey needs to have an overall winner (let alone second and third placed beers), surely two of the other (three) beers which achieved a score of 4.5 should have been ranked second and third? Or am I missing something?

It seems obvious that there is an increasing lack of trust in the results of this survey. That's a great pity considering Capital Times' long-time support of good beer. I think Aaron really needs to front up and respond to the questions posed above.

[Kempicus]

I for one would love to hear some answers!

[Steve Baker]

Given the following numbers:
- judges score
- volume of production

It would be pretty easy to come up with a formula which replicated the overall winners result. However this would only demonstrate that the deceit had some scientific rigour ;)

[Geoff Griggs]

Here is an edited version of a column (written by Aaron Watson) which will be published in the December 31 issue of Capital Times...


Snob beery

A great year in beer ended on a slightly sour note, and sadly not a porter.
Capital Times Kiwi Beer Necessities Survey came under fire in the Real Beer
(www.realbeer.co.nz) forum because a couple of mainstream beers were
selected in our top three of the survey.
I feel I must respond.
"So if I read this right Monteith's Black and Mac's gold were judged better
beers than say Emerson's Bookbinder, Renaissance Elemental Porter, Smokin
Bishop or Emerson's Pilsner....?"
"Seems like a load of commercialised crap to me. How does a lower ranking
beer get a higher place? Unless they pay for their place?"
"This sort of irregularity unfortunately really strains the credibility of a
survey like this."
Not quite. In choosing the top three, the judges re-tasted the highest
scoring beers in each category. At this point we looked for balance,
integration and drinkability as opposed to stylistic integrity or clever
brewcraft.
Founders Fair Maiden (pale ale) Mac's Gold (golden lager) and Monteith's
Black (dark mild/schwarzbier) were selected from a powerful line up - tasted
blind - because they had those qualities in abundance.
Criticism has focussed on lower scoring beers coming through to top the
tasting. But that is not unusual. Choosing a best of the best is a separate
act to rating beers by style. Otherwise you might as well just list them
according to their original score, which is how they are presented in the
survey.
Of the other class toppers only Renaissance Elemental Porter, Emerson's
Bookbinder, and Green Man Wheat Beer outscored Mac's Gold and Monteith's
Black in the judging of beers by category. And only by half a mark.
Judging is a subjective business and when tasted again next to each other,
and next to other category toppers, those excellent boutique beers did not
stand out.
The real problem for a few Real Beer snobs seems to be that two of the top
three are from mainstream breweries. There is a lot of foolishness in the
idea that a mainstream beer should not be rated highly.
I challenge the critics to find a better golden lager than Mac's Gold
anywhere in the world. When fresh, it is clean, crisp slightly malty and
with a touch of hop aroma and bite. A classic of the style. (Although not my
cup of tea.)
Similarly Monteith's Black is, on good day, a classic dark lager - banana
esters on the nose plus hints of chocolate and coffee, and a palate that
matches perfectly.
Recognising that does not to take away from the excellent work by the
smaller breweries.
My personal favourite beer is Emerson's Pilsner. I'd love to see it top the
tasting. But I would never rig the competition. Snide remarks about "this
sort of thing", or implying the judges were paid off, are insulting,
misplaced and, frankly, odd.
Reviewing and journalism in general is a bit like being a member of the
Royal family in that every mistake you make is made in public.
But this result was not a mistake.
Fair Maiden, Mac's Gold and Monteith's Black were the most balanced, clean
and flavoursome beers on the day. Each topped its class and each was still
drinking nicely after a tough day's judging of 101 beers.
That is not to take away from the other great beers highlighted in the
survey - beers that by and large get no recognition of their excellence in
the mainstream media.
Perhaps the comment that saddened me the most was the suggestion craft
brewers boycott the event in the future.
That is a petulant remark that is short-sighted on two levels.
Firstly, how could it help beer and brewers to remove from the public eye
one of the few independent surveys - not a competition - of the state of the
beer nation? Answer: not at all.
Secondly, if brewers only enter survey they know they will win, there is no
point. Such competitions/awards/surveys are promotional tools and okay as
such, but they should never be allowed to replace an independent panel
capturing the feeling at a single time and place.
For those more interested in drinking good beer than bagging certain
breweries, here is a list of the top scoring entries in this year's survey.
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 Ale
Three Boys Oyster Stout

[Reviled]

There are some fair comments in there and maybe some of the comments ive made were unnessecary...

However, this still doesnt really make sense to me? How can you rate a beer a 4.5, and then pick a different beer as your favourite, one you rated less? Im confused??? Because it tasted better later? After drinking more?

[Greig McGill]

Some fair points, but it does seem a nerve has been hit there. Since it "saddened" Aaron the most, I feel I should put my name to the boycott suggestion (Kempicus pays my agent fee in homebrew). It was a musing conversation we were having via email, and James posted it here. I stand by the intent of it though, which was if the results are consistently poor, then why would a brewer wish to be involved?

As for some of the other comments... Aaron, really?
Challenging people to find a better golden lager? Ratebeer seems to have no trouble at all with that.http://www.ratebeer.com/beer/macs-gold/8745/ - I doubt you can call that many ratings biased. After all, none of them work for the brewers.

Mac's Black. If it's a dark lager, or schwarzbier, are banana esters actually appropriate to the style?

I'd rebut this column by suggesting that it's very easy to take a swipe at "beer snobs", but we are not snobs. We want EVERYONE to drink better beer. A snob wants to feel superior. We want everyone to taste what we've tasted for themselves. That's not going to happen if the mainstream keeps getting reinforced. There's no incentive to look beyond what's easily available. No, Mac's gold is not an excellent beer. It's passable on a hot day. No, Monteith's Black is not a great beer. It's sweet, burnt, and full of banana. I'd say this about these beers even if they were made by breweries who have otherwise excellent products. And while Fair Maiden was excellent when first released, I've not heard much good about the current batch. I won't say anything more though not having tasted the latest stuff.

You should post here a bit Aaron. You'll see we're not snobs. I've always enjoyed your columns, even when I've (often) disagreed with them. Beer love is NOT beer snobbery. You must admit, given the depth and breadth of beer experience represented by posters to these forums, and the almost universal surprise at the result (coupled with the involvement of two people working for the "winning" breweries") that maybe we have a point? We do at least know what we're talking about from a flavour point of view. :)

Would love to see some reply to the responses I'm sure will be posted here Aaron. Get amongst it.

[Reviled]

Touchee!! Very well written my man!