BeerBorg

Finally have enough time to type up my results from the New England regional competition. I write this post because I think some items in here would be of interest to the Borg.

I didn't score any prizes, but am fairly satisfied with my scores and the feedback I got.

All brews were fermented in trusty old Mr. Beer LBK's, and were extract/hop-boil batches. I usually do steeps, but it just so happened that only one of these beers featured one. All were partial-volume boils (1-gallon top-up into the LBK) done on an electric stove.

Double IPA - Score: 31 (30 and 32) - 48 entries in category -
Northern Brewer Super Structure LME and some Light DME plus honey, lots of Simcoe, Centennial and Nugget, US-05 yeast - 1.080/1.0125
Both judges picked out piney aroma, which I was going for with the Simcoe. They mentioned "no process flaws" but said the hop presence needed to be increased. I attribute this, rightly or wrongly, to the cotton hop sacks I used (see this thread). Maybe it would have scored better as a regular IPA.

German Pils - Score: 31 (29 and 33) - 11 entries in category -
Pilsen LME and DME, also some Beer Machine extra pale hopped DME from the famous Cabela's clearance sale, noble hops, a touch of honey and sugar for a dry finish, dry Saflager 34/70 lager yeast - 1.060/1.009
No diacetyl or off-aromas, one judge noted a SPICY hop aroma, other said flowery hops, NO spice (isn't that typical!). "Excellent clarity," "brilliantly clear." Both suspected caramel or Munich malt in addition to the Pils, saying it was a little too sweet for style. I didn't use any crystal or Munich - maybe the Beer Machine DME brought that sweetness to the table? Don't know. “A very nicely made version of the style. More hop aroma/bitterness would help.” <-- again disappointing, because I was going for a strongly-hopped version of the style! I can't recall if I used the cotton hop sacks on this brew, but my assumption is that the hop character suffered from aging. This beer was brewed in March, bottled in April and lagered until summer, and the judging was in October. So I won't sweat that issue.

Raspberry Saison (entered as a Belgian) - Score: 31.5 (29 and 34) - 42 entries in category -
Pilsen and Wheat LME, Carpils and Caramunich steeped, a small amount of Beer Machine hopped DME, Saaz and EKG hops, WLP565 Saison I yeast - 1.069/1.011
Read the saga of this beer here in this thread. I used 2/3rds of an ounce of raspberry extract for an LBK-sized batch, and apparently it was too much. The two judges' comments for Aroma: “Very raspberry, VERY raspberry.” “Raspberry prominent.” Alcohol kick noted by both judges (yeah, this one was up there; 7.6% ABV). Overall comments: “Perhaps this should have been entered in the fruit category, it would have scored better.” (Spoiler alert: I did! And it did!) “In a category by itself – my first. I like it but would like it more if the raspberry was toned down a little to improve the balance.”

Raspberry Saison (entered as a Fruit Beer) - Score: 34.5 (34 and 35) - 20 entries in category -
Same beer as above.
One judge noted an "expansive head upon pour” (see this thread for the pertinence of that comment). One judge: “Spicy farmhouse esters" -- the other judge: ”some interesting yeast complexity-hard to define”. Presumably both noting the character of the Saison yeast. References made to an appropriate peppery phenolic spiciness, and a slightly acidic finish. Again, alcohol/hot noticed (same as the Belgian judges -- obviously I'd tone this one down a bit if doing again). Overall comments: “Overall this is a good idea but the raspberry is a little overpowering. Saison base beer was good though.” “Quite nicely done. Consider handling fruit differently for more of a ‘fresh fruit’ flavor.” (Well, it was flavor extract, so that's a valid point.)

Bourbon Oak IPA (entered as a wood-aged beer) - Score: 34.5 (33 and 36) - 17 entries in category -
Northern Brewer Super Structure LME, amber DME, the last few ounces of my Beer Machine hopped DME, Simcoe/Saaz/Willamette hops, English Ale S-04 dry yeast, 4 oz bourbon and 1 oz oak cubes - 1.058/1.012
This was a "kitchen sink" beer, using up some ingredients on-hand, and I wanted to try oak cubes and bourbon. I'm not a big fan of stouts/porters, and love IPA's, so I took an English IPA approach with it. This beer is mentioned in this thread. Again, my hop character was a big miss on this brew, as in my opinion it had no IPA character to it. One of the judges did check the "Flawless" technical merit box, which made me feel good about my process. They noted the bourbon and oak prominent in the aroma, but no hops. The bitterness in the taste was said to be OK, though. However, the malt flavor was overwhelmed by the bourbon and oak. Described as almost astringent. Overall comments: “A lot of complexity w/ this beer. The hops seem to be a mix of varieties and blend together nicely. Would like a little more malt backing up the rest of this complex ale.” “A very tasty beer. I like the balance betw the oak/bourbon and hops. The beer has very few technical flaws, which highlites the oak/bourbon flavor. Nicely done!”

Ginger Ale (entered in Spice/Herb/Vegetable category with Blonde Ale as the base) - Score: 37.5 (36 and 39) - 24 entries in category -
This beer is basically...wait for it...the old Mr. Beer "Horse's Ass Ale" recipe! Best-scoring beer of the bunch.
Mr. Beer Craft Series Northwest Pale Ale, honey, and a bag of the oft-maligned Booster. Fresh ground ginger root (0.5 oz). MB Downunda yeast. Saaz 3-day dry-hop. - 1.061/1.010
Aroma: subdued malt and ginger, no hop aroma (so much for that steep!). Malt flavor sweet, maybe slightly too sweet for a blonde style. Ginger tasted up front w/ dry, bitter finish -- one judge said a “sugary flavor comes through”. Overall comments: “Good blend of base ingredients, ginger and sugar.” “Good clean base beer, maybe a little sweet. Ginger is well-balanced. I’d suggest making the base a little crisper, but good job!” (I'll be sure to pass that suggestion along to Coopers/MB )

There you have it. Hopefully you found something of interest in that novel. And if you haven't entered a competition, I would highly recommend doing so! You'll get some objective, trained feedback on your beers, and that is invaluable for helping improve your beers.

That is awesome. I would love feedback from someone who isn't a friend or family member. Very cool to get professional criticism on your brews. Sounds like and invaluable experience to me. Wish I could find something like that. Thanks for the post!

that's great! and Rev. like inkleg, we don't live that far apart. i'm willing to trade brews with you. pm me and we'll set something up.

Anything in the 30s is a quite good beer. So all those are good scores, and I find it awesome that they liked the horses ass so much.

Great scores! thanks for the report.

Dat's pretty cool, awesome job!!

Outstanding! Congratulations! Scores in the 30s mean you've made good beer (I came in 3rd with a score of 32). And, as you say, the comments from the judges are like veins of gold when it comes to wanting to improve your beer.

I'd say the most encouraging thing is that you don't really have any process flaws, which means tinkering with the recipes to make improvements. That's good to know.

I would encourage every serious homebrewer to enter at least one beer in at least one competition every year. It's fun and exciting waiting for the results, and the information you get is very valuable. Well worth the expense (most comps charge only about seven bucks an entry) and the small bit of hassle from shipping entries or locating a drop-off point. The BJCP website has a calendar of scheduled competitions (BJCP-sanctioned comps, I should say). Check it out to find one in your area.

If we get enough posts about competition results, maybe Louie Mac can create a new forum dedicated to it!

That's excellent! Great results, and nice feedback - just what you enter competitions for. I think this really goes to show that extract beers can be as good or better than all-grain. I've seen much lower scores for all-grain beers; it's all about the process. Congrats!

Great write up and good comments! Love to get feedback like that from judges. Sounds like you're making some excellent beer!

Thanks for the kind words, and all the insightful comments -- all of them are right on the mark.

The two biggest take-aways I got from this experience are:

1) My process is sound. Getting that information is gold. Now I can "just keep doing what I'm doing" and know that I'm not inadvertently building flaws into every beer I make. That info alone was worth the $7 per entry.

2) This is concrete proof that you absolutely, positively CAN make good, quality beers with just basic ingredients and an LBK. (Even with Booster, and Beer Machine DME!)

I guess #3 would be to always go easy with non-essential additives (fruit, spice, liquor flavorings). I once made a beer with some of the hops replaced with fresh basil leaves. I was disappointed to find that most people couldn't taste or even smell the basil. So it seemed like a lot of effort for no gain. That probably nudged me towards over-doing things with any such additions, to make sure they'd be noticeable. But I may have gone a little too far with the raspberry in my saison, and with the bourbon in my bourbon oak IPA. This is why I now say, dose several small samples at bottling time when possible, and "round down" from what you think is right.

Next time I enter a competition, I want to get feedback on my BIAB and partial-mash brews, to validate the quality of my processes in those situations. It just so happened that the beers I had ready to go this time were mostly basic extract/hop-boil brews.

The reason I entered so many beers in this comp is because my LHBS was a drop-off location. Can't get easier than that. I entered a comp once that involved packing/shipping, and that was a real PITA, and expensive. I think I'll stick to local drop-off competitions, mostly.

And I think FD's idea of a competition-related sub-forum is a great one! Reading threads where people discuss the contests they plan to enter, plan their brews, and report back results would be a fun read, and a good learning experience for us all.

Great Job man! Sounds like an awesome experience and it must be nice to know you're doing things right. Keep up the good work.

Very nice work Climber. I bet you are thrilled to death, as well you should be. And heck yes you can make fantastic beer from extracts. I mainly prefer all grain because I enjoy the process and have somewhat more control over the outcome. But there certainly is nothing wrong at all with extracts or using whatever equipment you enjoy using.

You can also look ahead to competitions and concentrate on brewing to style specifically for the comp. I would gather that most comps are held at roughly the same time every year, just for ease of organization, publicity, etc.

I sort of "fell into" my first competition, and I actually had to research what style my beer best fit. In that respect, I got lucky. This year, I planned ahead, since I thought I'd like to enter a pilsner, and I brewed it with enough conditioning time built in.

I've found this to be very educational in itself, since the BJCP style guidelines are online. I can look up a style I'm interested in submitting (or even just brewing for its own sake), and get good advance information to help me work up a recipe. I like this idea, as it gives me information to help me plan, and then gives me feedback on how well I followed the style in terms of recipe, process, etc.

GREAT job CC and congratulations. Those are great scores to be proud of and excellent feed back on your brewing process.

6 beers in the low to high 30's. Well brewed sir, well brewed.

Congrats. Glad to hear that you were happy with the results/feedback.