625288 Thu Jun 04 20:02:30 -0700 2009 157 35 Beer 0 4743906 I'm a huge craft beer fan, and I'm particularly fond of American micro brews. Sometimes though, I think they are a little too "explosive". I had the Founder's Breakfast Stout a few weeks ago, and I have to say, I didn't think it lived up to the hype. It was better than almost anything out there, but to me, it was a little bit overdone on some of the flavors (way too much espresso, almost burnt). Westvleteren 8 also comes to mind (really good, but if I was blindfolded, would I have thought it was the top 20 in the world?). Anyway, does anyone else feel that way about some highly rated beers? Thu Jun 04 20:02:30 -0700 2009 46815 Shaggy 1 4744837 Actually, I feel compelled to defend the Breakfast Stout. I love good coffee and good stouts, and Breakfast Stout is the best coffee-infused stout I've ever tasted. In most other brews of this style, the coffee flavors taste as if they are derived from weak or stale coffee. In the Founders' brew, the coffee flavors are good -- and they meld beautifully with the dark malt (and, IIRC, there's some chocolate in there too). Fri Jun 05 07:36:56 -0700 2009 4743906 90936 Kenji 1 4745264 The KBS lived up to the hype. One of the best beers I have ever had on draught. A beer for me that did not is the DFH 120min. Fri Jun 05 09:21:54 -0700 2009 4743906 127010 Diego Sanchez 2 4749139 I'm an IPA guy and DFH 120 is over the top even for me. As is Dale's Pale Ale (it's hopalicious!). With all the choices we have these days at all price points, the thing that amazes me is how beers like Heineken, which used to be a "premium" back when there were far less choices, still commands an above average price in today's market. Sat Jun 06 18:21:11 -0700 2009 4745264 24421 Panini Guy 2 4754440 I agree with that, DFH 120 min and the WW Stout are almost closer to cordials, which is good but not what I want in a beer. Mon Jun 08 16:50:44 -0700 2009 4745264 46815 Shaggy 1 4745550 Perhaps you should have named this thread BEERS I JUST DONT GET rather than MOST OVERRATED as that description is bound to cause feathers to ruffle as the WORST BEER thread has done lately. That being said we all have some things that seem to be very popular or held in great esteem by many others that we just dont find nearly as enchanting. Whether its music (Im sorry but Bruce Springsteen just does nothing for me), Movies (why is everyone saying this latest Star Trek movie is so great?) or Beer. And for me, the beer everyone else seems to worship that I just dont get is Fat Tire. Sorry. Tastes fine but whats all the fuss about? Yet beer heads act like its the second coming of Jesus Ale. Why? And since Ive gone there Id like to also add that Disney World is boring, Steven King is a hack and apple pie is a mediocre dessert... There. Have I skewered enough sacred cows for one day? Fri Jun 05 10:40:27 -0700 2009 4743906 238787 Insidious Rex 2 4749338 I've yet to meet anyone I'd consider a serious beer geek who likes Fat Tire, and I know a huge number of serious beer geeks. The Fat Tire worship I've seen mainly comes from people who I consider more casual beer fans: they know that macro lagers are bland and uninteresting, but they still like a sweeter, less assertive beer. I agree with most of your other comments (esp. re: Star Trek, totally baffling), except the apple pie one. A well-executed apple pie is absurdly good - unfortunately it's also really hard to come by. Sat Jun 06 19:57:04 -0700 2009 4745550 10809 Josh 3 4749456 My grandfather (who died in 1990) made THAT apple pie. Apples were firm and tart but the juice of the pie was a sweet contrast. Crust was flakey and bumpy with solid apple under every curve. I miss my grandfather. Sat Jun 06 21:21:28 -0700 2009 4749338 26180 Chinon00 3 5275367 Fat Tire didn't used to be insipid, back when Jeff L. was still brewing it in his basement. It was quite hoppy and balanced back then. The marketing decision to remove most of the hops and change Fat Tire into a craft beer that people who don't like beer will still drink was brilliant for New Belgium -- just look at the amazing beer factory they've built with the profits. Fortunately, New Belgium still makes some good brews. I vote Fat Tire as by far the most overrated beer, at least by sales volume. Fri Dec 25 12:47:54 -0800 2009 4749338 998307 danbob 4 5284370 Unfortunately for Fat Tire, I tried it after having had Widmer's and Anderson Valley's Amber Ales. Wed Dec 30 09:58:45 -0800 2009 5275367 10883 JAB 2 4754064 Agred, New Belgium is a bit overrated. Although I hear good things about their Abbey style. Mon Jun 08 14:51:05 -0700 2009 4745550 259583 ohdaylay 3 4836333 Their Abbey is solid, as is what I'm assuming to be their take on a sour ale, La Folie. Their Wit, however, is one of the worst beers I've ever encountered. Tue Jul 07 09:08:54 -0700 2009 4754064 92744 invinotheresverde 2 4861643 Hands down, Fat Tire is the most overrated beer. Wed Jul 15 13:28:19 -0700 2009 4745550 46700 Truh 1 4749318 "Westvleteren 8 also comes to mind (really good, but if I was blindfolded, would I have thought it was the top 20 in the world?)." What beers would you rate in the top 20 in the world? Thanks Sat Jun 06 19:46:30 -0700 2009 4743906 26180 Chinon00 2 4749699 I'd be interested to know this too, as Westvleteren 8 is my favorite beer in the world. Sun Jun 07 05:15:35 -0700 2009 4749318 185685 Whisper 3 4750165 More than the 12? Sun Jun 07 09:30:37 -0700 2009 4749699 10809 Josh 4 4754016 Yes. While the 12 is an exceptional beer and probably in my top 5 or so, I've enjoyed the 8 more than any other beer I've ever had. Just a matter of personal taste. Can't go wrong with either. Mon Jun 08 14:38:36 -0700 2009 4750165 185685 Whisper 3 4751484 Let me make clear that the West 8 is awesome, maybe I was just expecting perfection, which is why I was curious. I hope I'm not ruffling too many feathers, I'm honestly just curious. Anyway, top 20, not necessarily in order: 1. Boon Oude Geuze Mariage Parfait 2. Goose Island Night Stalker 3. Gulden Draak 4. Harviestoun Old Engine Oil (Barrel Aged) 5. Smisje Wostyntje (Mustard Ale) 6. Hoppin Frog BORIS The Crusher 7. Rochefort Trappistes 10 8. Three Floyds Dreadnaught Imperial IPA 9. Three Floyds Oak Aged BlackHeart English IPA 10. Van Den Bossche Buffalo Belgian Stout 11. BeerMania Mea Culpa 12. Deschutes The Dissident 13. Bells Expedition Stout 14. Lagunitas Cappuccino Stout 15. Chimay Blue 16. Dark Horse Fore Smoked Stout 17. Goose Island Bourbon County Stout 18. Struise Pannepot 19. St Feuillien Brune 20. Hales Red Menace Big Amber Ale Sun Jun 07 19:14:21 -0700 2009 4749699 46815 Shaggy 4 4751618 That's one hell of a nice list, the ones I know anyway. Sun Jun 07 20:04:52 -0700 2009 4751484 10809 Josh 4 4751945 Chimay Bleu over Westvleteren 8? I respectfully disagree. Mon Jun 08 01:06:50 -0700 2009 4751484 149239 juantanamera 5 4753047 I knew I should have left that one off. I have to be honest though, it is always excellent, it ages well, and it didn't cost me 20 Euro. Mon Jun 08 10:06:14 -0700 2009 4751945 46815 Shaggy 6 4755463 I do agree on Chimay Bleu aging well - a friend shared an older bottle with me once, about five or six years old if I recall, and I found some really interesting flavors in it that I don't normally find in a fresher bottle. I don't dislike any of the Chimay beers, I just prefer some other examples of similar styles. Perhaps I am also a bit biased because I've had the Chimay so many times, but only get to try Westvleteren beers on rare occasions. I'll admit I'm not immune to the hype! Tue Jun 09 01:35:09 -0700 2009 4753047 149239 juantanamera 7 4757685 Yeah it ages amazingly. Another one that ages quite well is Trader Joe's Holiday Ale. It's made by Unibroue. I had a 4 year old one recently and it had mellowed impressively. Surprisingly good stuff, esp. for such a low price. Tue Jun 09 15:16:09 -0700 2009 4755463 10809 Josh 6 4755466 I recently, with great excitement, opened my treasured bottle of Russian River Consecration and found it very good but not quite among my favorite sours. To me, the fruit was a bit too dominant and the lambic-like characteristics a bit muted. I still enjoyed it quite a bit, but considering the reviews this beer has been receiving I was a bit let down. Certainly not the most overrated, but not quite as good as I had hoped. Tue Jun 09 01:55:32 -0700 2009 4753047 149239 juantanamera 7 4756658 If you haven't already, try the Mariage Parfait, it's really sour and amazingly good, sounds like it might match what you're describing. If you can get your hands on an aged bottle, even better. Tue Jun 09 10:19:55 -0700 2009 4755466 46815 Shaggy 7 4757692 Man I loved Consecration. Toasted my engagement with it, in fact. I like that it's a bit more fruity/winey, with less dominant lambic flavors. I view it as a unique beer, not belonging to any one particular style. Tue Jun 09 15:17:19 -0700 2009 4755466 10809 Josh 1 4749881 Any of the Red hook beers, I've tried them on and off since the later 80's and they do nothing for me. I also don't get the love for 6 Points beers. Sun Jun 07 07:11:50 -0700 2009 4743906 10491 MOREKASHA 2 4751518 I agree with both of those points, and I really want Red Hook to be better, being a New Englander. Sun Jun 07 19:25:04 -0700 2009 4749881 46815 Shaggy 1 4752123 Before I get jumped on, let me say I do love this beer, BUT it does not live up to the Hype. I am talking about Pliny the Younger. Here in the Philly area, the hype bordered on hysteria. Went to one bar for a 10 am release and there was a line 50 deep waiting for the bar to open. I drove by and kept going. When I finally did have one, it was very good, but I can think of a half a dozen IPA/DIPA's that I like just as much if not better, and don't have to race around or stand in line for. The avarage time around here for a keg from tapping to kicking it was 30-40 minutes. That is crazy! Mon Jun 08 05:28:20 -0700 2009 4743906 186590 Chefmonty 2 4754067 These would be my top 10 at the moment, subject to change now and then: 1 - Westvleteren 8 2 - St Bernardus Wit 3 - Moinette Blond 4 - Westvleteren 12 5 - Gueuze Girardin 1882 Black Label 6 - Weihenstephaner Hefeweissebier 7 - Pannepot Old Fisherman's Ale 8 - St Bernardus Tripel 9 - Rochefort 10 10 - Damnation Not saying these are "the best" beers in the world, just the ones which I've had and enjoyed the most. There are still a number of brews out there I haven't tasted yet such as Isabelle Proximus, Masala Mama and Närke Kaggen Stormaktsporter and a few others which I'd like to try someday and could possibly make it into my top 10. Mon Jun 08 14:51:36 -0700 2009 4752123 185685 Whisper 3 4754444 Nice list, I forgot about the Black Label. Mon Jun 08 16:52:02 -0700 2009 4754067 46815 Shaggy 3 4755274 Great list, though I find the Moinette to be kinda hot and fusely. I love that an American's Belgian-style brew made such an overwhelmingly Belgium-centric list. Love the Girardin, get it regularly at my local pub. Mon Jun 08 21:36:34 -0700 2009 4754067 10809 Josh 1 4754550 magic hat no.9 Mon Jun 08 17:26:47 -0700 2009 4743906 72635 hyde 1 4756768 Stella Artois - Just another marginal euro lager that I unfortunately hear sometimes being taken way too seriously. Tue Jun 09 10:49:16 -0700 2009 4743906 26180 Chinon00 2 4757585 Stella Artois is the Corona of the 00s. It's a beer for yuppies who don't really know anything about beer but who assume they look sophisticated ordering something with an "exotic" name. Tue Jun 09 14:48:12 -0700 2009 4756768 90936 Kenji 2 4757707 The other night I was sitting with a friend at our local craft beer bar. Guy goes to bar, doesn't look at the giant chalkboard in front of his face or any of the handles, barks out that he wants a Stella. Server informs him they don't serve Stella. "OK, give me a Newcastle." Sorry, no Newcastle either. "OK, give me a Guinness." Not once did this guy look at any of the myriad other choices right in front of him. The marketing of Stella is annoyingly effective. Tue Jun 09 15:19:40 -0700 2009 4756768 10809 Josh 3 4758132 They did a great job marketing Stella on premise as an elegant product, served in nice glassware. Tue Jun 09 17:43:22 -0700 2009 4757707 10998 Jim Dorsch 4 4796281 I was buying some Blind Pig at Whole Foods and the cashier asked me why I pay $5 a bottle for beer. I told him to try one and he'd never drink another Bud. He defended himself by saying he drinks Stella some times. I didn't have time to get into it. Mon Jun 22 17:02:41 -0700 2009 4758132 163246 tofuburrito 5 4796367 Stella's marketing director is a god. Mon Jun 22 17:37:54 -0700 2009 4796281 26180 Chinon00 6 4796390 I visited the Stella brewery in Leuven several years ago. At the time they operated a floor maltings across the street. We visited that as well. You will probably not be surprised when i tell you that it's now gone. Mon Jun 22 17:48:06 -0700 2009 4796367 10998 Jim Dorsch 7 4796555 What a shame. So many traditional things like this going the way of the world. As far as Stella Artois goes, it's not so bad, and very undeserving of the hate that beer geeks like to heap upon it. They seem to be putting in the category of "big brewery products" and dissing it mainly for that reason. For what it is, it is a good beer. Mon Jun 22 18:52:59 -0700 2009 4796390 116047 The Professor 8 4796576 You mean for an industrial light Euro lager it's a good beer? The reason it gets a lot of hate is because it represents all that is horrible about marketing. A substandard product is given a name, look, and story that portray it as the zenith of beer. That kind of crap is not only irritating, but how many pubs are absent a good, local craft brew because they have a handle occupied by a marketing concept masquerading as a beer. Mon Jun 22 19:02:36 -0700 2009 4796555 10809 Josh 9 4796762 I don't think a bar selling Stella is likely to have chosen a local craft beer if Stella were not available. If Stella is there, it's at the expense of another similar beer. Mon Jun 22 20:35:29 -0700 2009 4796576 10998 Jim Dorsch 10 4797148 I've seen it happen, mainly in pubs whose owners don't know beer, or have clientele who don't know much about beer. Tue Jun 23 02:54:23 -0700 2009 4796762 10809 Josh 11 4797181 I agree it can happen. And you also find 'regular' bars that have been turned into craft establishments by a savvy salesman. Tue Jun 23 03:32:17 -0700 2009 4797148 10998 Jim Dorsch 9 4796871 I know what you're saying, but the micros do their share of "marketing" too, usually positioning their products as naturally better because they are made in a small plant. Well, that sounds great, but the reality is that it just isn't so. With the explosion of small breweries of recent years, there is certainly a fair amount of lousy beer coming out of those smaller plants as well. Just to clarify, I am and have always been a fan of so called "craft" beers and specifically more a fan of micro brews than the bigs (with a couple of worthy exceptions among the bigs) and was playing "devil's advocate" a bit since I do not regularly partake of Stella Artois. I've had it, it's not bad, but would never be a first choice. But to say that it, or more importantly, any big brewery products are "masquerading as beer" is just plain silly. Especially silly if any big brewery product that is a cut above the norm is summarily dismissed because it competes (successfully in some cases) with the so called "craft" segment. Being in a business where I have been a visible part of "marketing" products, I know the mechanics of it and the psychology of selling, so I tend not to pay attention to _anyone's_ marketing...not the big brewers, and not the so called "craft" brewers. The "craft" of the beers I like comes through loud and clear in the taste. Doesn't matter how big or small a brewery is. If the beer is good, they get my $$$. Mon Jun 22 21:39:45 -0700 2009 4796576 116047 The Professor 10 4797156 I think your experience working in marketing may have skewed your perceptions. I know a lot of craft brewers, and the last thing on most of their minds is marketing - for the most part they're preoccupied with making their orders and keeping their draft accounts happy (a few prominent and notable exceptions notwithstanding). Craft brewing isn't automatically better, though I would say it typically is. When it is better, it's not because it comes from a small plant. Larger regional craft breweries operate out of giant plants, but they still make good beer. Knowing how hard craft brewers work at making their beers, it really rubs me the wrong way to see that passion dismissed as a conceit to gain market share. I think part of the reason that people generally think of smaller production as resulting in a better product is because of the closer attention that can be paid to every step of the process, plus the freedom and flexibility that comes from not needing to cater to the lowest common denominator. I met a Miller brewmaster, who makes Miller Lite products. He told me that they have a 10 barrel system they use to make experimental beers like imperial stouts, IPAs, etc. They give them away to people near their brewery, because they wouldn't be able to put such products on the market. I do agree that the initial boom of microbreweries in the '90s produced a fair amount of substandard beer. But I think the more recent boom has been much more consistent in terms of the quality of the beers. Judging from the medals won at international competitions, it seems that others agree. Tue Jun 23 03:06:42 -0700 2009 4796871 10809 Josh 11 4797214 Agreed that some not-so-good 'craft' beer was issued during the '90s boom. Today the quality is generally there, with perhaps some boring craft brew out there, but not bad in quality. AB's pilot plant (I believe it's associated with their Michelob company now) has produced all manner of interesting beer. Your neighbor Mitch Steele was involved in a lot of that back in the day. Tue Jun 23 04:04:07 -0700 2009 4797156 10998 Jim Dorsch 10 4939544 "I've seen it happen, mainly in pubs whose owners don't know beer, or have clientele who don't know much about beer." A smart pub owner will stock what sells, period. Since Stella sells, it is on the beer list, and a selection that does not sell is omitted. Wed Aug 12 08:20:12 -0700 2009 4796871 141620 Sdenred 11 4939624 It's a bit more complicated than that, particularly with draught. it's not at all uncommon (and it's often illegal) for suppliers to provide lucrative incentives to pubs for putting their beer on tap. Who do you think can best afford to provide these incentives? The huge importer or the small craft brewer? And regarding what sells, well, it's a combination of what sells and what brings in the most margin dollars. Wed Aug 12 08:37:52 -0700 2009 4939544 10998 Jim Dorsch 11 4939780 Lots of things sell. This is one of my biggest pet peeves with the pro-macro swill argument put forward by people in the industry. It's as though if you don't have some giant brewing conglomerate's product on tap people will simply stop drinking beer. Local pub here, complete with smart owner and everything, doesn't have Stella. The only non-craft tap he has is Guinness, and the other 19 handles sell quite well. It is possible to educate your audience about alternatives. Wed Aug 12 09:17:26 -0700 2009 4939544 10809 Josh 12 4939989 Stone's sales people walk into a bar equipped to show them how they will make more money on a full-priced keg of Stone than a discounted keg of a mass-market beer. On top of that, carrying Stone makes them unique and the mass-market keg does not. Wed Aug 12 10:10:04 -0700 2009 4939780 10998 Jim Dorsch 8 4796585 I appreciate that Stella is one of those gateway beers that gets people away from Bud. I just don't like that it is sometimes portrayed as a craft beer, which isn't completely their fault. I think for a lot of craft beer geeks it's about sharing something they love, no different than when your friend who's in a band tries to convince you that Nickelback isn't necessarily the great rock band of all time. He's not dissing Nickelback, he just wants you to get into the Beatles. (Sorry for the analogies, it's the best I can come up with.) Mon Jun 22 19:05:34 -0700 2009 4796555 46815 Shaggy 9 4796763 I've never heard of Stella being portrayed as a craft beer. Mon Jun 22 20:36:46 -0700 2009 4796585 10998 Jim Dorsch 5 4796570 LOL. That's funny. Mon Jun 22 19:00:24 -0700 2009 4796281 10809 Josh 6 4797637 Getting back to the Westy vs. Chimay conversation; whichever side of the fence you're on in that debate, most wouldn't turn either one down. I also think most would agree that all the abbey ales are made extremely well and which is better comes down to a matter of personal preference. It would be interesting to do a blind tasting of Westy, Chimay, Westmalle, Duvel and Rochefort and throw in Unibreu and Lost Abby to see how the North Americans stack up. If anyone decides to host such an event, please invite me, I'd love to attend. Tue Jun 23 07:28:15 -0700 2009 4796570 163246 tofuburrito 7 4798065 I went to an event like that, in a way, at O'Brien's in San Diego. It was a tasting of all the authentic trappist ales, and included all three Westvleterens. It also included Koeningshoeven, which I guess is the only non-Belgian trappist monastery that makes abbey ales. The Westy 12 was definitely a cut above the others, IMO. Tue Jun 23 09:14:52 -0700 2009 4797637 10809 Josh 8 4798425 I have to admit that despite the ridiculous hype the Westy 12 remains the best beer I have ever tried. I even went into it thinking "how damn good could this be really" and it floored me nevertheless. As I recall it is the only beer Ive ever sampled that seemed essentially flawless from nose to finish. Which is a semi-revelational experience for someone who naturally tends to find flaws in everything he ingests no matter how enjoyable. Tue Jun 23 10:43:59 -0700 2009 4798065 238787 Insidious Rex 9 4798448 I'll have to try it again. I'm retrying the Founder's Breakfast Stout, and there are things about it that either weren't there the first time, or I just didn't notice. For example, there was no head when I had it in a bar, which is strange, for anyone who has had it before. Tue Jun 23 10:50:28 -0700 2009 4798425 46815 Shaggy 9 4798490 "I have to admit that despite the ridiculous hype the Westy 12 remains the best beer I have ever tried." I can't say I've ever had a more enjoyable beer either and I was floored as well. Nonetheless, due to availability and cost I'm perfectly content with other options. I don't feel like I'm missing out when it comes to Belgian ales. Tue Jun 23 11:03:31 -0700 2009 4798425 163246 tofuburrito 8 4799284 I thought of the Pecos monastery that makes beer in NM, but that's Benedictine. Tue Jun 23 14:27:38 -0700 2009 4798065 10998 Jim Dorsch 1 4800813 Stella's a decent beer, admit it. Is it worth the hype? No. Is it worth buying at full price? No. Is it better than say, Miller High Life? Yup. On sale — and in context — it gets the job done. Wed Jun 24 00:49:58 -0700 2009 4743906 259583 ohdaylay 2 4801311 I guess it depends on your definition of "decent." Wed Jun 24 07:07:32 -0700 2009 4800813 163246 tofuburrito 2 4801466 The clue to your answer is the last sentence. I guess if you're drinking to get wasted then Stella would definitely "get the job done". Not sure what other job it could do. Wed Jun 24 07:52:56 -0700 2009 4800813 10809 Josh 3 4801552 deplete your bank account at a rate quicker than justified by the taste Wed Jun 24 08:13:14 -0700 2009 4801466 72231 DougOLis 1 4816480 Had the Three Floyds Dreadnaught this weekend and I think it may fall into the category of overrated. Don't get me wrong it's a good beer but not as great as it's ratings indicate. I tasted the Alpha King, Dreadnaught and Ballast Point's Sculpin IPA and the Sculpin was the clear cut winner. I think the Sculpin lives up to it's hype. Mon Jun 29 17:45:13 -0700 2009 4743906 127010 Diego Sanchez 2 4818722 Wow Id be hard pressed to call the Dreadnaught "overrated". It may be big but its quite a good beer to my tastes. Well constructed and refined for its style. Its big but in a fine tuned manageable kind of way unlike many double IPA's that are just an out of control sand paper explosion of abrasive hops with no sense of union or cohesiveness. Which is frankly something Im tired of now that everyone and their brother has a couple double IPA’s out. Tue Jun 30 12:36:56 -0700 2009 4816480 238787 Insidious Rex 3 4818837 I've never had Dreadnaught but in this day and age "overrated" may not always be that much of an insult. The first, second and tenth time I had Pliny the Elder it was no where near the hype that it generated; no beer could be. I don't think Diego Sanchez meant to put the beer down as much as he/she meant to highlight the often out of control celebration of certain breweries and styles. Thanks Tue Jun 30 13:09:40 -0700 2009 4818722 26180 Chinon00 4 4819582 I think Pliny holds it's own in the hype department. Tue Jun 30 17:08:59 -0700 2009 4818837 163246 tofuburrito 5 4821474 I agree with that. Unlike Chinon my first taste of Pliny (The Elder) absolutely floored me. Probably because it was my first real taste of the style, and the beer (and the hype) rarely reached the east coast at that time. So I didnt have a major preconception of what it was going to be. And now, many years down the road, after Ive had too many big hoppy beers to count, I still find Pliny to be much better then most in that department. It doesnt blow my mind like it did for that first pint but its still in my EXCELLENT category no doubt about it and one of my favorite beers. I actually prefer it to The Younger. Wed Jul 01 10:23:51 -0700 2009 4819582 238787 Insidious Rex 3 4819224 Like I said, this in no way is a bad beer...a pretty good beer at that but I guess I was expecting to be blown away. This goes for the same with Dark Lord. if I ever get my hands on it I will be expecting something special. If it does not exceed my expectations then I will be disappointed. Tue Jun 30 15:04:15 -0700 2009 4818722 127010 Diego Sanchez 4 4819374 I agree Diego, it's an awesome beer, but Dreadnaught is a little too one note for me. Don't get me wrong, I would build a home and raise a family in the 3 Floyd's brewery if I could. Tue Jun 30 15:55:51 -0700 2009 4819224 46815 Shaggy 5 4835451 Most overrated: stella artois\heineken. Great beer that i haven't been able to find in ages is Tucher Dunkles a german brown that i thought was awesome! Mon Jul 06 22:23:15 -0700 2009 4819374 226686 showthyme 6 4835512 wow...I remember Tucher! That Dunkles was a favorite of mine too. Haven't seen it around these parts (central NJ) in a _long_ time, although t is apparently still imported by Edelweiss. Looks like it's only distributed in the southeast. Mon Jul 06 23:30:16 -0700 2009 4835451 116047 The Professor 7 4836632 I haven't tried their dunkles, but I loved Tucher's Bajuvator doppel. Tue Jul 07 10:42:14 -0700 2009 4835512 90936 Kenji 3 4836300 Freshness is a huge factor in Dreadnaught - within a month of bottling and sitting on a warm shelf, it starts to go downhill quick. Still one my favorites despite other great DIPA's out there. Tue Jul 07 08:59:39 -0700 2009 4818722 12014 LStaff 4 4839776 Absolutely. But then freshness is a huge factor in any IPA as the hop oils tend to dissipate quite quickly leaving a very uneven malt bomb to deal with. Ive certainly wasted many a hard to find rare IPA by "saving" it for just the right time... And theres nothing worse than cracking open a Dreadnaught-like beer and being overwhelmed by the malt that had been built to match the original monster hop signature. Its enough to make you cry. Drink all your IPA's as soon as you get em people!! Wed Jul 08 10:25:37 -0700 2009 4836300 238787 Insidious Rex 5 4839848 Question: Then which styles of beer are more age-worthy? Wed Jul 08 10:41:14 -0700 2009 4839776 26180 Chinon00 6 4839958 You can put away Imperial Stouts. Barley Wines. Complex bottle conditioning Belgians. Certain sours and barrel aged specialties. Many of these will actually improve/evolve with time. Everything else I would treat as food and avoid long term storage. I have friends who actually prefer putting away big IPA's for a few years to come back to them when they are "mellower". They seem to genuinely enjoy this. When they suggest this to me though I want to pitch the bottles at them because I buy hoppy beer because I want to TASTE the hops and making such a suggestion is tantamount to suggesting buying a Lamborghini and then letting it age to the point where it doesnt accelerate quite as fast because you are left with a "nice smooth ride". I file all this under Completely Missing The Point… Wed Jul 08 11:02:42 -0700 2009 4839848 238787 Insidious Rex 7 4840104 Some people like the taste of a mellower IPA. Double IPAs, when aged, come across more like barleywines. It really depends on what kind of hoppiness a beer is exhibiting. Any bottle-conditioned beer should improve, or at least change, with age. Wed Jul 08 11:30:55 -0700 2009 4839958 10809 Josh 8 4840239 Yeah thats pretty much what these friends tell me. But I have to wonder why you wouldnt just get a Barley Wine if thats what you want. You know? Seems to make eminently more sense than buying a great double IPA and sitting on it for a couple years. Unfortunately, the only thing I taste when I drink an aged IPA is a hop vacuum and I find it tragic... Makes me wonder, when the Brits first started bringing IPA’s over to India how did they really taste? Because certainly after 6 months or more at sea they too would have been altered in terms of their hop signature. But then I know English IPA’s (and Barley Wines for that matter) are a whole different animal than American ones. Wed Jul 08 12:02:32 -0700 2009 4840104 238787 Insidious Rex 9 4840720 Barleywines are often brewed to be sweeter and more alcoholic than DIPAs, and they usually have a different grain bill. The flavor of an aged DIPA is reminiscent of barleywine, but is hardly the same. I like aged DIPAs, personally, depending on the DIPA. I wouldn't want Pliny the Elder or Pure Hoppiness aged, but others work well for me with a little age on them. Wed Jul 08 14:02:40 -0700 2009 4840239 10809 Josh 9 4841880 A good IPA (to me) is one that is brewed strong with enough hops to provide a very intense bitterness, enough to remain after a long period of aging before bottling (with a generous dry hopping for a period just prior to bottling to bring an intense and fresh 'nose' to the beer). Yes, an IPA should have an intense bitterness, but the problem with most current day IPAs is that there are harsh, green hop flavors present in many of them that reflect inadequate aging. If made properly, the beer would be hopped out the wazoo with the loss of some bitterness from aging expected and taken into consideration...but still allowing for a 75 IBU+ bitter intensity that is at the same time a 'cleaner' kind of bitterness. Almost every IPA I've tasted in the last 10 years (and I've tried a LOT of them) fall short of this quality. A lot of them are good, no doubt about it, but I have yet to find one that rates as "great" compared to my favorite IPA from years ago. Wed Jul 08 20:36:47 -0700 2009 4840239 116047 The Professor 10 4842143 ". . . but I have yet to find one that rates as "great" compared to my favorite IPA from years ago." Name, names. ;) Thu Jul 09 00:26:01 -0700 2009 4841880 26180 Chinon00 11 4842452 Sorry Chinon... I didn't name it because I was referring to an IPA long unavailable, which I first tasted more than 40 years ago (although it's a fact that beer afficianados who remember it almost universally agree that there hasn't been one better). Also, since I preach a lot about the old BALLANTINE IPA, I have begun to feel that when I evoke the name, that it gets mighty tiresome for some folks to hear. Michael Jackson and Jim Robertson both waxed poetic about Ballantine IPA about it in their various books, but words don't even begin to capture the remarkable intensity of this classic brew. So yes, for me Ballantine IPA is still the one to beat...it is the benchmark (and I know I'm not alone in this assessment). The micro industry makes some great beers, and I am a devoted fan of quite a few of them...but a lot of "beer people" today are so entrained by the often misleading hyperbole of the microbrew segment of the industry that they find it hard to believe that from 1933 (at least) until 1971, the nation's then third largest brewing company was making a long aged (1 year) knock-your-socks-off -bitter IPA that rivaled and in most ways bettered anything that's made today. The old Ballantine brewery closed back in '71, and for a decade the new custodians of the brand name kept true to the various original Ballantine brands and formulas (especially the IPA and Ballantine XXX Ale), but then dropped the ball by reformulating and cheapening both brews, and eventually totally discontinuing their best and most distinctive one...ironically enough right at a time when it could have finally found a wider and more savvy audience that would have been willing to shell out the premium price. Thu Jul 09 06:11:45 -0700 2009 4842143 116047 The Professor 12 4998518 If my fil is to be believed, much of the "clean bitterness"/dryness in Ballantine IPA came from not only a substantial use of hops, but also from the wood it was aged in. I am surprised that they would not bring back the original IPA - or even one of its lesser incarnations in this day and age. Wed Sep 02 07:10:26 -0700 2009 4842452 12014 LStaff 13 4999094 Tho' Ballantine and Falstaff both highlighted the "aged in the wood" aspect of IPA, most sources note that the aging tanks were lined with brewers pitch, so it wasn't quite as "woody" as today's "barrel aged" beers. Pabst CEO Kotecki suggested the possiblity of a return of Ballantine IPA in this somewhat fact-challenged sidebar article to a Beverage World story on Pabst a couple years ago http://www.beverageworld.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&Itemid=127&id=6242 (heck, just a revival of a truer version Ballantine XXX Ale would be good enough to start off with). Since that article Pabst has "revived" Schlitz "Gusto", Old Style, Primo and McSorley's (new recipes, etc.) but hasn't touched Ballantine (except to say "Dry Hopped Flavor" on the case). And Kotecki is now gone from Pabst. Certainly, if they did revive the IPA, they'd be better off using a craft brewery to make it (Anchor, Dogfish Head or Sierra Nevada all have a history of Ballantine "fandom") rather than Miller, The Lion or City/Latrobe- their current line-up of contract-breweries. "Pabst" (which is in reality what's left of the "S&P Corp." which owned Falstaff, General, Pearl and Pabst) of course, is the same company that dumbed down the IPA over the years, as it closed breweries and changed the recipe, lowered the ABV and IBU's, and shortened the aging period. There was a brief period when they brewed BIPA in Milwaukee and, apparently, marketed the same (or a similar beer) using the Pabst Old Tankard Ale brand, but soon after S&P shuttered Milwaukee, too. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3469/is_n4_v43/ai_11870348/ (Note the article says BIPA was brewed by "Falstaff" their sister company, but there were no Falstaff breweries left in 1992, and the final version of BIPA said "Milwaukee" on the label at the time.) Wed Sep 02 10:00:12 -0700 2009 4998518 11059 JessKidden 12 5281104 Wow - I didnt know anyone else liked Bally Ale like that ! I still can drink a bally ale (even tho it tastes hardly at alike the original) faster than I could a glass of water !! LOL Mon Dec 28 21:55:14 -0800 2009 4842452 1135249 katahdin 6 5281122 Purely by accident, I got about two cases of large 750(?) with cork and small btls of hennipin and ommegong. It was a close out sale - really good deal - I wasnt that crazy about either of them - I tend to like stouts/porters for dark and ales for regular drinking. So I lugged them around, in self-storage, at camp - down to -10 or so - only a few froze, but when I had NOTHING else I had one. Then after about 10-12 years I took a couple over to some summer folk, thinking what the heck - get rid of it !! (Remember I wasnt crazy about it) My neighbors went crazy !! Thought it was the best stuff they ever had !! They were more wine connoisseurs than beer folk !! But they were on target !! It was great and only had a few btls left !! So aging some beers really works ! To me it went from lousy, bitter, off tasting to some great drink ! Mon Dec 28 22:07:36 -0800 2009 4839848 1135249 katahdin 5 4998533 Its not so much the case of hop flavor/aroma fading that turns me off to non-fresh IPA's. Its the qualities the hops give when they are showing signs of oxidation - like grassy, metallic, and caramel flavors. I am fully convinced that most craft drinkers think that is how some beers/ipa's are supposed to taste. Wed Sep 02 07:14:12 -0700 2009 4839776 12014 LStaff 6 5000945 Ballantine IPA certainly had no loss of flavor/bitterness/aroma after a year in wood (not surprised to learn that the wooden aging tanks were pitch lined since that was pretty standard procedure; what _i_s surprising is the degree of oaky woodiness that came through in the beer if that was the case). As far as the aroma goes, I have yet to find _any_ commercially made beer today that has anywhere near the aroma that BIPA had. Wed Sep 02 20:43:36 -0700 2009 4998533 116047 The Professor 1 4941423 I may not have the chops to post on this subject, but a couple of years ago while in Switzerland my wife and I enjoyed an assortment of the local beers, but were pretty disappointed when served Tuborg. And it was all over. Don't know if mediocre can be raised to a new level, but this was a good try at that. Wed Aug 12 16:55:03 -0700 2009 4743906 89849 Akitist 1 4962212 I have to agree that the most overrated beer would be a tie between Heineken and Stella. Not that they are the WORST beers though. I wouldn’t go out to seek them specifically but they are drinkable over a Budweiser or MGD people… However as “craf” beers go I find Nector IPA to be the most overrated. I find it on tap or cask all over the NY metro area, and I feel like it tastes like water. Not a fan of Chimay, Duvel, golden drauk, either. And why am I seeing the pig slap crap everywhere, it really is awful stuff. Thu Aug 20 08:40:14 -0700 2009 4743906 177720 Asumnuthin 2 4962303 I think the vast majority of beer drinkers who venture beyond macro have mostly positive things to say about Chimay, Duvel & Gulden Draak. Even if you don't like Belgian ales I don't think you can make a reasonable argument that they aren't well made. Thu Aug 20 08:58:59 -0700 2009 4962212 163246 tofuburrito 3 4962332 I’m sure they do, which is why I began the sentence with “not a fan of” I didn’t say they were poorly made, I said I thought they were overrated… huge difference Oh and P.S. I enjoy Belgian ales in general it’s not a style complaint in the least Thu Aug 20 09:05:49 -0700 2009 4962303 177720 Asumnuthin 4 4962445 What was "pig slap crap" in reference to? Thu Aug 20 09:34:20 -0700 2009 4962332 163246 tofuburrito 5 4962458 Probably means Pork Slap from Butternuts. Thu Aug 20 09:37:39 -0700 2009 4962445 10998 Jim Dorsch 6 4962617 yes, that is what I meant, Thanks! Thu Aug 20 10:19:01 -0700 2009 4962458 177720 Asumnuthin 1 4997836 Blue Moon, Heineken, and Beck's (St.Pauli Girl) are overrated. Tue Sep 01 20:32:40 -0700 2009 4743906 15018 elgringoviejo 2 4998174 How so? Wed Sep 02 03:38:19 -0700 2009 4997836 10998 Jim Dorsch 3 4998683 Heineken is bitter, Beck's and SPG usually have a "skunkiness" one doesn't find in the best pilsener (Budvar/Czechvar), and Blue Moon is bland compared to witbiers from Belgian breweries. Wed Sep 02 08:02:04 -0700 2009 4998174 15018 elgringoviejo 4 4998954 Heineken is skunky, too, isn't it? Wed Sep 02 09:22:59 -0700 2009 4998683 10998 Jim Dorsch 5 4999066 Heineken is just plain foul. Wed Sep 02 09:54:44 -0700 2009 4998954 92744 invinotheresverde 5 4999070 I'm not really a big Heineken fan, but i prefer the skunky bottles over the cans which aren't skunky. Not sure why, maybe because as a teen, the only imported beer I had was in the green bottles, Heinekin, St. Pauli girl, Beck's, Moosehead, so I thought all good beer was supposed to taste skunky. Wed Sep 02 09:55:18 -0700 2009 4998954 60603 TroyTempest 5 5000597 Yes it can be skunky, too. Wed Sep 02 18:26:16 -0700 2009 4998954 15018 elgringoviejo 6 5000766 Skunkiness in beer is not a characteristic that the brewer wishes to achieve. It is a function of the beer being light struck/ mishandling. On the otherhand bitterness in beer is a characteristic that is desireable by brewers and beer drinkers. Some of the most highly regarded pale lagers are marked by their bitterness (e.g. Victory Prima Pils, Sly Fox Pikeland Pils) Wed Sep 02 19:35:02 -0700 2009 5000597 26180 Chinon00 7 5001632 yeah, i know that. My point was that as an uneducated imported beer drinking newbie back in the late 70's, i thought skunkiness was one of those acquired tastes. Virtually all the first imports i drank (mentioned previously) were almost always skunky. I got to where i came to like the skunkiness common in all the green bottle imports. Maybe it is nostalgia, but now I prefer the bottled heineken, which is almost always a little skunky to the canned which isn't skunky or as flavorful. Thu Sep 03 07:15:14 -0700 2009 5000766 60603 TroyTempest 8 5001869 Yes, skunkiness is definitely part of the 'imported taste' for many folks! Thu Sep 03 08:21:08 -0700 2009 5001632 10998 Jim Dorsch 8 5002075 I was actually responding to elgringoviejo's analysis (SEE below): "Heineken is bitter, Beck's and SPG usually have a "skunkiness" one doesn't find in the best pilsener (Budvar/Czechvar), and Blue Moon is bland compared to witbiers from Belgian breweries." I'd also like to address elgringoviejo last comment about Belgian wits. Elgringoviejo, what are your favorites other than Hoegaarden? Thu Sep 03 09:15:28 -0700 2009 5001632 26180 Chinon00 9 5004530 I prefer Hoegaarden to Blue Moon. Also, Heineken has a taste that is not pleasing to my palate, aside from the "bitterness" of English pale ales or pilseners. Fri Sep 04 07:28:23 -0700 2009 5002075 15018 elgringoviejo 10 5004657 Thanks for your response. However in your earlier post you stated that Blue Moon was bland compared to witbiers from "Belgian breweries". That's FAR different from stating that you personally "prefer Hoegaarden to BlueMoon" as you've stated today. Thanks for the clarification. As for your second statement in regard to Heineken it is somewhat unclear. Could you clarify that as well? Thanks Fri Sep 04 08:16:12 -0700 2009 5004530 26180 Chinon00 11 5006023 Can't be more precise about why I don't like Heineken, it just doesn't seem to have the same clean taste as my favorite pilseners, such as Victory, Budvar (Czechvar), Rebel and Gambrinius. Although the lighter lagers from Saranac are quite up to Budvar standards IMO, I personally greatly prefer them to Heineken Fri Sep 04 16:26:34 -0700 2009 5004657 15018 elgringoviejo 12 5006490 It is the last part that confuses me when you say ". . . aside from the "bitterness" of English pale ales or pilseners." Are you saying that Heineken has a particular bitterness that turns you off versus the bitterness found in say Victory Prima Pils of Samuel Smith Pale Ale? Listen, I'm no fan of Heineken and don't understand its popularity from a standpoint of flavor profile either. Having said that though I'd add that your rationale for not liking it was as clear as mud. I've never liked it because the Euro lager style at its best just isn't at all challenging or complex. Thanks Fri Sep 04 20:23:09 -0700 2009 5006023 26180 Chinon00 13 5007468 Henieken just seems to lack the good, fresh taste of my favorite pilseners, such as Victoy and Budvar. Sat Sep 05 11:10:58 -0700 2009 5006490 15018 elgringoviejo 9 5005259 ok, I'm about to get us off track here, but at least i am being upfront about it. These posts bring up some lingering questions that I have had for a while. In my experience, for most of my 30+ years of legal drinking, the majority of green beer bottles are skunked. This is a given. This is as Chinin00 reports due to beer being exposed to light, etc., etc. I believe this is true. Now if this is the case, and if brewers do not want their beer to be skunky, why do so many, especially the ones previously mentioned keep putting their product in the green bottles thus allowing it to get get skunky? This brings up another question. Miller and Corona are in clear bottles. If i remember correctly (it has been years since i had either), they are not skunky. Devoid of flavor, yes, but not skunky. Why is this? I have heard that Miller puts chemicals in the beer to make it less susceptible to reaction with the light. Or is it some other reason, like to get skunked there must have been more of a presence of hops or malt in the first place to react with the light? Fri Sep 04 11:30:36 -0700 2009 5002075 60603 TroyTempest 10 5005329 From what I understand, those clear bottle beers you mention can avoid the pitfalls of skunking (which can occur in less than a minute by the way!) because, instead of using hop flowers to bitter their beers, they use a special hop extract called tetra-hop. The isomerized alpha-acids in this product have a slightly different molecular structure than naturally isomerized alpha-acids, and are immune to the effects of light. So bad beer is skunk free! Unfortunately its usually flavor free too... Although let me amend that by saying there are certainly some very GOOD beers who have been known to use hop extract (why one of my favorites, the infamous and much loved PLINY THE ELDER comes to mind...) but for the most part they dont use clear bottles. Its the clear bottle crowd thats infamous for using extract. And probably because their drinkers dont really like the taste of hops and its cheaper to use clear glass. Fri Sep 04 11:57:09 -0700 2009 5005259 238787 Insidious Rex 11 5005589 I've been told that Miller conditions the bottles with something (a chemical process I think) that keeps the beer from being light struck. Fri Sep 04 13:22:48 -0700 2009 5005329 163246 tofuburrito 12 5005626 Possibly. Im sure Jess will know. Although it makes me wonder just how much some of these beers will actually be effected considering how little hops they put in their beer. I wonder what the parts per million threshold is exactly. Sounds like an experiment waiting to happen. Someone buy some miller high life and a good light bulb... Fri Sep 04 13:32:30 -0700 2009 5005589 238787 Insidious Rex 13 5005685 Miller uses a special hop extract where the alpha acids aren't susceptible to UV light. Corona gets skunked. Fri Sep 04 13:51:27 -0700 2009 5005626 10809 Josh 10 5005333 To address your first question about why Heineken for example would continue to use clear green bottles if it lead to this "skunk" phenomenon rather than switching to something else I could only guess that fundamentally altering packaging might confuse the customer. And I figure too that sales are still high so why would they really care. As for the second question I've heard similar things about additives to beer to stop skunking but I don't know much else about it. Fri Sep 04 11:59:16 -0700 2009 5005259 26180 Chinon00 11 5005933 Heineken USA's Dutch brand sales (which I guess would be the various Heineken beers, plus Amstel) are down 12% for six months. Sam Smith changed to dark bottles a while back, so it can be done. Fri Sep 04 15:39:15 -0700 2009 5005333 10998 Jim Dorsch 10 5005487 One should also remember that people throw the term 'skunky' around quite freely, and often incorrectly. I have often heard people describe _any_ hoppy aromatic or flavored beer as 'skunky' when it is not really the case at all. I _have_ experienced 'skunky' beer...and one whiff tells you precisely why it got that name. It literally smells like a skunk's perfume. With regard to the green bottle thing, it is interesting to note that Henekin doesn't use green bottles exclusively...their dark lager is packaged in amber/brown bottles. Fri Sep 04 12:50:39 -0700 2009 5005259 116047 The Professor 11 5007503 One time years ago on a cruise I drank quite a bit of Heineken- it came in green bottles but they were a very different shape from what I see in the store- and they were decidedly *not* skunky. I figured it was a different style that they created for Europe or the islands and to be perfectly honest, I missed the "skunk"... Sat Sep 05 11:36:40 -0700 2009 5005487 96658 Clarkafella 12 5237536 Without a doubt, LUCKY Lager is the best beer in the world, I dont want any arguments, its final, done, the best!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Tue Dec 08 15:23:20 -0800 2009 5007503 1110002 NorfolkGuy 13 5237872 Back in the day we called it Lucky Laxative. Tue Dec 08 17:42:47 -0800 2009 5237536 153214 chimay5 10 5247494 Agree about the green bottle skunk syndrome. For someone wondering, compare one of the Heineken 5L self carbonated mini kegs to a bottle. Big difference. And as much as I hate to admit it, fresher beer is usually better, exceptions above noted. Sat Dec 12 17:11:34 -0800 2009 5005259 1131242 Ken H 11 5249193 Just wondering why you would say, " hate to admint fresher is better"? Sun Dec 13 18:01:19 -0800 2009 5247494 10491 MOREKASHA 12 5257684 The whole concept was 'invented' by Anheuser-Busch, which in general I'm not a big fan of their beers. Wed Dec 16 20:23:42 -0800 2009 5249193 1131242 Ken H 13 5258468 That is not true. In fact, AB's freshness initiative was a direct response to Boston Beer's long-standing policy of open-dating. Thu Dec 17 08:25:14 -0800 2009 5257684 10998 Jim Dorsch 14 5258548 And before that (at least since Repeal) almost all US brewers gave their beers a shelf life of 3 months or so, pulled out of date stock, always recommended drinking their beers as "brewery fresh" as possible, etc. (In fact, scores of brewers used the phrase "Brewery Fresh" in advertising campaigns over the years- all except those "shipping" breweries from far away, exotic locales like St. Louis, Golden, CO and Milwaukee, anyway.) Granted, the date codes were not always easy to find or figure out (altho' most have always been based on the "day of the year" calendar) but with a little effort, it was done by knowledgeable/caring beer drinkers. This concept that A-B "invented" dating coding and that it's just a scam to sell more beer (I think it's safe to say that US brewers have destroyed a lot more beer than has ever been thrown out by consumers as "too old") has been annoying me for awhile. In fact, I started collecting some citations of "pre-A-B BORN ON" (man, I hate that terminology) examples for a while. Not quite done, but, for example: http://sites.google.com/site/jesskidden/beer-freshness-and-date-coding Thu Dec 17 08:54:25 -0800 2009 5258468 11059 JessKidden 15 5258880 Jess, you created that page? Its nice to see someone take the time to put something like that together, I enjoyed it Thu Dec 17 10:51:02 -0800 2009 5258548 182441 DapperDave 15 5258960 Some of those quotes are weird. I've had aged beer that definitely improved over time. It seems these comments are specifically directed at non-bottle conditioned or low alcohol beer. Thu Dec 17 11:16:29 -0800 2009 5258548 10809 Josh 16 5259062 Well, yeah, they all do date from the era in the US of the final dominance of "adjunct light lager" and NOBODY was cellaring them. The breweries, of course, were talking about the beers they brewed at the time. I think it'd have been pretty strange for the brewmaster of Billings Brewing Co. to say, in 1951, that "...beer deteriorates with age regardless of what container it is in unless you're talking about some weird high alcohol or bottled conditioned ales, stouts and barleywines that haven't been seen much in this country for a few decades but just wait till your grandkids are of drinking age! .” <g> The point of the quotes is more to suggest that A-B's emphasis on "shelf life" and freshness was nothing new in 199-whatever when some hotshot in the PR department decided on "BORN ON" dates to replace the frogs that year. In fact, the "freshness" aspect was more commonly used AGAINST them in the previous era when they only had one (and then two, then three and....) breweries and they were shipping beer in from afar and invading the local's markets. Thu Dec 17 11:55:45 -0800 2009 5258960 11059 JessKidden 1 5239627 Cantillion---hated it I love Orval and Rodenbach, but couldn't drink this Wed Dec 09 11:39:19 -0800 2009 4743906 63643 niquejim 2 5240068 Which Cantillon did you have? They produce several beers, with distinct flavor profiles. Wed Dec 09 13:59:23 -0800 2009 5239627 10809 Josh 3 5240273 Kriek Wed Dec 09 15:16:40 -0800 2009 5240068 63643 niquejim 4 5240373 Interesting. Sour beers can emphasize a couple of different kinds of sourness, lactic and acetic. Rodenbach and other flemish reds are more acetic (vinegary), where lambics tend to be more lactic. The Cantillon Kriek is usually one of their more approachable varieties, so if you don't like that one, then they may not be the brewery for you. That said, I'm not sure I'd consider a beer overrated for not being to my taste. To me, the term implies something that's not made well yet still receives accolades. I think Cantillon's skill in what they do is inarguable. Just my $0.02. Wed Dec 09 16:06:34 -0800 2009 5240273 10809 Josh 5 5242846 To a point you are correct, but above you stated Quote " I guess if you're drinking to get wasted then Stella would definitely "get the job done". Not sure what other job it could do." While I don't like Stella their skill in creating a popular and consistent lager are inarguable. Maybe I got a bad bottle, but I won't buy it again to find out at that price Thu Dec 10 14:31:14 -0800 2009 5240373 63643 niquejim 6 5243040 Yeah, I probably would retract what I said about Stella. :-) (And Fat Tire for that matter) Cantillon is an authentic lambic producer, and those beers are definitely not to everyone's taste. Thu Dec 10 15:36:37 -0800 2009 5242846 10809 Josh 1 5282542 Up here in Seattle I run into two culprits of overhyped beer. The first is patently rediculous: Pabst Blue Ribbon. Utterly unenjoyable piss that the hipster kids drink by the truckload. The other is Guinness. If you ask the average person around here to list some good beers, it might not be on their list, but if you bring it up, the reaction you get is one of worshipful longing. I dislike the beer, and find it to be hard to drink even when paired with complimentary foods. With excellent local brews coming out of our ears up here, I just don't understand how PBR and Guinness seem to have won the hearts and tastes of so many. Tue Dec 29 13:30:02 -0800 2009 4743906 1135496 Bihlbo 2 5283372 Easy answer. PBR is a simple, cleanly made beer (albeit a shadow of the actually quite good beer it once was), and Guinness quite simply _defines_ dry stout. It is the standard, everything else is a variation on the theme. The new breed of beersnobs love to hate on Guinness because it's made by a big company and because you can't stand a spoon up in it like many American stouts, many of which are overdone and not nearly as balanced as the roasty slightly sour and refreshing tartness of Guinness. I can sort of understand the "I don't get it" factor of PBR's popularity...anyway it's not even really PBR they're selling these days but a cheap imposter with a PBR label...but Guinness is in a class by itself. It's a dependable brew, not like the hit and miss crapshoot that buying "craft" beer has become lately. Tue Dec 29 20:02:58 -0800 2009 5282542 116047 The Professor 3 5283964 I don't understand this need for people to use terms like "beersnob." If you like Guinness and PBR then drink it, no one cares. If there are others who prefer more flavor why would you feel the need to criticize their personal preference. In my experience the snobby ones are the macro crowd who seem to think they are more manly for drinking water with a small amount of flavor and alcohol. Wed Dec 30 07:27:23 -0800 2009 5283372 163246 tofuburrito 4 5284361 whoa, amigo...don't get defensive. I wasn't criticising your preference...drink whatever you like. That's what I do, and my choices sometimes surprise my beer snob friends. There is certainly plenty of choice for everybody's tastes, especially in these more beer savvy times. And please...I am anything _but_ a member of the "macro crowd"...I have supported and been a cheerleader for the so called "craft" movement since it began 30 years ago and in fact searched out more characterful beers since long before that. Hell...my favorite beer 40 years ago was one that was hopped at 75 IBUs and got a year of aging in oak before it was even bottled (a concept now being revived by some small brewers, at great expense). Occasionally I rise to the defense of the macro brewers because there very definitely IS a snob faction out there that rejects out of hand ANYTHING the big companies make simply because they are big companies. The bigs are making plenty of worthwhile beers, especially in light of consumers' willingness to be more adventurous. If anything, the big brewers are rediscovering the craft, at least in some small measure. But they still have to cater to the vast majority of beer drinkers (probably better than 95%) that want that weak yellow fizz water. My main point was that as much as I support and admire what the better ones do, the so called "craft" movement is not the be all and end all or saviors of the beer world. Granted that there is a lot of crappy, thin and weak macro product out there (which again, the biggest majority of beer drinkers prefer)...but lately the so called "craft" brewers seem to be so bent on pushing the envelope that they are losing sight of the real craft of making truly great beer in favor of gimmickry. Just my own ranting opinions, of course...others' mileage may vary. So please...I was not calling you out as a snob, just mentioning that there ARE for sure plenty of beer snobs out there. I know because I hear them at my local pub (a great and progressive beer spot) pontificating and quoting amateur judging guidelines and proclaiming that the Brooklyn IPA (or whatever other beer) they are drinking is not really "to style". Wed Dec 30 09:56:59 -0800 2009 5283964 116047 The Professor 5 5284559 I agree about the 'bigs'. A lot of my friends don't like some of my more extreme beers (in their eyes). So I keep some more mainstream on hand. I think Michelob is doing a heck of a job blending the craft and macro. One of my favorite 'non craft' beers is their Amber Boch. It is IMHO a good beer with a great price tag. I wouldn't call it extremely innovative or ground breaking, but a great session beer or for when I have non beer geek friends over. Wed Dec 30 11:02:51 -0800 2009 5284361 182441 DapperDave 3 5284634 I think you're oversimplifying the reason a lot of beer geeks don't go for Guinness. In many places, it's the one decent beer on tap, but is too often ruined by dirty tap lines or spigots. So in that respect, ordering Guinness in a random bar is a total crapshoot, and one that rarely yields good results. So if you're in a bar that *does* know about beer, and does maintain good, clean lines, the odds are good they have a dozen beers more interesting than Guinness. As an avowed beer snob, I have no problem with Guinness at all. As you say, it's the textbook example of dry stout. But given the choice of dry stout vs. any number of other styles I find more compelling (witbier, sour), why would I opt for it? Also, I think there are craft-brewed stouts on the market that are a more interesting quaff than Guinness flavor-wise. Avery Out of Bounds Stout is far and away my favorite stout in existence. GIve that one a try and see if you don't find yourself a little nonplussed by Guinness. Wed Dec 30 11:25:40 -0800 2009 5283372 10809 Josh 4 5285461 Well stated as always Josh. There are plenty of other stouts out there, for sure. In the last 35 years of working on the road I have tasted scores of them and other "craft" beers (being in show biz does have some advantages, even if steady income isn't always one of them) and many of them are indeed very good. In recent years though, owing to the opening of hundreds of new small breweries, about half of the time trying something new is a bust anymore. I have tasted literally scores of beers that warranted tasting only once. So as a former card carrying and now 'reformed' beer snob, I have become a bit more wary and quite a bit more forgiving of the larger brewing companies (especially as some of my favorite 'small' brewers have graduated to the ranks of being larger ones). In a bar situation where the product is craft-draft, I always ask for a sample taste anymore. And again, it's a 50/50 shot that something new I try winds up tasting like something simply very badly made. And the hurried production of yeasty and green tasting beer that the vast majority of brewpubs serve has pretty much put me off of _that_ whole segment for the most part (except for a few notable favorites). But hey...for every beer I hate, there will be plenty other people who love it (and vice verse). It's all good...there's plenty of choice out there these days. It bears repeating..."one man's elixer is another's poison". Wed Dec 30 16:49:55 -0800 2009 5284634 116047 The Professor 5 5285505 Not feeling defensive, hard to determine tone in forum posts but in my mind it's a friendly conversation. I don't get why you have to use terms like "so called craft." What's wrong with that term? Why is it snobby to discuss beers in depth? To me, defending the macros is like defending McDonald's or KFC and saying they deserve respect because not everything they make is the food (or beer) equivalent of crack. The macros are not exactly sitting idly by and saying to each his own, they media blitz against the "craft" brewers. Wed Dec 30 17:12:38 -0800 2009 5285461 163246 tofuburrito 6 5286543 Glad you didn't take offense. I don't think it's at all snobby to discuss beers in depth...I have discussed beers in depth since my first tastes of Bock Beer and India Pale Ale 42 years ago. It is the out-of-hand rejection of anything made by larger breweries (even when the beer is good) that has come to bother me of late. That's why I use the term "so called craft" ; the micro industry's own hype is getting as tiresome as some of the big brewer marketing we've been bombarded with. It is their incorrect assertion that "because their beer is made in smaller quantities by a smaller company it must be better" that has become bothersome. While it is sometimes true, plenty of the product out there certainly proves that it is not always true. The craft is in the making, not the size of the brewery... and while there are plenty of brilliant, well made, and innovative beers coming from these artisinal brewers, there is probably just as much that is just plain badly made. Same with the bigs. In the end, they're all in the same business, and for the same reason: profit and fighting for consumer dollars. As far as media blitzing by big brewers against smaller ones, I don't really see that...they are only doing what they have always done (establishing all important brand recognition). What I do see is the big brewers responding to a rather small threat to their bottom line by seeing the trend towards fuller flavored beers and reaching back to their own traditions to bring out more beers of real character. As much as I hate to say it, AB-Inbev (whose products I have mostly loathed in the past) has done a particularly good job with regard to their specialty beers...characterful and yet achieving balance. They certainly have the technology and the best trained master brewers in the business---their main problem is that they still have to make the kind of beer that the vast majority of beer drinkers want, the lightweight fizz that feeds their bottom line. The irony of all of it remains the fact that some formerly small brewers have become quite big brewers...at least one of them seems poised to actually go international within the next two years. It will be interesting to see whether these fine "microbrewers grown up" will begin facing the same hate once reserved for the established macros, simply because they have grown to be too popular. Thu Dec 31 08:51:27 -0800 2009 5285505 116047 The Professor 7 5286960 American macro beer makers have some of the best equipment and the best brewers in the world. They use their expertise to make beer that is consistently bland and lacking in flavor -- no mean feat -- because their marketing departments have determined that the vast majority of American beer drinkers want beer that is as flavorless as they can possibly make it. Have the macro brewers conditioned American beer drinkers to avoid the flavors of hops and malt? Probably. But we are where we are and for the foreseeable future, they're probably going to continue to make beer with corn and rice rather than barley malt because that's what their customers want (or at least what their marketing departments tell their customers they should want, which comes to the same thing). They're not in the business of making good beer per se, but in making money and if they make more money making flavorless beer they will continue to do so. It's up to the beer drinking public to change that and while the number of craft beer drinkers is growing dramatically, 90% of American beer drinkers prefer macro lagers. I have no doubt that macro beer makers are capable of making good beer if they felt there was a significant market for it, but so far that's not the case. Thu Dec 31 11:57:43 -0800 2009 5286543 74192 chuckl 8 5287157 Well put. I would only argue the point about using corn and/or rice as adjunct grain; this is an example of where the micro industry gets a little overzealous in their self hype and begins to rival the kind of marketing misdirection that the bigs use. The truth of the matter is that plenty of fine beers (and at least a couple that could be termed 'world class" ones) have been made using corn or rice adjunct. However, yes...there are a number of mainstream beers where as much as half of the grain bill can be something other than barleymalt, and I would agree that such beers are on the lower end of the quality and flavor spectrum. It may be a rather surprising fact that the vast majority of fine ales brewed in the UK over the last 125 years have used not only corn in some cases, but also various forms of sugar as an adjunct to the barleymalt. It certainly doesn't necessarily make them inferior brews. Thu Dec 31 13:40:17 -0800 2009 5286960 116047 The Professor 9 5287311 not to mention whatever the Belgians choose to put in their beers. The difference, I think, is that the Brits and Belgians add things to make their beer taste more flavorful, not to make them taste "smoother," which I interpret as tasteless, or as the marketers would say, more "drinkability." Thu Dec 31 15:21:13 -0800 2009 5287157 74192 chuckl 1 5287767 PBR, Fat Tire and Stella. Any one of these may have been a better beer back in the day. But now they are just undeserving beneficiaries of a supremely marketed hipster zeitgeist. Fat Tire, like several other New Belgium brews, is just foul; off-balance and badly weird. Sorry to say that, I live in CO. And New Belgium is capable, like Left Hand, of good things. But mostly, I think a lot of the Belgians are better from Belgium, or thereabouts. La Folie, Russian River, Lost Abbey... I have to reflect a bit about my last statement. Fri Jan 01 02:20:08 -0800 2010 4743906 1136215 bmiddleb 2 5287952 "But now they are just undeserving beneficiaries of a supremely marketed hipster zeitgeist." Stella Artois?! Fri Jan 01 07:02:21 -0800 2010 5287767 26180 Chinon00 2 5288072 PBR has almost no marketing support. The only 'supreme' thing about their marketing is the company's unmatched discipline in keeping their hands off. I haven't had Fat Tire in a while, but recall it to be solid and balanced, just what many people seek in a beer. For whatever reason, this brand resonates with a huge cross-section of people, hence I couldn't call it a hipster beer. Stella has benefited from positioning as an elegant beer. Again, not exactly a hipster brew. Fri Jan 01 08:08:21 -0800 2010 5287767 10998 Jim Dorsch 3 5289735 Hmph… thought this was a relatively straightforward point and cheap shot. Wrong again! Okay, so maybe “hipster” was the wrong word (but I’m not takin’ it back in the case of PBR, because I see it all the time). And clearly, I don’t know what I’m talking about when it comes to the marketing. But what explains the huge popularity of these three crappy beers (IMHO, natch)? It seems to me, when I'm at a bar, restaurant or liquor store, that people who feel that their tastes have evolved in some direction, be it maturity or added coolness, past the chugging stage, can often be seen buying one of these three beers. And I think these people are wrong! - none of those three beers is a sign that one's tastes have become more sophisticated. But I think the people buying them believe they are signifiers of exactly that. What many people believe are improved tastes are really just trendiness (of which we're all guilty to some degree). In most of the settings where I see people ordering one of these three products, something better is available, which is what’s so notable to me. And I really get the feeling (though this is all just pure conjecture) that the people buying these three beers, much of the time – i.e., leaving cost and potency issues out – think that they *are* buying the better, more sophisticated product. Sat Jan 02 02:03:06 -0800 2010 5288072 1136215 bmiddleb 4 5289754 I've never seen or heard about any hipster drinking a Stella or a Fat Tire. PBR is different thing. The deal with Stella is that it looks the part (cool name cool label with some apparent history) while tasting like the same old yellow fizzy water-beer. So I agree that for some they are getting the look of an accomplished drinker while their tastes haven't developed at all. Sat Jan 02 03:32:06 -0800 2010 5289735 26180 Chinon00 4 5289779 We're pretty much agreed on Pabst. In my observation, all kinds of people have had Fat Tire while visiting or living in places where it's popular (it's not sold where I live), and want to buy it when they get home. I don't see signs of faux sophistication, but I don't doubt that it exists, and you've seen it. Neither do I see it with Stella, and again, that doesn't mean it's not there. The issue of 'better' is a slippery one, as there is room for subjectivity, image, many factors that have nothing to do with the taste of the beer. Sat Jan 02 04:42:47 -0800 2010 5289735 10998 Jim Dorsch 1 5298023 Blue Moon. Every bar in CT has to have it. It is the number beer on tap...for what reason? I dunno. Tue Jan 05 12:45:55 -0800 2010 4743906 253803 triggs73