From JudgeNet Thu Apr 2 11:25:50 1992 Subject: 1st Round AHA Judging To all homebrewers, beer judges and beer stewards on the East coast: Well, last night a hardy crew of 5 (Sheri A., Tom G., Dan H., Dave R., and myself) _almost_ finished unpacking the entries at the Boston Beer Co. for the AHA Competition, 1st round, Northeast region. There are still a few to unpack, plus all of the entries need to be pulled and organized by category (right now they're just in numerical order). Dave and Sheri would like to do that this *Saturday* to get ready for judging next week. If you can help out, please call Dave Ruggiero or Sheri Almeda (tel. #'s below). Now here's the REALLY bad news: Guess how many entries there were? 400? Nope. 500? Higher? 550? Try again. 600? No, we had 616 entries as of last night, plus another 15 or so awaiting unpacking! About 40 of those are probably cider, so we're still faced with the daunting task of judging 600 1st round entries! Needless to say, more judges and stewards are needed if we're to complete first round judging by the 27th. Whether you're local or out of state, please, please, please come to help out as many times as you can! There is no way that a small group from the Worts can carry this off alone. We need a LOT of help and we need it OFTEN. As Sheri has previously posted, the judging schedule will be: Apr. 8 Wed 7-10 pm Barleymalt & Vine Apr. 9 Thurs 7-10 pm Barleymalt & Vine Apr. 10 Fri 7-10 pm Barleymalt & Vine (K of C Hall) Apr. 11 Sat 9-6 Barleymalt & Vine (K of C Hall) Apr. 12 Sun 9-2 Boston Beer Company Apr. 15 Wed 7-10 pm Barleymalt & Vine Apr. 16 Thurs 7-10 pm Barleymalt & Vine Apr. 17 Fri 7-10 pm Barleymalt & Vine Given the huge number of entries, it is likely that more judging sessions will be added the week of April 20th, as well as extended sessions on the weekend of April 25th just to finish things up. Again, especially for you out-of -town judges, please consider coming to judge more then once. Your help is needed and will be appreciated. Please contact Dave Ruggiero or Sheri Almeda if you have any questions. Dave Ruggiero National Judge Director (617) 327-0089 Sheri Almeda National Site Director (617) 225-6000 x7021 Thanks, Steve Stroud -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Apr 2 18:26:38 1992 Subject: 1st Round AHA Judging in the Rockies To all homebrewers, beer judges and beer stewards in the Rockies: I sent in my judge registration form but hadn't heard anything about the judging dates for the first round judging in Boulder, CO, so I called them to find out some details. I talked to Karen Barela and here is what I found out: Number of entries: Boston - 616 Boulder - 450 San Francisco - 670 Judging dates and times for Boulder: Tuesday April 7 6:30-9:30 Hotel Boulderado Thursday April 9 6:30-9:30 Hotel Boulderado Tuesday April 14 6:30-9:30 Hotel Boulderado Thursday April 16 6:30-9:30 Hotel Boulderado Saturday April 11 12:30-6:00 Boulder JC Depot Sunday April 12 10:00-1:00,2:00-5:00 Boulder JC Depot The Hotel Boulderado is located at 2115 13th St., and the Boulder JC Depot is located on Pearl between 28th and 30th Sts. Judging points for the Nationals: Two points for the first session, half a point for each additional session, *provided that it takes place on a different calendar day*, up to a maximum of three points. In other words: One session, one day > 2 points Two sessions, one day > 2 points Two sessions, two days > 2.5 points Five sessions, three days > 3 points (Whew!) Hope to see you all there (how many Rockies-area judges are there on this net?). Mike Hall hall at lanl.gov -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Sun Apr 5 17:14:47 1992 Subject: 1st Round AHA Judging on the Left Coast First, to update Michael Hall's numbers: > Number of entries: Boston - 616 > Boulder - 450 > San Francisco - 670 I just got off the phone with Russ Wigglesworth, National Site Registrar, and the final number for San Francisco is (drum roll, please) *753*. Wow. Judging dates for San Francisco: Saturday, 4 April Saturday, 11 April Saturday, 25 April All sessions are at Anchor Brewing in San Francisco (corner Mariposa and De Haro), check-in starts at 8:30 AM and judging at 9:30. The afternoon session starts at 1:30 PM. It's a little late for the 4th, but if you're interested in one of the other dates and haven't yet "checked in" either with me or with Brook Ostrom, please contact me: Martin Lodahl Site Judge Director Home: 916.823.0202 Work: 916.972.4821 Email: malodah at pbmoss.pacbell.com Hey, it's gonna be GREAT!! = Martin A. Lodahl Pacific*Bell Systems Analyst = = malodah at pbmoss.Pacbell.COM Sacramento, CA 916.972.4821 = = If it's good for ancient Druids, runnin' nekkid through the wuids, = = Drinkin' strange fermented fluids, it's good enough for me! 8-) = -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Mon Apr 6 12:26:05 1992 Subject: Re: ... And Speaking of Entry Numbers ... > > By the way, has anyone heard any entry figures from Chicago? > > Indeed. Confirmed count of entries (actually logged in via database soft- ware): 505. There are likely an additional 20+ to be entered. We're reconciling all counts and sorting all entries into categories tomorrow evening at Goose Island, in preparation for this weekend's marathon. Judging sessions are booked for: Friday, April 10, 7-10 pm Saturday, April 11, 9 am-3 pm Sunday, April 12, 9 am- 5 pm with additional sessions after this weekend, if required. I'll have an update on Wednesday morning with final counts, category break- downs, # of judge commitments, etc. -------- Steve Hamburg Internet: stevie at spss.com SPSS Inc. Phone: 312/329-3445 Chicago, IL Fax: 312/329-3657 -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Wed Apr 8 13:29:02 1992 Subject: BJCP point for National Competitions I wish to clarify judging points for the National Competition. Judges receive two points for judging the first session and one half point for each additional session on different calendar days, upto a limit of three points. For National competitions different sites are treated as different events with reguard to the above limits. This means that for the AHA Nationals, someone judging first round in Boston, and second in Milwaukee, could receive upto three points for Boston and two for Milwaukee. Someone judging both Boston and San Francisco could receive upto three points for each site. This provision did apply in 1991, but some points may not have been recorded correctly. The administrator is going to check the records for all the BJCP judges that judged second round in Manchester, and correct the records of those who also judged first round. The judge lists for the first round sites will not be checked against each other. Anyone who judged first round at more than one site should contact: BJCP Administrator AHA PO Box 1679 Boulder CO 80306 (303) 447-0816 (303) 447-2825 fax -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Wed Apr 8 19:19:06 1992 Subject: Re: BJCP point for National Competitions The recent posting from Homer stated the judging points to be awarded for the various rounds at the nationals. I would like to know the rationale for awarding two points at the first session judged at a first round site, while only one-half point for subsequent sessions. At the San Francisco judging, there are three full Saturdays scheduled with morning and afternoon panels. It is just as much work for a judge to make the trip to the site and spend all day judging, whether he participates only one day or all three. The effort and importance of the event is the same each time. Why shouldn't the point award also be the same, i.e. two points for each day judged? It is my understanding that such a large undertaking as the SF rounds desperately need as many BJCP judges as they can get, yet this point system clearly discourages participation on more than one day. If I am mistaken here and there is actually a surplus of available judges, then this policy could at least encourage a broader participation, giving more people a chance to judge. Tom Altenbach -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Wed Apr 8 19:37:22 1992 Subject: Final Chicago Counts The final number of entries for the Chicago AHA regional is 540. The top categories in number of entries are (minimum 25 entries): Stout (can you believe it?), Porter, Bock, Fruit, Specialty, Brown, English Pale, Vienna, and Wheat. There are multiple entries (at least 3) in all categories. The top nine average about 32 entries per category, the rest about 13. At least 40 judges are expected over various portions of this weekend. -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Apr 9 11:21:26 1992 Subject: Re: BJCP point for National Competitions Well, since Tom Altenbach opened this up, I am going to throw in my $.02. I don't have a particular problem with the 3 point limit for the first round and I believe that the 2 points for the first session encourages participation as it should. My problem is with the 1/2 point per session on subsequent calendar days. In my case, I live about 80 miles from Boulder which makes going up for an evening judging session after work a major effort (3 hours of driving plus the time to judge a flight of beers). I know that last year others come from even further away for just the final weekend of judging; there were judges from New Mexico and even one from British Columbia. This is what I am planning on doing this year. I believe that if someone donates an entire weekend to the first round judging (probably 4 sessions) that they deserve the full 3 points instead of the 2 1/2 that they will receive with the current rules. The current point scheme favors judges that live near the judging locations. For example, a judge from Boulder can judge three evening sessions and get the full 3 points, but people who can only attend on the weekend may judge 4 sessions and only get 2 1/2 points... I mean 1/2 point difference isn't a big deal, but it doesn't seem quite fair to me. Dave Resch -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Apr 9 16:17:15 1992 Subject: Re: BJCP point for National Competitions Tom Altenbach mused: > The recent posting from Homer stated the judging points to be awarded > for the various rounds at the nationals. I would like to know the rationale > for awarding two points at the first session judged at a first round site, > while only one-half point for subsequent sessions. At the San Francisco > judging, there are three full Saturdays scheduled with morning and > afternoon panels. It is just as much work for a judge to make the trip > to the site and spend all day judging, whether he participates only one > day or all three. The effort and importance of the event is the same each > time. Why shouldn't the point award also be the same, i.e. two points for > each day judged? I've wondered that myself. The impact, naturally is greatest concerning the judges who travel the longest distance. Mike Kaperick, for example, came down to SF from the Tacoma area by train, and is hanging around California all week to judge in two sessions, for which he will be magnanimously rewarded with 25% more "pointage" than a single day would have earned. The usual pattern seems to be to grab 2/3 of the total available points for 1/3 the total possible cost, and hit a single session. It could be worse. Consider, for example, that San Francisco has three scheduled sessions, which according to the rules Jim detailed, yield exactly the three point maximum first-round award. What about Boston, where scheduling difficulties with their host brewery mandated many sessions? After three of those sessions, judges are in it "for free". > If I am mistaken here and there is actually a surplus of available judges, > then this policy could at least encourage a broader participation, giving > more people a chance to judge. You are not mistaken at all, Tom. We need not only lots of judges, but the RIGHT judges, judges who are qualified to judge classes they haven't entered in. This is especially tough in the case of meads. The first session at Anchor was, IMHO, a resounding success. The second is next Saturday, 11 April, and the last on 25 April. Judges? If you haven't talked with Brook Ostrom, call me or send me email ... Martin Lodahl, Site Judge Director = Martin A. Lodahl Pacific*Bell Systems Analyst = = malodah at pbmoss.Pacbell.COM Sacramento, CA 916.972.4821 = = If it's good for ancient Druids, runnin' nekkid through the wuids, = = Drinkin' strange fermented fluids, it's good enough for me! 8-) = -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Apr 9 16:19:37 1992 Subject: Re: BJCP point for National Competitions I agree with Dave Resch that the current system is not fair to out-of-town judges. I was one of three guys that drove up from Los Alamos, NM to Boulder last year. (I'll be there again this year!) We judged four sessions, on two days, and got 2.5 points. Believe me, judging four sessions in two days is not as easy as it sounds (I judged 13*4 = 52 beers). It is a 350-mile (one-way) trip, and I take a day of vacation when I do it. It does seem that there is preferential treatment towards the guys that live in Boulder and can go to one session per day for three days and bag their limit in points. My solution, you ask? Only a minor change in the rules would correct the problem. Drop the "on different calendar days" part. Leave in the 3-point max, the 2-point first session and .5-point per additional session parts. After all, judging a flight of beers does the same amount of good for the competition no matter how many other sessions have been judged that day. Now, don't get me wrong --- the reason I go to Boulder is that I *LIKE* it. I think that the experience of judging with people that have more expertise than I do is very valuable. I also like to visit all the brewpubs in the area in my spare time...and I do make a vacation of sorts out of the trip. Sadly, two of us are not going to make it this year (the Los Alamos beer judging team consists of Gordon Olson, Geoff Reeves, and Mike Hall). I look forward to sharing a beer (or 50) with the Boulder folks this weekend. Mike Hall hall at lanl.gov -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Apr 9 16:20:09 1992 Subject: More Miscellania from Chicago.. Judging assignments for the AHA Chicago regional have been figured out. Anyone who wants his/her assignment(s) and schedule can contact me (net address and phone below) or Ray Daniels (312/871-1832). Some interesting stats, courtesy of Mr. Daniels: - 542 beers will be judged - 48 judges will participate in first-round judging. 44 are BJCP partici- pants. The breakdown by rating is: 1 Master 1 National 15 Certified 27 Recognized - over four judging sessions, 51 two- and three-judge teams have been assigned - 82% of the teams include a judge rated Certified or higher - all 23 judges who expressed category preferences were assigned to at least one of their preferences - of the 111 judge assignments, 48 matched a judge with one of their preferred categories - 95% of all judge assignments match judges with categories that they prefer or felt qualified to judge ------ Steve Hamburg Internet: stevie at spss.com SPSS Inc. Phone: 312/329-3445 Chicago, IL Fax: 312/329-3657 -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Thu Apr 9 23:33:19 1992 Subject: Re: BJCP point for National Competitions gee, people actually questioning the wisdom of the BJCP?? A few years back I had brought up similar questions about the system for awarding points to judges at various levels of competition (this was on the HBD). I agree that this system of awards does not serve the new system of tiered competitions well. Let's push for a better system. JaH -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Fri Apr 10 14:24:44 1992 Subject: Re: BJCP point for National Competitions The limit of three points was created because the points for multiple sessions was seen as a benefit only for judges in one geographical area. When I proposed this by-law change, in 1989, I suggested 2 points for the first session, 1 for additional with a limit of 7 total. I also suggested points for multiple session large regionals. The committee cut down the National points and took out the large regional points. Now that there are several sites judging the first round, maybe the committee will see things differently. The limit of one session per calendar day was created due to horror stories about marathons of judges judging 50 beers in one day, at a large regional. Now that I have judged several two day session, I can see changing the limit to two sessions in a day. I will have placed one the agenda of the next committee meeting (June) the points for National Competitions. I will recommend that the total limit of points be expanded, and the limit of one session per day be changed to two. I will also suggest that any changes be effective April 1, 1992. For this to work the judge directors have to have better record keeping than was previously required. I expect Russ will see this, and hopefully change his judge records if needed. Since the Chicago and Boston judge directors are not on the net, can someone tell them? Note that my recommendations do not assure passing, about half of my suggestions are enacted. Jim Homer Co-Director BJCP -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Fri Apr 10 16:10:07 1992 Subject: Re: BJCP point for National Competitions Jim Homer sez: > For this to work the judge directors have to have better record keeping > than was previously required. I expect Russ will see this, and hopefully > change his judge records if needed. Well, first of all, Russ shouldn't be blamed for my kvetching. All my fault! And I'd like to hear more about record keeping changes: how detailed would you like? We can presently provide data on who judged what style, on what day, how many sessions, and how many entries. We'd have to review the scoresheets to compile a listing of which beers were evaluated by which judge. As the one who'll probably put that report together I'm ready to meet just about any requirement, but I'd like to know what that requirement is likely to be, worst case. And I have to say, I _very_ much appreciated your immediate response to the issue, and the insight you provided into the present system. Thanks! - Martin = Martin A. Lodahl Pacific*Bell Systems Analyst = = malodah at pbmoss.Pacbell.COM Sacramento, CA 916.972.4821 = = If it's good for ancient Druids, runnin' nekkid through the wuids, = = Drinkin' strange fermented fluids, it's good enough for me! 8-) = -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Mon Apr 13 11:45:29 1992 Subject: Re: BJCP point for National Competitions >Well, first of all, Russ shouldn't be blamed for my kvetching. All my fault! I intended no criticism of anyone for discussing BJCP policy. >And I'd like to hear more about record keeping changes: how detailed would you like? A list of who judged each session and the date of each session should be sufficient. Jim Homer BJCP Co-Director -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Mon Apr 13 20:18:28 1992 Subject: beer score sheet suggestions Having just completed three days of judging at the Midwest Regionals, I have a few suggestions that, I feel, would make the score sheets better. The way that I have been using the sheets, is to put a number next to the "sub-section" that I am judging at the moment. For example: This, of course, is what the current Bouquet/Aroma section of a blank sheet looks like: Max Score BOUQUET/AROMA (as appropriate for style) 10 _______ Malt (3) Other Fermentation Hops (3) Characteristics (4) Comments __________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ And this is an example of how it looks after I fill it out: Max Score BOUQUET/AROMA (as appropriate for style) 10 ___7___ Malt (3) 2 Other Fermentation Hops (3) 3 Characteristics (4) 2 Comments _malt aroma could be stronger; no hop bouquet -- ideal _for style; sherrylike/wet-cardboard smell (caused by oxidation: _be careful to not splash or otherwise aerate the beer after _fermentation is complete)_________________________________ Note that I've taken off 1 for low malt aroma and 2 more for the oxidation. I like the "Other Fermentation Characteristics" in the BOUQUET/AROMA section which is obviously there for esters, clove aroma, etc., and I also use this area to mark off for off-smells (sour, oxidized, DMS, diacetyl, etc.) but there is no comparable "sub-section" in the FLAVOR section. Here are my suggestions for forms in the future: 1. Change "Other Fermentation Characteristics" to "Other Aromatic Characteristics" in the BOUQUET/AROMA section. [Many aromatic components (like oxidation, DMS, yeasty smells, etc.) are not products of fermentation.] 2. Add an "Other Flavor Characteristics" to the FLAVOR section. [Let's face it, virtually no style is just malt & hops.] 3. Change "Conditioning" to "Carbonation/Conditioning" in the FLAVOR section (as in the back of TNCJoHB), to help the brewer understand this area better." Maybe the FLAVOR section could then read: FLAVOR (as appropriate for style) 19 _____________ Malt (3) Other Flavor Characteristics (4) Hops (3) Carbonation/Conditioning (2) Balance (4) Aftertaste (3) Note that this addition would be all that more powerful if we switched to a 100 point system, thereby doubling the accuracy available to the judge in each "sub-section." I imagine this suggestion may attract some debate, if after which the consensus is that this is a good idea, maybe Jim could propose it at the June meeting. Al. -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Tue Apr 14 11:24:37 1992 Subject: Re: beer score sheet suggestions Al's idea about some changes to the current AHA score sheet deserve some consideration. However (and I could be wrong about this, Jim can correct me if I am), the BJCP has no control over the score sheets that competitions use. It is entirely up to the local organizer. That is why Russ's people can still use the 20 point system, the AHA's and HWBTA's point breakdowns are different, and why Dwight was able to give the 100 pt system a go in Ithaca with no flak from the AHA. In other words, Jim can't propose the changes you have suggested at the June BJCP meeting. The people to discuss this with would be the AHA and HWBTA, since most competitions use the score sheet that is provided to them. Should you wish to discuss this with Charlie P., his address is 72210.2754 at compuserve.com Does anyone know who the current president of the HWBTA is? Steve -------------------------------------- From JudgeNet Tue Apr 14 12:05:11 1992 Subject: Re: beer score sheet suggestions while your suggestions are valid, I think that many judges start off working in this manner, and after judging for a while no longer break points down. My personal experience is that I used to judge in this manner, but now I no longer break down points within a section, I am able to do the assignment of points on a section without this breakdown. Now I find that breaking down the points in this manner makes scoring much slower and typically the score I wish to assign for a section is often not the straight sum of the points awarded to each subsection. While this may work fine for many judges, the heart of the debate about score sheets was based on many other considerations. JaH --------------------------------------