Subject: Digest for the period 5/18/2003 - 5/19/2003 Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 01:03:28 -0400 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Re: Decongestants (Mike Dixon) 2. NHC 1st round, two bottles, ect (jack kephart) 3. Re: Digest for the period 5/16/2003 - 5/17/2003 (Mark Wilson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Dixon Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 08:28:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Decongestants > From: Hedglin, Nils A Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 11:25:40 -0700 > Subject: Decongestants >Unfortunately, I have a chronic > congestion problem that inhibits my judging ability. In the BJCP > guildlines, I noticed it recommended against taking decongestants > before > judging. What is the reason for that? Are any of the new products ok > (clariten, allegra, flonase, nascort)? I think the reasoning is certain decongestants an cause a loss of your sense of smell. Aromas that normally would be perceived one way can be sensed in a different way. As for the new products, Claritin is an allergy medication and I did not find it problematic for judging, although it's standard form is not a decongestant. I switched for other reasons to Alavert. It is still not a decongestant, but I have no side effects with it... Just find one that works consistently for you and does not affect your abilities as a judge. My $0.02... Cheers, Mike Dixon Wake Forest, NC ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jack kephart Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 07:33:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: NHC 1st round, two bottles, ect Jay, I know for the 1st round East regional we tried to recap and re-fridge all potential entries from multiple table/flight categories for the "Mini-BOS" judging that determined the final placing (I believe this is standard 1st round procedure). I suppose you could argue that beers judged later in the flights "may" have a advantage in the mini-BOS due to sitting less time, but if they are recapped and kept cool I think this is negligible. As for John Tull's concerns about huge split flight categories being determined by the score assigned at different tables, that shouldn't happen. The process of avoiding this issue is precicley why we are having the current debate about the 1st round judging procedures. We had several categories where the highest scoring entry in a given flight did not place 1st in its category. In fact we had at least one category (that had a large no. of entries) where the highest scoring entry did not even place. Another where a the 3rd entry chosen for mini-BOS at one table ended up taking 1st. Even though the current format may seem flawed with one bottle I believe it still ensures the best beers are chosen when categories need to be split into multiple flights. The Mini-BOS format minimizes the scoring diversity from flight to flight that John is concerned with. I'm even in favor of judges going back and "reviewing" the top 3 or 4 entries in a single flight category to ensure the best entries placed relative to each other. This would take care of concerns some people have with scoring drift over the length of a single flight. Unfortunately it would also lead to another recent topic of concern, length of judging sessions. Two bottles for the 1st round makes sense, I think most entrants would be in favor of this if it ensured the best entries won. It would also allow judges to have a second look at an obviously infected entry. Of course there is always a chance the good beer gets judged 1st and the infected bottle goes on to the mini-BOS.......its always gonna be something;-) Perhaps we can discuss this at the AHA members luncheon at the conference in June. (Ramble mode off) see those of you heading to Chi-town for the conference next month! Jack Kephart Society of Akron Area Zymurgists BrewRats "Experienced, and STILL not BJCP" __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mark Wilson Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 11:04:14 -0700 Subject: Re: Digest for the period 5/16/2003 - 5/17/2003 > I don't know whether doubling the bottle storage would cause problems for any > of the First Round sites - and some people might complain about needing to > send an additional bottle on top of our 'high' entry fee, but then you can't > please everyone. At any rate, you've come up with a question worth > considering. It's extra work, but would improve the quality of the tasteoffs, especially for the lighter beers, i.e. this year we had 30 german light lagers. Hard to get a fair taste-off between those three flights! The main extra work I see is: doubles the storage space required Makes entry processing quite a bit more difficult. Now you have to locate both bottles that are the same and tag them with the same number. This is _MUCH_ easier with one bottle. For sites that accept entries at one place and judge at another, it's now two pickup trucks worth of beer. More expensive to ship the beer; AHA receives a lot more shipped entries than your run-of-the-mill comp. It's a tradeoff; as a past entrant, I like only having to give up one bottle for the first round. But the quality of the taste-offs would definitely be improved by two bottles. I'm not sure if having one bottle is a bigger variable than say, judge quality variation, judge preferences (especially in wide-open categories like mead, specialty, etc.), or tasting order. > > Another huge problem is that large categories are split and placement > is given based on scores. Scores are great, but they vary tremendously > from table to table (my 38 may be the next table's 45). This is not the case. In split flights, placements are assigned based on the tasteoff, not score. Judges send 1, 2, or 3 beers depending on the quality of their flight (usually 2) Since the flights were so huge this year I received LOTS of questions about this from entrants. I don't think any beer got beat by another by a spread of more than 5 points, though. -Mark Wilson AHA Northwest Region Organizer ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** Subject: Digest for the period 5/18/2003 - 5/19/2003 Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 01:03:28 -0400 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Re: Decongestants (Mike Dixon) 2. NHC 1st round, two bottles, ect (jack kephart) 3. Re: Digest for the period 5/16/2003 - 5/17/2003 (Mark Wilson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Dixon Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 08:28:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Decongestants > From: Hedglin, Nils A Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 11:25:40 -0700 > Subject: Decongestants >Unfortunately, I have a chronic > congestion problem that inhibits my judging ability. In the BJCP > guildlines, I noticed it recommended against taking decongestants > before > judging. What is the reason for that? Are any of the new products ok > (clariten, allegra, flonase, nascort)? I think the reasoning is certain decongestants an cause a loss of your sense of smell. Aromas that normally would be perceived one way can be sensed in a different way. As for the new products, Claritin is an allergy medication and I did not find it problematic for judging, although it's standard form is not a decongestant. I switched for other reasons to Alavert. It is still not a decongestant, but I have no side effects with it... Just find one that works consistently for you and does not affect your abilities as a judge. My $0.02... Cheers, Mike Dixon Wake Forest, NC ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jack kephart Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 07:33:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: NHC 1st round, two bottles, ect Jay, I know for the 1st round East regional we tried to recap and re-fridge all potential entries from multiple table/flight categories for the "Mini-BOS" judging that determined the final placing (I believe this is standard 1st round procedure). I suppose you could argue that beers judged later in the flights "may" have a advantage in the mini-BOS due to sitting less time, but if they are recapped and kept cool I think this is negligible. As for John Tull's concerns about huge split flight categories being determined by the score assigned at different tables, that shouldn't happen. The process of avoiding this issue is precicley why we are having the current debate about the 1st round judging procedures. We had several categories where the highest scoring entry in a given flight did not place 1st in its category. In fact we had at least one category (that had a large no. of entries) where the highest scoring entry did not even place. Another where a the 3rd entry chosen for mini-BOS at one table ended up taking 1st. Even though the current format may seem flawed with one bottle I believe it still ensures the best beers are chosen when categories need to be split into multiple flights. The Mini-BOS format minimizes the scoring diversity from flight to flight that John is concerned with. I'm even in favor of judges going back and "reviewing" the top 3 or 4 entries in a single flight category to ensure the best entries placed relative to each other. This would take care of concerns some people have with scoring drift over the length of a single flight. Unfortunately it would also lead to another recent topic of concern, length of judging sessions. Two bottles for the 1st round makes sense, I think most entrants would be in favor of this if it ensured the best entries won. It would also allow judges to have a second look at an obviously infected entry. Of course there is always a chance the good beer gets judged 1st and the infected bottle goes on to the mini-BOS.......its always gonna be something;-) Perhaps we can discuss this at the AHA members luncheon at the conference in June. (Ramble mode off) see those of you heading to Chi-town for the conference next month! Jack Kephart Society of Akron Area Zymurgists BrewRats "Experienced, and STILL not BJCP" __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mark Wilson Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 11:04:14 -0700 Subject: Re: Digest for the period 5/16/2003 - 5/17/2003 > I don't know whether doubling the bottle storage would cause problems for any > of the First Round sites - and some people might complain about needing to > send an additional bottle on top of our 'high' entry fee, but then you can't > please everyone. At any rate, you've come up with a question worth > considering. It's extra work, but would improve the quality of the tasteoffs, especially for the lighter beers, i.e. this year we had 30 german light lagers. Hard to get a fair taste-off between those three flights! The main extra work I see is: doubles the storage space required Makes entry processing quite a bit more difficult. Now you have to locate both bottles that are the same and tag them with the same number. This is _MUCH_ easier with one bottle. For sites that accept entries at one place and judge at another, it's now two pickup trucks worth of beer. More expensive to ship the beer; AHA receives a lot more shipped entries than your run-of-the-mill comp. It's a tradeoff; as a past entrant, I like only having to give up one bottle for the first round. But the quality of the taste-offs would definitely be improved by two bottles. I'm not sure if having one bottle is a bigger variable than say, judge quality variation, judge preferences (especially in wide-open categories like mead, specialty, etc.), or tasting order. > > Another huge problem is that large categories are split and placement > is given based on scores. Scores are great, but they vary tremendously > from table to table (my 38 may be the next table's 45). This is not the case. In split flights, placements are assigned based on the tasteoff, not score. Judges send 1, 2, or 3 beers depending on the quality of their flight (usually 2) Since the flights were so huge this year I received LOTS of questions about this from entrants. I don't think any beer got beat by another by a spread of more than 5 points, though. -Mark Wilson AHA Northwest Region Organizer ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * **********************************************************************