Ratebeer.com and problem beers

[Steve Plowman]

I would like to draw attention to a recent ratebeer.com post which obviously involved a problematic beer.

http://www.ratebeer.com/beer/hallertau-porter-noir/89435/30436/

I this case it appears the crownseal has failed and the beer has lost carbonation and become oxidized.

According to the Ratebeer Craftbeer Introduction:
“What to do with spoiled beer? As a rule, dump it. Don’t rate it. It would be considered Rateable only if you had it at the brewery (where the brewer should be held 100% responsible for quality control), in the presence of the brewer outside of the brewery, or if you’ve had the beer several times and found it to be infected on numerous occasions, indicating a chronic problem. If a group shares an infected bottle, only one rating should be entered. No need to slander a good beer’s name simply because of one bottle that just happened to be split amongst multiple Ratebeerians. That is not good form.
If the beer is a vintage beer, caveat emptor applies. No matter how many good ones you try, vintage beers should always be considered a crapshoot. If the beer is not a vintage beer, or comes on draught, send it back. Don’t pay good money for bad beer.

Lastly, if you are unsure if the beer you’re holding is spoiled or not, check out the other ratings. Do they talk about the same characteristics you’re finding? If not, it probably is infected. But if most people seem to agree that the beer does in fact taste medicinal and a little sour, it may just be that the brewer intended it that way. “

Rather than make mindless and frankly, somewhat offensive speculation as to the production methods, possibly a better plan is to inform the brewer privately of the issue with as much information as possible. The likely result being a “thank you” and a replacement bottle or 2 sent back.

Lets all try to act positively to improve the quality and image of the local beer scene.

Cheers

Stephen Plowman
Hallertau Brewbar & Restaurant

[Stu McKinlay]

I feel your pain mate:
http://www.ratebeer.com/beer/yeastie-boys-pot-kettle-black/92150/84...

Obviously written by some muppet who was hoping for an equine filtered black lager. "Sharp and homebrewish" could be interpreted as (and has been by me):
I know nothing about beer with lots of flavour and character, so this totally took me off guard. I had to give it a low rating because I felt I owed it something for making me wet my pants.

However, do look at the other ratings and take some positives. I thought your beer was a shining light amongst what is generally a hop-obsessed local industry.

[JoKing]

Looks like whoever it was pulled the comments.

[JoKing]

It wasn't me Steve - I promise. I liked it - honestly.

[Kempicus]

In response to your mail on ratebeer:

I would be happy to try this beer again next time I am in Auckland, although it wasn't as obvious as you claim that there was a seal issue I would think it prudent that it be good brewing sense to up the frequency of quality control checks on the crown seals on a beer of this standard, especially a beer that's quality deems the price tag of $16 per 345ml

as a response to this post:

Speculation wasn't being made over production methods rather a simile was being used as an aid to description of flavour.

Unfortunately I’ve found brewers less than willing to accept issues with their beers in the past so it's a case of 73rd time bitten 74th time shy so instead of wasting my time (I’ve already wasted my money) i rate as is.

I too would love to see an improvement in the quality of the beer in the local scene and perhaps this sort of thing will help that along, it’s certainly elicited an immediate response to quality control issues!