Competition results confusion

[Qcbrew]

Ok so I recently got back my results from the first homebrew competition I entered in. I sent in two beers; an american IPA and an amber ale brewed with some orange peel (entered as a specialty ale).

As far as total score I didn't score too well, but that is not what bothers me. It's why they didn't. Here is what I mean:

American IPA; one judge said it was musty (stale) and oxidized while the other said it was astringent and phenolic. To my understanding harsh flavors such as astringency and chlorophenols are really not similar to stale and cardboard flavors.

Amber ale; one judge said it had major flaws due to a metallic taste while the other said it was almost flawless technically speaking. Also one the judges said it didn't have enough malt flavor while the other pointed out the lack of hop flavor.

As someone who wanted to use these scoresheets as a way to better my brewing process, the results are simply too contradictory to do so. That added to the fact that I got my sheets back 6 months after entering the competition means I don't have any of these beers left to taste myself.

Has anyone else had similar experience with scoresheets results? I had much more constructive criticism from members in my brewclub than I did from the expert judges. Since I'm a newb as far as competition are concerned I would welcome any opinions from other people.

 

[bob1852]

Anymore, I view competitions as a chance to win, and not so much for feedback.

Because they don't know your ingredients or process, constructive input on how to improve your beers (especially process) really isn't possible.

Competitions are more about the judges perceptions of your beer versus their perceptions of the style they are judging it to.

 

[bleme]

http://www.wine-searcher.com/m/2013/07/controversial-wine-judging-study-the-real-story

This is an interesting story about the accuracy of wine judging. I think it would be fair to say that the same principles apply to beer judging.

 

[Phunhog]

Join the club.....I would also say that if you can't trust the judges negative comments how can you trust their positive comments either?

 

[Mirilis]

I wouldn't change a beer till I get at least 10 different sets of scoresheets back, and only if the same flaw was pointed out in a majority of them. Its hard telling who will be judging your beer or if their perceptions are worth trusting.

 

[Hello]

I totally agree with the above but I would definitely look into my ferm temps with the feedback. If you're confident in those temps then I'd write off everything else they wrote.

 

[Qcbrew]

Thanks for the replies guys! As far as my temps are concerned I ferment at 18 C (64 F) and pitch slurries from previous batches so I really do not think this would be a problem.

I guess I'll try entering one more competition and see the results. If I still get unreadable results (ie just stating the beer is good for example) I'll just save the money to buy more brewing ingredients

 

[progmac]

also, look at who judged it (upper left of the scoresheet). if it is a bjcp certified or higher judge, take the comments a little more seriously than if it is an "experienced judge" or similar...

 

[bleme]

There are also free competitions around. My County Fair is free to enter and last year the judges were all BJCP or head brewer at a craft brewery.

 

[Braufessor]

If you got scoresheets back 6 months after a competition, you entered a crappy competition and I would not send there again. What region of the country do you live in? If you let us know the general area (Midwest, east coast, etc.) I bet some folks can point out pretty good comps. to send to. There are some great comps out there with good, prompt feedback.
As mentioned earlier - do not think one set of sheets is going to pinpoint all the changes you might need to make. If I REALLY want feedback on a beer, I send it to 3-5 good competitions at about the same time. I concentrate on the consistent areas of feedback from experienced judges. I then rebrew with the consistent comments in mind, and do the same thing again. Lots of people don't want to do that - which is understandable, but that is the best way to "use" competitions for feedback.
*Also look to a local homebrew club, or homebrew store for a free critique - ask them to please be very honest, as you are looking for ways to improve - not a pat on the back.

 

[Qcbrew]

I live on the east coast of Canada (in Quebec) and sent the beers to Saskatchewan (midwest-ish). Just the shipping is 30$ and that is with the cheap canadian postage system (it would go to 45$ with private courier companies).

I know I can get feedback from people in my club and the LHBS. Based on what you guys are saying it seems that it takes a tremendous amount of effort (ie entering multiple competitions) to get valuable feedback.

In other words it would seem to me competitions are just that, a competition. It's a way to see how your beer compares to others, not a way to get feedback.

 

[kombat]

I live on the east coast of Canada (in Quebec) and sent the beers to Saskatchewan (midwest-ish). Just the shipping is 30$ and that is with the cheap canadian postage system (it would go to 45$ with private courier companies).

It would also be illegal. Note that in Canada, only Canada Post is legally permitted to transport alcohol across borders (both provincial and international). If Purolator finds out you're trying to ship alcohol, they'll return your shipment.

 

[Braufessor]

I am not gonna be much help with comps. in your area - but maybe someone else will chime in . In general, I look for big comps put on by large, well-respected brew clubs. In your situation, I think I would really try to get your initial feedback from brew store, brew club, maybe local brewers, etc. Then, take some of their suggestions and rebrew, and then perhaps send to another comp.

 

[IkeKrizzule]

The competition referred to was early April so the op likely got his results 6 weeks after, not 6 months. It's also the biggest homebrew contest in Canada.

 

[wowbeeryum]

I knew I was through with competitions when my score sheet for a wit suggested I boil longer because DMS from the pilsner grains was apparent. I didn't use any pilsner.

 

[Pilgarlic]

I knew I was through with competitions when my score sheet for a wit suggested I boil longer because DMS from the pilsner grains was apparent. I didn't use any pilsner.

"Ach! He said I used Pilsner and I didn't! I'll compete no more!"

I can see that.

 

[bob1852]

"Ach! He said I used Pilsner and I didn't! I'll compete no more!"

I can see that.

Especially when the problem was DMS. Not pilsner, or lack thereof.

Judge just should've said: detected some out of style DMS. Consider boiling longer or more vigorous (and for sure without a lid on) or reducing amount if pilsner malt (if used).

 

[JustLooking]

I knew I was through with competitions when my score sheet for a wit suggested I boil longer because DMS from the pilsner grains was apparent. I didn't use any pilsner.

Pilsner is common is Witbier, so it's a reasonable assumption that you used it. And just because you didn't use Pilsner Malt doesn't mean your beer didn't show signs of DMS.

From BJCP Guidelines:

Ingredients: About 50% unmalted wheat (traditionally soft white
winter wheat) and 50% pale barley malt (usually Pils malt)
constitute the grist.

 

[wowbeeryum]

I submitted the recipe along with the bottles, as specified in the comp guidelines. Do the judges not get to look at that? If not, why include it at all?

 

[JustLooking]

No. In a BJCP competition the judging is blind. Every BJCP competition that I've entered the recipe section of the entry form is optional. For the final round of NHC they want your recipe so they can publish it in the Zymurgy results issue. Some competitions have the winning recipe brewed by a local brewery.

 

[gbx]

Especially when the problem was DMS. Not pilsner, or lack thereof.

Judge just should've said: detected some out of style DMS. Consider boiling longer or more vigorous (and for sure without a lid on) or reducing amount if pilsner malt (if used).

I hate the suggestions because they always seem misguided. They should just say "DMS noted" and assume the brewer has access to the internet or a copy of How to Brew and can look up the causes and solutions. The suggestions always just seem like a way to fill space on the scoresheet.

But to defend judges, its not a bad thing if the scoresheets for the same beer are different. They all perceive things differently and the perception is coloured by the flight of beers it was included in and the style description in front of them. At the recent comp here I put the same beer in as a South Brown and as an English Brown Porter. Reading the scoresheets you would never guess they were the exact same batch of beer. eg. the word "roastiness" appears in all the porter scoresheets (as roast is expected in porter and one judge thought it "maybe high for style") but none of the brown ale scoresheets mention it. But that isn't necessarily a bad thing. The judges sat down and evaluated the beer as a Southern English Brown and scored it as such. The differing scores between judges just meant they were honestly giving there own opinions and perceptions.

 

[wowbeeryum]

No. In a BJCP competition the judging is blind. Every BJCP competition that I've entered the recipe section of the entry form is optional. For the final round of NHC they want your recipe so they can publish it in the Zymurgy results issue. Some competitions have the winning recipe brewed by a local brewery.

ahh, ok, well then I perceived the situation wrong. I acknowledge that dms could have been present in this beer (even without pilsner), I just thought he had the recipe staring him in the face yet he was critiquing my use of pilsner grain. my bad.

 

[Schemy]

Anymore, I view competitions as a chance to win, and not so much for feedback.

Because they don't know your ingredients or process, constructive input on how to improve your beers (especially process) really isn't possible.

Competitions are more about the judges perceptions of your beer versus their perceptions of the style they are judging it to.

This.

I used to try to use it as a way to improve my beer, but unless it is scoring in the low 20's, then the comments are just distinguishing factors from other beers, not necessarily issues with the beer.

I do get upset when I know I have an awesome beer, and have recieved high marks in other comps, and it gets blasted for perceived off flavors that aren't there.

 

[bleme]

Another issue with competitions is that by the time it gets to the judge, the beer is often warm. A warm beer is going to highlight flavors that a cold beer doesn't.

Personally, I get much better feedback at my club meetings. One of the members is BJCP certified and I trust his palette. One meeting I took my Cascadian Dark and got about 20 positive comments. One guy said that it had a nice malt backbone but the hops weren't right for the style. I took his comment with a grain of salt because I know he hates fruity beers. When you use Cascade, Centennial and Belma, you are going to get some fruity notes.

 

[bob1852]

for perceived off flavors that aren't there.

Just because you don't perceive them doesn't mean that someone else won't for sure notice them...

Another issue with competitions is that by the time it gets to the judge, the beer is often warm. A warm beer is going to highlight flavors that a cold beer doesn't.

Yeah, I think too many people serve their homebrew at American Lager temperatures...which mute many of the things judges notice when sampling a warmer beer.