Return-Path: listadm at synchro.com Received: from srvr8.engin.umich.edu (root at srvr8.engin.umich.edu [141.212.2.81]) by srvr5.engin.umich.edu (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA09214 for ; Sun, 25 Feb 1996 06:16:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from truelies.rs.itd.umich.edu (truelies.rs.itd.umich.edu [141.211.83.38]) by srvr8.engin.umich.edu (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA28091 for ; Sun, 25 Feb 1996 04:40:07 -0500 (EST) Received: by truelies.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.1/2.2) with X.500 id EAA28911; Sun, 25 Feb 1996 04:40:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from uu6.psi.com by truelies.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.1/2.2) with SMTP id EAA28906; Sun, 25 Feb 1996 04:40:04 -0500 (EST) Received: by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA12996 for ; Sun, 25 Feb 96 04:21:05 -0500 Received: (from listadm at localhost) by synchro.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA00410 for judge-recipients at synchro.com; Sun, 25 Feb 1996 01:10:01 -0500 Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 01:10:01 -0500 Message-Id: <199602250610.BAA00410 at synchro.com> To: judge-recipients at synchro.com (JudgeNet Recipients) From: judge-owner at synchro.com (JudgeNet Administrator) Reply-To: judge at synchro.com (JudgeNet) Errors-To: judge-error at synchro.com Precedence: bulk Subject: JudgeNet Digest #1220 (Feb 24, 1996) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ JudgeNet Digest #1220 Sat 24 Feb 1996 JudgeNet The Beer Judge Digest digest submissions: judge at synchro.com administrative requests: judge-request at synchro.com send cancellations & rank updates to the administrative address messages sent to the wrong address will be ignored WWW Archives: http://www.umich.edu/~spencer/beer/judge Editor: Chuck Cox Archivist: Spencer Thomas Publishers: SynchroSystems and the Riverside Garage & Brewery Anti-Prohibitionists may also be interested in LiBeerty: The Libertarian Beer Digest Subscription info: libeerty-request at synchro.com For BJCP General Information contact: geninfo at bjcp.synchro.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Contents: BJCP Competition Recognition: Is it Worth It? ("JOHN A. JR. CARLSON ") Continuing Education (Tom Leith) Re: Judging Point Awards (Jim Dipalma) BJCP Competition Recognition: Is it Worth It? (fwd) ("JOHN A. JR. CARLSON ") BoS judging (Jerry Macala) Judging skill (Norman Dickenson) difficult to brew, who cares? (919) 405-3632" Help! Study guide for MAC (WALZENBREW) Competition Announcement (Greg Holton) Judging Points (FermEdit) Difficulty of brewing?? (Spencer W Thomas) Re: Difficulty of Brewing (Jeff Frane) 5th ann. New York City Spring Regional Homebrew Competition (Ken ) Call for Judges (Ken ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 13:49:08 -0700 (MST) From: "JOHN A. JR. CARLSON " Subject: BJCP Competition Recognition: Is it Worth It? Recently I organized the 7th Annual Reggale & Dredhop Competition for my Boulder based club Hop Barley & the Aler's. We had a web site and drew around 190 entries. This was a good turn out for us and the event went pretty smooth. I sanctioned with AHA ($25.00) and recognized with BJCP ($20.00). I got a nice package from AHA complete with master shore sheet forms, etc. To me it was worth the $25.00. >From the BJCP I got a HWBTA July 9, 1994 competition guide and a set of 1994 AHA style guidelines. This was OK but was a some what out-dated version of what the AHA sent. The BJCP homepage was outstanding! I was able to download some forms and even register online. This was very nice. I filed an organizer report with both the AHA and the BJCP and paid an additional $42.00 to the BJCP for point recordation of all who participated (judges, stewards, etc.). Total cost for BJCP recognition came to $62.00 the same for the AHA would have been $40.00. Was it worth it? At this point, I think so because the BJCP program needs a revenue stream, and the judges want their points recorded. Would I recognize again with BJCP? I am not sure. I think we need to re-evaluate the point recordation fee and come up with a flat rate. The Dredhop lost money which was OK because we expected it would, however the competition (consumer) should get some value for it's expenditure and I feel a dollar per point is a poor price structure and should be changed to some sort of flat fee. I am interested to see how other organizers have gone about this and what their feelings are on the subject. - --jcarlson ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 08:40:18 -0600 (CST) From: Tom Leith Subject: Continuing Education Lee Bussy wrote: >I'll tell you one thing that we might consider... continuing >education for judges. It would have to be optional of course and >since it would cost, it would have to have a small fee attatched. I've been thinking about something along the same lines. What if we could contract with one of those mail-order beer companies to ship three beers of *our* choosing each month. Such a company should be in a pretty good position to import small quantities of not-normally-available beer for us as well. We could have a panel of master-rank judges judge the beers, and send around some kind of composite scoresheet the next month. We could also gather statistics from the membership at large to be used for comparison purposes. To do this, we'd probably have to contract also with some kind of testing company to deal with the scoresheets, data-entry, reduction, and so forth. I can see this costing maybe $50 a month or so. Ths cost could be spread among four or five participants though -- by getting a few of your brew-buddies to join you in the program. It wouldn't be perfect of course, but I think it could be VERY good, at least with respect to classic styles, and the more popular contemporary styles. If we require perfection before we begin, we'll never do anything. Tim Dawson's new guidelines have commercial examples for many of the styles. Can we come up with 3 - 6 examples for each style, and get agreement on how they cover the range as described for purposes of competition? Its OK if some examples are not generally available, or available in the US at all so long as there's some small chance of being able to import it directly somehow. (ie: it must be for sale in bottles). Of course, I guess we should get agreement about whether we're going to use Tim's guidelines at all 8-) Personally, I like them, and think he's done a great job. Its just possible they'll be used at a major regional competition in St. Louis this year... Anyhow, who'd be up for something like this? t ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Feb 96 11:22:12 EST From: dipalma at sky.com (Jim Dipalma) Subject: Re: Judging Point Awards Hi All, In JudgeNet #1219, Martin Manning writes: >Here's my put: Fundamentally, the experience that a judge gains is directly >proportional to the number of beers (s)he judges in a competition setting. Agreed. >The current system has points awarded on a per competition basis, with extra >points given for number of entries, or "regional" or "national" status of the >competition. These provisions are, I believe, based on the assumption that >increased point awards are necessary to attract a sufficient quantity of >judges to the larger competitions. The current system is flawed in that it awards "experience" points without taking into account the amount of actual judging experience gained by an individual at a given competition. >A points-per-beer-judged system... >and it would give fair compensation to judges who, >for whatever reason, had to judge a large number of beers at any one >competition. There's any number of reasons why this occurs. We're all aware that one of the problems caused by "no-show" judges is that it increases the workload for the judges who do show. At a local competition a few years ago, I judged 35 beers in one day, because fully half of the judges committed did not show. For this, I recieved 1 point. At the 1995 Bock is Best club-only, we had to pre-judge the Helles bocks the night before the competition, in order to get the number of entries down to a manageable size for the number of judges who had committed. I judged 12 Helles bocks the night before, an additional 24 dopplebocks the next day. 36 beers judged over a two day period, for which I received 0.5 points, because the current system sez 0.5 points for competitions with less than 75 entries (we had 68). At the World Homebrew competition held in Boston last November, there were over 1650 entries recieved. I judged on Sunday only, 12 beers in the morning flight, another 12 in the afternoon, which I think we'd all agree is pretty standard. I got the same 1 point as those who stuck around and judged an additional flight held before the BOS round. Clearly, there is no correlation between the number of entries at a competition and the amount of judging actually performed, so why are experience points awarded on that basis?? I agree with Martin that a more accurate measure of experience is the number of beers actually judged in a competition setting. >So, I propose that the BJCP simply award one point for each completed score >sheet. The only problem I have with this is that it would skew the point totals for judges currently in the program. I suggest perhaps 1 point for each 12-15 beers, or some such. In this way, a judge who does the typical 20-25 beers still earns a point, but those who judge >30 beers a day, for whatever reason, recieve an additional point. Cheers, Jim dipalma at sky.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 10:09:03 -0700 (MST) From: "JOHN A. JR. CARLSON " Subject: BJCP Competition Recognition: Is it Worth It? (fwd) Recently I organized the 7th Annual Reggale & Dredhop Competition for my Boulder based club Hop Barley & the Aler's. We had a web site and drew around 190 entries. This was a good turn out for us and the event went pretty smooth. I sanctioned with AHA ($25.00) and recognized with BJCP ($20.00). I got a nice package from AHA complete with master shore sheet forms, etc. To me it was worth the $25.00. >From the BJCP I got a HWBTA July 9, 1994 competition guide and a set of 1994 AHA style guidelines. This was OK but was a some what out-dated version of what the AHA sent. The BJCP homepage was outstanding! I was able to download some forms and even register online. This was very nice. I filed an organizer report with both the AHA and the BJCP and paid an additional $42.00 to the BJCP for point recordation of all who participated (judges, stewards, etc.). Total cost for BJCP recognition came to $62.00 the same for the AHA would have been $40.00. Was it worth it? At this point, I think so because the BJCP program needs a revenue stream, and the judges want their points recorded. Would I recognize again with BJCP? I am not sure. I think we need to re-evaluate the point recordation fee and come up with a flat rate. The Dredhop lost money which was OK because we expected it would, however the competition (consumer) should get some value for it's expenditure and I feel a dollar per point is a poor price structure and should be changed to some sort of flat fee. I am interested to see how other organizers have gone about this and what their feelings are on the subject. - --jcarlson ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 10:53:23 -0700 (MST) From: norac at primenet.com (Jerry Macala) Subject: BoS judging "Thomas W. Ausfeld" wrote: >Here's the scenario: > >You're judging a BoS, it is narrowed down to three beers: >#1 - Stout category - Guiness >#2 - Dopplebock - Celebrator >#3 - Pilsener - Pilsener Urquell > >Who Wins???? I'm curious to the response. IMVHO, I feel that This one's easy- The Guinness will always win! ; ) Mmmm, gotta love that Guinness . . . -Jerry Macala (Immediate Past) President- Maltose Falcons Home Brewing Society 1994 Anchor Home Brew Club of the Year! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 10:04:59 -0700 From: Norman Dickenson Subject: Judging skill Subject: Time: 8:11 AM OFFICE MEMO Judging skill Date: 2/23/96 In issue # 1219, Martin Manning sez: >.........a high rank can be attained with relatively little >real experience. >Considering this, one shouldn't wonder how it can be >that, in the current system, one can find a highly ranked >judge who really isn't all that good at judging. At face value, this seems a rational enough conclusion. But, I wouldn't underestimate the value of the exam. To obtain that "high" ranking, the judge must demonstrate in-depth knowledge of styles and brewing science. Additionally, he/she must demonstrate the ability to properly evaluate and provide feedback on four beers. True, this somewhat selective sampling of a persons skills and abilities alone doesn't make for a good judge. The knowledge and experience needed to be a truly great judge takes years of study and practice to obtain, IMHO. On the other hand, I've known judges who have been plying the craft for years and still don't understand the fundamentals of many styles and who are reluctant to score down a very tasty beer even though it has major style flaws (back to the big beer flame war). They are in the "comparison" mode whereby the out-of-style beer was such a welcome relief after having taste buds assaulted by rankly incipid entries. It doesn't seem to matter that they have an in-depth written description of the style in front of them. Rome wasn't built in a day, and the amount and distribution of judging points is being reviewed by the BJCP Competition Committee. There may be some changes in the near future. Perhaps there is no doable solution to having highly ranked judges with mediocre or less judging skills walking the streets. I would suspect, though, that we're talking about a relatively low number of persons. I would be more concerned about the flights staffed only by apprentice, recognized or the infamous "others". I've judged a flight with another National judge when other flights in the competition had no National or Master or professional brewers as judges (and by the way, being a professional brewer by itself in no way establishes that person as learned in other styles). Part of the learning process is discussing the beers being judged with more skilled/experienced judges. >A points-per-beer-judged system would also encourage >organizers to even out the judging load,........ Yes, until the organizer has to seat judges to flights of 8 stouts and 14 pale ales. This could lead to manipulation or resentment. >I think it does still make sense to impose a limit on the >number of points awarded for any one day's effort, simply >due to limits on the amount of alcohol one's body can process. I would consider my taste buds shot long before alcohol is a factor. I have judged three flights in one day (morning- afternoon-evening). This is brutal, but sometimes organizers have no choice due to a dearth of judges. >I would also question the point awards for best-of-show >judging, which should be no greater than for judging an >equal number of beers in categories. This seems to be a >case of the rich getting richer, as BOS judges are generally >well along in the program, otherwise they wouldn't be selected >to serve on the panel. I'm glad you brought this up. Yes, it does seem that BOS judges are very richly compensated. And,I think that many many BOS judges could care less about the points earned. Either they already have all the points they need for whatever rank they covet, or they are professional brewers or beer writers not in the program. I am all for organizers including an up and coming judge on the BOS panel (and the Belgian panel) in sort of an apprentice role. How about recommending that every BOS panel include at least one person who has never served on a BOS panel? It is very difficult, though, to dictate to organizers. The more rules there are, the more policemen are needed. -norman- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Feb 96 13:20:36 EST From: "George Danz (919) 405-3632" Subject: difficult to brew, who cares? I agreed with Tom Ausfeld in the latest post, beer should be judged on its taste/flavor, aroma, mouthfeel, and its visual appeal. We don't drink difficulty. We don't dislike BudMillOors because it was easy or difficult to brew... we dislike it because it was made cheaply at the expense of flavor, aroma and mouthfeel. If it truly takes a triple decoction to make a good czech pilsener then so be it. The brewer accepts that when he makes that kind of beer. If someone down the road can duplicate it in every way and is so clever that he can >win with it, wonderful, I say. We all get to win, because when he gives>out the recipe, the art of brewing may have been advanced. The goal to >winning, I thought, was to produce the best beer that matches best the style>to which you are brewing. If it is difficult to do that, so what? That's MHO. Best Regards, George Danz Apprentice Brew Judge (hoping to soon be 'certified') ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 13:37:17 -0500 From: WALZENBREW at aol.com Subject: Help! Study guide for MAC I recently posted my BJCP Exam study guide on the TRASH home page. However, been getting a lot of comments from MAC users that they are having problems downloading/translating the WP 5.1 for PC format into one they can use. I don't have a MAC or know anybody who does. Anybody out there willing and able to translate the Guide into a zipped MAC word processor format? Send the file to me at WALZENBREW at aol.com and I'll make sure it gets on the TRASH home page. Thanks in advance.. Cheers, Greg Walz ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 14:00:00 -0500 (EST) From: greg at kgn.ibm.com (Greg Holton) Subject: Competition Announcement The Hudson Valley Homebrewers,inc will host their 6th Annual Homebrew Competition on Sat. March 30th at River Station Restaurant, 25 Main St. Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 This competition is participating in the New York State Homebrewer of the Year award Judges and stewards are needed! For more information, visit our web site: http://alpha.rollanet.org/~hvhb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 15:06:16 -0500 From: FermEdit at aol.com Subject: Judging Points At our beer club's Oktoberfest (Arizona Society of Homebrewers) competition I was paired with a very experienced judge, and we went through the beers efficiently. The two of us judged 7 categories, probably 30 beers. I felt like I worked very hard (and learned a lot) for my measly 0.5 experience points. By contrast, at the Arizona State Fair I judged with two other judges, tasted a third as many beers, learned less and got the same number of points. I would like to cast my vote for the one-beer-one -point system! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 15:54:27 -0500 From: Spencer W Thomas Subject: Difficulty of brewing?? At least one message today alluded to the difficulty of brewing a pLambic. Ironically, in today's Lambic digest, Tom Ayres writes: Tom> [My] first -- an all-extract beer fermented with Tom> Boon/Cantillon slurry followed by Wyeast 1056, aged four Tom> months in a carboy scecondary on oak chips -- actually scored Tom> a blue ribbon in the Western New England Competition in Tom> December. Scary -- it was the easiest brew I've made in Tom> years, by far. =Spencer ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 13:47:27 -0800 From: jfrane at teleport.com (Jeff Frane) Subject: Re: Difficulty of Brewing Steve Casselman wrote: >I don't buy into the "more difficult to brew" tie breaker argument >because beer is art. It is like saying "painting #1 wins because >it has more colors" Flip the coin does not really turn me on >either. I think a judge must bite the bullet and find a difference. >if the score is 48 to 48 then go to the next level 48.6 to 48.6? >Try harder, there is always *something*. In a BOS you have other >judges to talk to (although some just talk at:) Unlike other >rounds of judging is a cooperative event. You should make it >work with as little randomness a possible. > And Fred Hardy wrote: > >Sorry, Al, it just won't do. If you want to champion "more difficult to >make" as a basis of elimination, help us less exhalted judges by >providing a scale we can at least discuss. If it has merit, such a scale >would go a long way towards quantifying what is usually a subjective >judgement. > The "More Difficult to Make" ruling is one of the more irritating irrelevancies that I've encountered in judging. Having been napping through a lot of Judgenet Digests lately, I'm not sure whether Fred is serious about his list or not, or whether it's simply a rhetorical device. I suppose, though, that the end result of developing such a list would be a system of handicapping. You know, automatically knocking 6 points off a pale ale because it's so *easy* to brew; maybe 2 points off a doppelbock; add 12 points if it's a lambic. Sound ridiculous? I don't brew pale ales because they're easy, I brew them because I like to drink them. I put at least as much effort into brewing each one as I do when I brew a weizen, an altbier, or a pre-Prohibition Pennsylvania lager. As a brewer, I have as much respect for the lads at Marston's as I do the monks at Rochefort; I'd never think to suggest one group was working harder than the other. Not to mention that I, for one, have no interest in relinquishing my judgment and tastebuds to *anyone*; I don't care whether it's a Master judge or some one on their first round ever. I've seen enough evidence to assure me that achieving high status in judging is no guarantee of either a palate or good sense, and certainly not enough guarantee for me to waive my own. As Steve notes, there's certainly room for discussion during BOS judging and a Master judge's opinion counts as much as anyone on the panel -- but only if he/she is *on* the panel, tasting *those* beers. - --Jeff Frane ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 19:13:16 -0500 From: kbjohns at escape.com (Ken ) Subject: 5th ann. New York City Spring Regional Homebrew Competition Following is the info packet for the NYCSH Comp. Please load it to your word processor & print out. Xs indicate page breaks for entry forms etc. Additional info can be found on our web page URL http://www.wp.com/HOSI HOMEBREWERS OF STATEN ISLAND 5th. Annual NEW YORK CITY SPRING REGIONAL HOMEBREW COMPETITION Sunday, March 24, 1996 - 10:00 A.M. CAROL'S PUB 1571 Richmond Rd. Staten Island, New York 10304 ORGANIZER Frank Salt (718) 984-0373, eves. Msg. 718 667-4459 Fax 718-987-3942 E-mail kbjohns at escape.com The fifth annual New York City Spring Regional Homebrew Competition will take place on Sunday, March 24th., at Carol's. The competition is sanctioned by both the AHA and BJCP and sponsored by the Homebrewers of Staten Island. All judging will take place at Carol's. Judging will begin promptly at 10:00 am. The first round judging will be a closed session. Best of show judging will take place, after a lunch break, at 2:00 p.m. and will be open to the public. Party to follow, call for details. Last years competition brought 157 entries. This year we are expecting a minimum of 200. As we are in the middle of brewing season most brewers should have a number of entries. Carol's is located 3 miles south of the Staten Island Expressway. Take the Richmond Road (not Richmond Ave.) exit. If you need directions please contact Frank Salt at 718-948-0373 or Ken Johnsen at 718- 667-4459S.N.Y.S.R. Additional information can be found at the HOSI web site URL http://www.wp.com/HOSI XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ____________________________________________________________________________ COMPETITION RULES: 1. ELIGIBILITY: The competition is open to all homebrewers. Beer must be brewed at home. 2. ALL AHA recognized categories, with sub categories, will be judged. Categories with sub-categories will be set under 6 classes. Based on past experience we anticipate combining categories as shown in the attached sheet. Categories with less than 6 entries will be collapsed according to AHA/BJCP procedures. Sub-categories with 6 or more entries may, at the discretion of the organizer, be judged as a separate category. To insure proper placement, please include as much information about your entries as possible. 3. NUMBER of entries: Brewers may enter more than one beer per category provided it is a different recipe. Each entry must be clearly identified and labeled. 4. BOTTLES: Brewers must submit three 7 - 16 oz., plain brown or green glass bottles. No labels or identifying marks. Plain gold caps are preferred. Other caps must be completely blacked out. Grolsch bottles will be accepted. 5. ENTRY fee is $5.00 per entry. For five or more entries the fee for all entries drops to $4.00 per entry. (if you enter 4 or 5 beers cost is $20.00). Entries beyond ten (10) are free. For entries received after Thursday March 21st. the entry fee is $6.00 per entry regardless of number. Paper work must be in (faxed, mailed) prior to the 24th. Make checks payable to Frank Salt. 6. DEADLINE for entries sent to East Coast is Thursday March 21st. Entries will be accepted after March 1, 1995. Entries will be accepted on the day of the copetition PROVIDED ALL PAPER WORK IS RECEIVED BY THE 23rd. AND ENTRIES ARRIVE BY 9:00 AM 7. REGISTRATION forms must be attached, with a rubber band, no tape, to all bottles. Recipes must be included on the entry form in case there is a question as to category. Winning recipes may be published, with credit given to the brewer. 8. SEND entries, adressed to HOSI Comp, by UPS, or bring to East Coast Brewing Supply. It is legal to send beer for evaluations. Identify contents as non perishable food. Pack carefully. Include a self addressed stamped envelope to receive a rapid return of results. Main Drop-off East Coast Brewing Supply 124 Jacques Ave. Staten Island, New York 10306. Phn (718) 667-4459, Fax (718) 987-3942 Other Drop-off points. (Entries must be dropped off by Wed. Mar. 20th.for Thurs. pick-up) The Home Brewery 56 W. Main St. Bogota, N.J 07603 201-525-1833 Hop & Vine 11 DeHart St Morristown, N.J 07960 201-993-3191 Red Bank Brewing Supply 67 Monmouth St Red Bank. N.J. 07708 908-842-7507 Little Shop of Hops 9 E. 37th. St./79 New St. New York, N.Y. 10018 212-704-4248/952-4374 Brews Brothers at Kedco 564 Smith St. Farmingdale, N.Y. 11735 (516) 454-7800 SIMTAC 15 Colton Rd. East Lime, Ct. 06333 (203) 739-3609 U-Brew Co 319 1/2 Milburn Ave Milburn, N.J. 07041 (201) 376-0963 10. PRIZES will be awarded for Best of Show, as well as 1st. and 2nd. runners-up. Prizes will also be awarded to 1st. place winners of each category. We currently have committments for $500.00 in prizes and are making efforts to secure additional prizes. All 1st. 2nd. and 3rd. place category winners will be also be awarded a certificate. Please support the following businesses which donated prizes: East Coast Brewing Supply 124 Jacques Ave. Staten Island, N.Y. 10306 718-667-4459 The Home Brewery 56 W. Main St. Bogota, N.J. 07603 201-525-1833 U-Brew Co.319 1/2 Milburn AveMilburn, N.J. 07041 201-376-0963 Zip City Brewing Co. 3 W. 18th. St. New York, N.Y. 10011 212-366-6333 Mugs Ale House 125 Bedford Ave. Brooklyn, N.Y. 11211 718-384-8494 Old World Brewing Co. 2070 Victory Blvd Staten Island, N.Y. 10314 718-370-0551 Hop & Vine 11 DeHart St Morristown, N.J. 07960 201-993-3191 Adobe Blues Restaurant 63 Lafayette Ave Staten Island, N.Y. 10301 718-720-2583 11. For further information or questions, contact: Frank Salt, (718) 948-0373 or (781) 667-4459 (can leave message). Ken, Internet Catalogs at: Precision Brewing Systems URL http://www.wp.com/hosi/pbscat.html East Coast Brewing Supply URL http://virtumall.com/EastCoastBrewing/ECBMain.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 19:13:22 -0500 From: kbjohns at escape.com (Ken ) Subject: Call for Judges 5th. Annual NEW YORK CITY SPRING REGIONAL HOMEBREW COMPETITION The Homebrewers of Staten Island will sponsor their 5th. annual competition on Sun March 24, 1996 at 10:00 am. We expect at least 180 entries, based on past years number of entries. Based on this projection we will need 36 judges and 18 stewards. There will be one round of judging, complimentary lunch and a second round as required. Best of Show will be judged immediately thereafter. A party at at the SILL hall will follow the event. We will have a keg of New York Harbor Ale donated by Old World Brewing Comany, as well as tastings of the winning entries. Food will be provided JUDGE REQUIREMENTS Only current AHA/BJCP qualified judges will be allowed to judge. AHA/BJCP experience points will be awarded on an as available basis. Judges and stewards should make advance registration with Frank Salt. Preference will be given to judges who make early reservations. As the date of the competition approaches preference will be given to more experienced judges. Judges and stewards must report, no later than 9:15 am to guarantee their spot. A judge registration/waiver must be signed or points will not be submitted. Judges and stewards will be required to finish all entries not consumed at the competition at a party following the competition. REGISTRATION To register as a judge or steward, fill out a registration form (request via email e-mail, and please copy it to your word processor on one sheet) and send, the signed form, via mail to: Frank Salt, Competition Organizer 131 Islington Ave. Staten Island, N.Y. 10306 Phn (718) 984-0373, Fax (718)-987-3942 E-mail kbjohns at escape.com You will not be contacted, unless there is a change of plan. Please view this as a commitment. We do understand that last minute problems may arise. If you find that you cannot keep this commitment, please contact us, no later than Friday March 22, in order that we can reassign judges. Ken, Internet Catalogs at: Precision Brewing Systems URL http://www.wp.com/hosi/pbscat.html East Coast Brewing Supply URL http://virtumall.com/EastCoastBrewing/ECBMain.html ------------------------------ End of JudgeNet Digest ************************ -------