BeerBorg

I was going over my most recent score sheets, and I noticed something.

My Copperbottom Lager, which scored an overall 36.5, yet didn't garner a podium spot, was the first beer sampled in that category. Now don't get me wrong, a 36.5 is the best score I've ever received, and it's a darn good score, and it pleases me no little and more than somewhat, but I just have to wonder if that set the table for the other entries.

I'm perfectly willing to accept that at least three other entries were higher quality. But I just wonder how much of an influence, if any, sampling place has, and whether middle draws would be more favorable than first or last.

Any thoughts?

That's a good point. I can see where they would, without thinking about it, be overly cautious with the first and last of the draws. Wouldn't want to rush into anything at the start, and equally they wouldn't want to rush thru anything at the finish.

Interesting question. On my APA that took 2nd in its category, it was actually the first sample in its flight (there were 3 flights of 12). Not sure if it is a bar setter or not, but I guess I would rather be first in a flight especially if the judges believe it is a really good representation of the style. Kind of like being the first to interview for a job. Everything gets compared to you so if you knock it out of the park, they are more likely to find something in those that follow that just doesn't measure up. Of course it can always work against you too...

Easy answer. It has a huge/moderate/no impact.

Judges are human beings. Senses (taste, smell, etc.) are subjective assessments. We compare to other things. Despite a human beings best intentions, we're influenced by other things. If a judge had a heavy garlic seafood dinner the night before, his/her tastes are off. If they taste something before your sample, it impacts their taste. Like any contest, judges have pre-conceived notions which also impact them.

So - it may, or may not, impact your score if you're first, last, or in the middle.

Think of Olympic gymnastics.

I think it depends on the style, too. A beer judged late in a flight of Double IPA's is bound to suffer from judge's "palate fatigue," for example.

I have read somewhere - or heard on a podcast - that judges may have a tendency to score early beers fairly conservatively, not wanting to set the bar too high up front. True or not - who knows.

I was tending toward Rick's assessment, myself.

Removing the heavy garlic seafood dinner the night before (which I tend to think a serious judge would avoid), I like to think they'd sort of have an idea of what an ideal representation of that particular style would be, and then take each sample on its own merits comparing to that ideal, rather than saying, essentially, "Well, this stout was better than that one." It may not be possible, but I would hope that would be the way they approached it. In addition, the BJCP style guidelines for these things are spelled out pretty much as well as they can be.

Taking individual idiosyncrasies into account (one guy may be more sensitive to diacetyl, or cattiness, for instance), I've usually found the scoring and comments pretty even-handed. Still, human beings being what they are, I imagine it's a little tough to be completely objective when it comes down to the fifth or sixth APA.

I just thought it was interesting that mine was first, and wondered what impact, if any, it might have overall.

That's a good question and we have to remember that the judges are only human.
Checking my latest entries, my RIS was 3 of 6 and took 3rd. My Bitter was 2 of 12 and took 2nd.
Having stewarded for some competitions, I've seen it doesn't really seem to matter where the beer is in the flight. They are only taking 3-4 ounce pours of each beer and don't normally finish those. They smell, they look, they smell again, they sip. They have the BJCP guidelines in front of them. They read them before they start and are going over them as they are judging for each . For a group of volunteers, they take their job very seriously.

Here's another thing to keep in mind. The highest scored beer does not aways win.
Case in point. I had a IIPA score a 44, the next two beers were 40 and 39.5. At the end of a flight they will retest the top scoring beers to place them. My beer had lost something by that time and placed 3rd. Oh well, I scored a firkin 44.
I have also seen them bring back beers that were a little further down the line, bring them up and vice versa.
Tastebuds, they're a subjective thing.

I'll second Inkleg's comments, with a couple additions. With the score that you received, chances are very good that your beer went into a mini Best of Show (unless you were in a small flight). Once there, scores are irrelevant. In fact, some competition coordinators encourage judges to upgrade a winning beer's score to reflect that it was more highly regarded than a runner-up with a higher tally on the scoresheet. And the caliber of the competitors is what drives the result. A member of our club has won a gold with a beer that scored 33. I've had several beers that have scored in the 40+ range that never won a thing. In fact, I have never won an award with ANY beer that scored 40 or higher, yet I have 19 medals/ribbons on the wall. Judging is subjective to a point, but most of us make a good faith effort to assess the beers accurately throughout a flight; and a good early beer that receives a score that doesn't reflect its merits in comparison to other entries that may score higher, will still usually be sent to the mini-BOS. In other words, even if an earlier beer scored more poorly than a later one of lesser quality, most judges will pass it on to the mini-BOS, though the score won't be altered unless it's a winner.

Interesting assessments. This also helps explain why my Amber's Amber Lager took third place with a score of 33, but the Copperbottom didn't ribbon with a score of 36.5. Two different competitions, yes, but still, is the Copperbottom a better example of an American Dark Lager than the Amber's Amber? And if so, why no ribbon?

Well, the point of entering comps, for me, is the feedback, and both lagers got good commentary. In fact, in all of my entries, the comments reinforced something that's very important to me; my recipes and procedures, for the most part, are solid.

Having judged a few competitions, I can confirm that often judges may score the first entry conservatively, but can remember its merits through the end of a round and score the others in relation to the score of that first entry. There are risks to being later in a panel. Crazy Climber is correct that in some styles like IPA, palate fatigue can set in, and in the case of IPAs, it's harder to assess the bitterness. Also, if the style includes spicy entries or an entry has a strong off-flavor, your palate can be blown for the rest of the panel. On the other hand, a very good entry at the end of a panel can be what the judges remember when it's time to confirm which is the winner.

This discussion makes me want to attend a competition, just to see what y'all have experienced, and to gain some firsthand insight on the judging/scoring process.

It's good to see that the process strives for fairness across the board, as much as is possible, with re-assessments, mini-BOS rounds, etc. I like that beer competitions have spelled-out style guidelines for the judges to work from, too. That helps take a lot of the subjectiveness away. I imagine the judges have an "ideal" version of that style in mind, or at least a recognized commercial version they're familiar with, so there's a standard being applied to some degree.

I've been in barbecue competitions, and the lack of guidelines or standards is pathetic. I get the feeling the judges are just there for some free food, and they score entries based on whether they liked it or not. No comments, no suggestions, just a number that might as well have been pulled out of their ear. And this has been pretty much confirmed for me by people with more BBQ competition experience, and even people who used to judge BBQ. Very disappointing. I'm glad BJCP-sanctioned comps are not like that.

On my way to and from the LHBS yesterday I listened to a podcast on Basic Brewing Radio. The topic was competions. I would highly recommend it. It is episode 05-09-13: Gordon Strong on Competitions. Gordon Strong is the president of the BJCP and author of Brewing Better Beer.

It was very intersting to hear his take on competitions and judging. Especially as the president of the BJCP. If you have the time, downlaod it and give it a listen.

On the points that FedoraDave raises, one of the big reasons for entering BJCP competitions is to get the informed feedback and advice. Several of my own entries have been to get the feedback with no expectation that I would win. For example, the organizer has told me the Sacramento judging site for NHC round 1 has 800 entries, of which 90 are IPAs. Unless you think you have an outstanding IPA, the reason for entering that category should be the feedback, in that competition. Some styles are broad while others are narrow, and classic examples have variations. Judges should know the accepted range as well as being familiar with at least some classic examples. For many styles, judges will look for distinctive qualities, and I have heard judges complain when all the entries taste the same.