Now I know this happens all the time....and that's one of the reasons I think I am done with comps. There is too much variability in scores/remarks for them to be useful for me. I recently sent in a Dubbel to three separate comps. The average score in each comp was a 38, a 32, and a 22. Then I read the comments and they all say different things(both good and bad). I had a Grand Master II write "no technical flaws" and gave the beer a 37...well evidently the other judges found plenty of flaws to score a 22. Here is the frustrating part...I have won my share of medals/ribbons so then the doubt sets in. IF I can't trust the bad scores how can I trust the good scores either?
I think I am done entering Homebrew Competitions
- Thread starter Phunhog
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
JohnnyBrewGood
Well-Known Member
I feel ya.
I will never understand how you can judge taste anyhow. You entered 3 different comps and got 3 diff answers with same product. Sounds about right to me.
I will never understand how you can judge taste anyhow. You entered 3 different comps and got 3 diff answers with same product. Sounds about right to me.
sputnam
Well-Known Member
that sux...i'm entering my first in may. not nearly as excited now....but, maybe i was be as disappointed either
That does suck but if you enjoy it then don't give up. My last, the people judged a beer, gave it a low score and the comments clearly showed they didn't judge my beer. Entry fee and time wasted because they're disorganized. It was a better beer that I had brewed and I'm disappointed but that all I can do is be disappointed and move on.
At least the judging of the wrong beer was consistent. I'll give them that.
At least the judging of the wrong beer was consistent. I'll give them that.
machfive55
Well-Known Member
If you like your beer, and your friends and family like it (meaning they ask for more) then you are probably doing something right, keep doing it.
I've found the same variability with comps. It's a tough thing to manage, especially when you think you have a good beer and you get a crappy score. Now all that said there a ton of things that can go wrong till the judge gets the beer, many of those things are out of the brewer's hands.
It's a tough thing for me because I want the critical feedback, but I want more than a score sheet. I'd love to have a live session with a judge where they can critically judge my beer with me present so we can both understand what is going on. Also, I'd like to get the levels of perception of different things, for instance a certain flaw might take the beer out of running for a comp, but it might not be harsh enough to make a bad beer, or may just move the beer to a different category (which is something they won't tell you on score sheets). The BJCP should offer that service for homebrewers.
I've found the same variability with comps. It's a tough thing to manage, especially when you think you have a good beer and you get a crappy score. Now all that said there a ton of things that can go wrong till the judge gets the beer, many of those things are out of the brewer's hands.
It's a tough thing for me because I want the critical feedback, but I want more than a score sheet. I'd love to have a live session with a judge where they can critically judge my beer with me present so we can both understand what is going on. Also, I'd like to get the levels of perception of different things, for instance a certain flaw might take the beer out of running for a comp, but it might not be harsh enough to make a bad beer, or may just move the beer to a different category (which is something they won't tell you on score sheets). The BJCP should offer that service for homebrewers.
IL1kebeer
Well-Known Member
A very important thing to consider is storage, handling, and bottling procedures. This can be a cause for a great variability between bottles of the same batch, thus contributing to fluctuating scores. Bad bottling procedure may not be readily apparent, but bad storage or handling by the organizers can speed up those problems. Storage and handling can still be a problem even with good bottling procedures.
On another note, I'm not a judge, nor an expert, but I believe that my palate is good enough to differentiate between good and bad beer. I may be lucky in that regard. I scored moderately low in a comp once with a 32, and you know what, I agree, that beer had some problems and I knew it going in. I had a few other beers that I was happy with that scored well and even got gold. Again, not a fluke in my books because I know that it tasted great and. My point is, I have enough confidence in my palate to tell whether the beer was judged poorly. I know when a beer that I make is not quite up to par and I know when it's a home run. If you have confidence in your palate then you shouldn't second guess your beer. Like I said, it could be storage, handling, or bottling procedures.
Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew
On another note, I'm not a judge, nor an expert, but I believe that my palate is good enough to differentiate between good and bad beer. I may be lucky in that regard. I scored moderately low in a comp once with a 32, and you know what, I agree, that beer had some problems and I knew it going in. I had a few other beers that I was happy with that scored well and even got gold. Again, not a fluke in my books because I know that it tasted great and. My point is, I have enough confidence in my palate to tell whether the beer was judged poorly. I know when a beer that I make is not quite up to par and I know when it's a home run. If you have confidence in your palate then you shouldn't second guess your beer. Like I said, it could be storage, handling, or bottling procedures.
Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew
FuzzeWuzze
I Love DIY
I think its just bad judging and or preconceived notions of what a style should taste like, so if it doesnt taste like that its not to style and gets graded low. And there are judges who just dont understand the true meaning of some of the descriptions...i recommend OP listen to the latest "The Jamil Show" podcast from Brewing Network...he had Gordon Strong on the President of BJCP and they go over a lot of the flaws of the current system and the common mistakes judges make.
You can download and listen to it here
http://thebrewingnetwork.com/shows/1082
i had that happen (judging the wrong beer). got my scorecard back and saw it was classified as an oatmeal stout. i submitted a milk stout so i emailed the coordinator and they refunded my money for that entry. i think mine was mistagged... oh well sh*t happens
Your Beer Talking:
You wanna hurt me? Go right ahead if it makes you feel any better. I'm an easy target. I could be a cold-hearted cynic like you... but I don't like to hurt people's feelings. Well, you think what you want about me; I'm not changing. I like me. My wife likes me. My customers like me. 'Cause I'm the real article. What you see is what you get.
You wanna hurt me? Go right ahead if it makes you feel any better. I'm an easy target. I could be a cold-hearted cynic like you... but I don't like to hurt people's feelings. Well, you think what you want about me; I'm not changing. I like me. My wife likes me. My customers like me. 'Cause I'm the real article. What you see is what you get.
In general, I agree with this. I have entered enough comps. over the past couple years that I kind of "know" going in if something is really there or not. I still send beers in looking for feedback, or "hoping" they do a little better than I think they will.... but, by and large, the beers come back pretty much like I anticipated.
The one thing I will say is this though - I find the real variability in judging between smaller comps, or newer comps and the bigger, traditional ones. If I am sending beers to Competitions that show up on the MCAB or Midwest Homebrewer circuit - I find there is pretty consistent feedback. It is when I send to various other random comps that are smaller, have a small judging pool to draw from, rely on inexperienced local club members and maybe local brewers - that is when my scores/feedback don't really seem to add up or match.
There are a lot of well run, well staffed competitions in the midwest. I would say that most of the time they provide feedback and scores that are consistent. I routinely send the same beer in to 2-4 competitions that happen very near to each other.
I also listened to that podcast with Gordon Strong the other day - it did highlight some problem areas and issues. It was interesting and worth taking the time for.
QoB
Well-Known Member
Do yourself a favor and enter older competitions. The newer ones tend to have the most issues with score variances.
Nightshade
Well-Known Member
I have no real urge to enter comps, I just am not a competitive person.
That being said if and when I do enter a comp I will be doing it for reasons outside of scoring and ribbons. I am looking for detailed notes on what the judges taste and percieve in my brews. The notes mean far more than the score IMO.
That being said if and when I do enter a comp I will be doing it for reasons outside of scoring and ribbons. I am looking for detailed notes on what the judges taste and percieve in my brews. The notes mean far more than the score IMO.
machfive55
Well-Known Member
I agree with the bottling and handling issues. One of my best scoring beers was bottle conditioned, my theory is the conditioning was able to hold up better to these things because of the live yeast content.
I also think there are judges who don't review the style guidelines before judging and may go by memory on some things and therefore miss the mark. I think its possible to have a really good beer that scores really poorly because you have entered in the wrong category, and the judges will never tell you..."should have entered category X instead of Y".
I also think we should get to judge the judges, based on their level of feedback, were comments appropriate, score sheets completely filled out, etc.
I also think there are judges who don't review the style guidelines before judging and may go by memory on some things and therefore miss the mark. I think its possible to have a really good beer that scores really poorly because you have entered in the wrong category, and the judges will never tell you..."should have entered category X instead of Y".
I also think we should get to judge the judges, based on their level of feedback, were comments appropriate, score sheets completely filled out, etc.
Nightshade
Well-Known Member
double post somehow
therainmaker
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2013
- Messages
- 165
- Reaction score
- 8
I'm of the mindset enter comps that are relatively inexpensive, and take the feedback from the more experienced judges. I had a beer judged by a grand master and presumably apprentice or maybe guest judge. It looked like they reviewed 2 different beers. It seems as though all my better scores come from the more experienced judges, so I keep brewing and heeding their advice, while writing off the others.
jsledd
Well-Known Member
My secret wish is to enter the same beer in multiple categories and take 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Best of Show. Granted, not every style can 'fit' into multiple categories, but it would be funny if it happened.
indianaroller
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2008
- Messages
- 196
- Reaction score
- 4
Score: 28
Comments: Very nice beer!
Yeah, I'm done with comps too. Not worth the cash when I can just let people taste for free to get the same feedback.
Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew
Comments: Very nice beer!
Yeah, I'm done with comps too. Not worth the cash when I can just let people taste for free to get the same feedback.
Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew
Special Bitter scored a 29 with a BJCP National Judge
Comments: "Not enough hop aroma"
Style Guide: "Hop aroma can range from moderate to none"
Comment: "Carbonation is too low- little head retention"
Style Guide: "May have very little head due to low carbonation"
Comment: "Needs more caramel malt- not picking up enough"
Style Guide: "Caramel flavors are common but not required"
These coming from a BJCP National Judge-
Comments: "Not enough hop aroma"
Style Guide: "Hop aroma can range from moderate to none"
Comment: "Carbonation is too low- little head retention"
Style Guide: "May have very little head due to low carbonation"
Comment: "Needs more caramel malt- not picking up enough"
Style Guide: "Caramel flavors are common but not required"
These coming from a BJCP National Judge-
therainmaker
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2013
- Messages
- 165
- Reaction score
- 8
Wow.. This is slightly embarrassing. I believe the judges have the style guidelines when they judge, right?
Nightshade
Well-Known Member
They are "supposed" to know them and consult them, but I don't think there is a hard and fast rule on having them and reviewing them before or during judging.
As a guy recently did the BJCP exam and has done a bit of judging lately, I believe it. Some of the older and more experienced guys seem to have forgotten the guidelines yet have an overconfidence (bordering on arrogance) about their judging ability. I expect it to get worse when the new guidelines come in. I recommend emailing the judge and tell them they are wrong. I have in the past and got replies but when I talk to other judges nobody has ever gotten any feedback at all.
I'm not entering beers in comps unless they are from brewing classic styles or clones of the most readily available commercial example. You won't get good feedback other than how to make it "more on-style" which I don't care about.
biereblanche
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2009
- Messages
- 78
- Reaction score
- 14
I don't think the judge was necessarily "wrong," but failed to appreciate or understand the "range" of the style, and used that to justify a score that sounds lower than it needed to be.
Some judges, I think, judge against a single ideal interpretation of a given style, rather than accepting a range. There are technical flaws and recipe flaws that detract from stylistic accuracy, but I believe many, many brewers at this point are making clean examples that fit the style guidelines but are missing the intangibles or je ne sais quoi of the best of the style and unfortunately judges are not giving credit where due by adjusting their scoring trend.
Judges palates are all different, as are style knowledge, and judging/ scoring "philosophy;" it's inevitable that we see wide scoring disparities, inconsistencies, and some off-base or narrowly focused feedback.
Some judges, I think, judge against a single ideal interpretation of a given style, rather than accepting a range. There are technical flaws and recipe flaws that detract from stylistic accuracy, but I believe many, many brewers at this point are making clean examples that fit the style guidelines but are missing the intangibles or je ne sais quoi of the best of the style and unfortunately judges are not giving credit where due by adjusting their scoring trend.
Judges palates are all different, as are style knowledge, and judging/ scoring "philosophy;" it's inevitable that we see wide scoring disparities, inconsistencies, and some off-base or narrowly focused feedback.
machfive55
Well-Known Member
I disagree. I think the idea behind the BJCP is to provide some sanity and consistency to judging and competitions for brewers to use as a goal. I do agree that palates vary and interpretations vary, however, when a judge makes comments that are contrary to what the guidelines state then there is a disparity that needs to be addressed.
I guess what I'm try to say that is without some common goals and guidelines trying to judge beer and brew to style would be like hitting a moving target. I think this is what the BJCP tries to level out to some degree, and if that's the case I think the BJCP needs to reevaluate its guidelines, procedures, education, etc to reflect that. Maybe its as simple as every comp needs to have style guideline summaries at their table for the styles they are judging. Maybe its periodically retesting judges with an online exame, maybe something else? I would hope that the BJCP takes comments from brewers into consideration and continually reevaluates their process to reflect new trends in the industry and their own community.
I think you all expect more out of a system in which human beings are being asked to make subjective judgements than such a system can provide. As an example of this I took two growlers of the same beer to a party last weekend, one of which had been dosed with a little Sinamar so its color was about 16 SRM whereas the untreated one was about 12. I gave small samples to experienced beer drinkers (most of whom are BJCP judges) and asked for comparisons. No scientific data collection here but a general observation would be that the more experienced the judge the more and greater differences he found (e.g. 'lots more malt in the nose of this one'). The one non-judge I gave them to said "I'm not really very experienced in tasting beer so I can't really tell the difference."). BTW, some of the guys, the real experts, were pretty PO'd when they found out what the truth was. I'm not accusing anyone of BSing me. It is well known that color effects how things taste and that is why breweries go to great pains to control the color of their products. "We drink with our eyes" as Prof. Bamforth says. He should really say we taste with our minds.
And yet if we ask ourselves how we could do it better there aren't really any answers. Given the adaptability of human perception we're probably doing the best we can or close to it. If you think brewing competitions are squirrely check out dog shows some time.
And yet if we ask ourselves how we could do it better there aren't really any answers. Given the adaptability of human perception we're probably doing the best we can or close to it. If you think brewing competitions are squirrely check out dog shows some time.
hunter_le five
Sheriff Underscore
I make what I like and I drink what I make. Never been too concerned with competition.
If I want feedback, I'll go to a homebrew club or shop.
If I want feedback, I'll go to a homebrew club or shop.
Very interesting. Reminds me of the wine experiment on color:
Link.
I've only entered beers in a competition once, but I'm entering at least 5 next month. We'll see how they do.
I agree. The same Special Bitter was judged by an Apprentice and I received a 33 and more accurate criticism regarding why it didn't score higher.
I also agree that many judges take the top beer on the Commercial Examples and make it the Gospel that all other beers in the style are judged against. Unfortunately, this leads more to Competition Cloning than innovation and experimentation.
I've always made my own recipes and never cloned one, because the experimentation is what I enjoy about homebrewing. I guess that means I might not be terribly successful on the Comp circuit, but who cares in the end, right?
therainmaker
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2013
- Messages
- 165
- Reaction score
- 8
Great discussion here. While the human factor is always there, I think many of us seek constructive, meaningful feedback, and often we don't get it. I certainly don't brew for the judges, I brew what I like and what sounds good, but I'm always looking for ways to improve it, and the judges may make a suggestion I hadn't thought of, or perhaps they will confirm an off flavor of flaw I though was present.
I enjoy getting the feedback and trying to diagnose issues and what have you, but without constructive feedback, how can you? Some judging sheets I've seen literally had the complete opposite checked. One judge said huge creaminess and full mouthfeel and the other said thin and weak. Sure there are thresholds and everyone is different, but opposite sides of the scale doesn't provide any help, because you don't know what to believe
I enjoy getting the feedback and trying to diagnose issues and what have you, but without constructive feedback, how can you? Some judging sheets I've seen literally had the complete opposite checked. One judge said huge creaminess and full mouthfeel and the other said thin and weak. Sure there are thresholds and everyone is different, but opposite sides of the scale doesn't provide any help, because you don't know what to believe
I always point out to people that when setting out to improve your beer you must have an optimality criterion. Some optimality criteria are
1. Tastes best to you
2. Tastes best to your SO
3. Most enjoyed by your friends
4. Sells best (if you are commercial)
5. Most authentic
6. Wins competitions.
These can result in rather different versions of the same beer. There are strategies for optimizing under any of them. If you want to win competitions a few ideas include:
1. Shotgunning. In any given competition enter lots of beers and enter the same beer in several categories. In a competition I ran a disproportionate number of ribbons went to a rather small group of entrants but they enetered a disproportionate number of beers.
2. Shoot for the big end of the OG range.
3. Follow the BJCP guidelines as closely as you can even if you know or think them wrong.
4. Use low mineral content water.
5. Brew often. This keeps your skill levels up and gives you lots of beers to enter.
6. Become a certified judge and judge often.
7. Know who judges each style and what he likes and shoot for that.
No. 7 is impossible if you are entering a competition at the other end of the country but if you do No. 6 it won't be long before you realize that Joe always asks to judge wheat beers in your own club's competition. He may not always get the assignment he wants and there may be wild cards from out of town on the weizen panel but it all about improving your chances.
I have taken a similar stance this year, but for different reasons. I only plan to enter two comps this year: NHC and Dixie Cup. NHC I'm already done since none placed. Still not sure what I'm sending to the other. My reasons are twofold.
First, I'm concentrating more this year on addressing your problem: improving the pool of qualified judges. I'm waiting on tasting exam results, and actively judging as many comps as I can to hone my skills and abilities. Without more and better judging, that problem will never be addressed, so I'm trying to do my part. It may be something you want to look into as well since the best source of feedback is your own perceptions since you know your full process in a way that no judge will. If you've never read Randy Mosher's Tasting Beer and Gordon Strong's Brewing Better Beer, get them both.
Second, I don't enter comps for feedback. I've made beer for 19 years. I entered a few comps when I first started and did well, but I really stopped being interested in them and started just making beer for the house and friends. I only started entering recently again when I joined a club at the suggestion of someone I started in the brewing hobby. That's where I encountered the inconsistency you mention and decided on the first course mentioned. I don't need the feedback. I know the beer I make, and as long as my wife and I are happy with it, that's ultimately all I care about. I've found that in every case I've entered a beer that scored 'poorly' (relatively speaking), it wound up being a technical mishap that deserved it (I wound up having some bottling issues last year that bit me in a couple spots). Other than that, it's more a matter of luck of the draw on flights and judging which I have no control over.
This is a big thing now. There are a lot of hardcore competition brewers who spam every subcat in every style in every comp. They aren't brewing to clone their favourite beer, to create something new or even something to drink. They are brewing perfectly to style recipes over and over again for the sole purpose of winning medals. How do you think your beer will do against theirs? (you brewed less than a dozen times this year for fun without a thought about entering it in a comp). When a judge who has already tasted 5 other beautifully fermented and perfectly to style samples gets to your beer, what kind of feedback do you think you will get?
You hear stories from guys like Jamil or Gordon Strong about how they entered their first extract batch and won a medal. Maybe 5 years ago but that isn't going to happen today.
I agree. I've entered a few comps (including National Homebrew), scored from low to high 30's with rather useless feedback so I'm done. My best feedback is when the keg sprays CO2 foam and my buddies say "That was great, do have any more?"
Pilgarlic
Well-Known Member
I'm a judge and a competitor. As a competitor I have had surprising and inconsistent results on occasion. For the most part, though, my scores are consistent with one another for the same beer, and consistent with my expectations. It's not as bad as the exceptions make it seem, at least in my experience.
Judges commit their time and effort to become judges with the best of intentions. That said, every competition I've been a part of has suffered from too few qualified judges. That can lead to the kind of results I'm reading about, here, though, in truth, most unqualified judges are paired with a more experienced judge, and they tend to follow the more qualified judge's lead.
If you don't like the feedback or scores you're getting and you don't want to compete that's fine. A positive result of that may be that the ratio of entries to qualified judges will improve.
On the other hand, if your disappointment with judging leads you to explore judging yourself to improve the situation, it will help all of us.
Judges commit their time and effort to become judges with the best of intentions. That said, every competition I've been a part of has suffered from too few qualified judges. That can lead to the kind of results I'm reading about, here, though, in truth, most unqualified judges are paired with a more experienced judge, and they tend to follow the more qualified judge's lead.
If you don't like the feedback or scores you're getting and you don't want to compete that's fine. A positive result of that may be that the ratio of entries to qualified judges will improve.
On the other hand, if your disappointment with judging leads you to explore judging yourself to improve the situation, it will help all of us.
therainmaker
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2013
- Messages
- 165
- Reaction score
- 8
I'm in the process of getting certified. Passed the entrance exam. Called a dozen tasting exams in a 4 hour drive the whole way out to 2016 and still don't have a seat, though I'm on every waiting list.
I emailed Gordon about this and got a very sufficient response. Basically the amount of time a d qualified judges needed far outweigh what is available, but as the bjcp grows, it will allow people to continue earning their ranks and hopeful give back by helping to proctor exams.
I committed to helping with exams one I reach the appropriate level based on the lengthy wait time and frustration I'm feeling now, and I hope others will do the same.
Darwin18
Well-Known Member
People have been doing this for years. Both Gordon and Jamil spammed their way to homebrewing competition fame.
People still do this, just not at the NHC. If your excuse for your beer not doing well in a competition is because the other beers in your flight were better fermented and more to style, than perhaps you need to work on your brewing. People like to moan about how restrictive the BJCP guidelines are, but truthfully, there is enough room to differentiate your entry recipe-wise from the others for the bulk of the categories.
It used to be, not that long ago, that just sending in a beer that was fermented using temperature control would win you a medal. The increase in homebrewing has led to increased competition and it's more difficult to win. I think that's great. Focusing on water profiles, yeast health, freshness, and the quality of your ingredients are how you win and also how brew GREAT beer.
As a judge, I've seen some stupid stuff a handful of times, but the vast majority of the time the competition (judges, stewards, organizers) do a tremendous job. It's not easy to sit down and constructively evaluate 9 - 10 entries of the same style in a 2 - 3 hour window. If you don't like or disagree with your feed back then it is absolutely critical that you email the competition organizer and head judge and let them know! Email the judges and let them know!
I've had my share of odd scores and the occasional score sheet that leaves me shaking my head, but the majority of my entries have been spot on. I try to enter established competitions. If I'm looking at a new competition, I'll Google it and see how the previous years went. The comments about re-testing / re-evaluating judges are idiotic and come from people who themselves are not judges and do not understand how much effort it takes. Judges don't get paid. Sometimes we don't even get a lunch. I do it because I like the experience and I really like talking to people who love beer as much as I do.
I had my name on lists for the entire Gulf South at one point. Got a seat in Austin (7.5 hour drive) eventually, and I had a seat in Houston as a backup or retake option, but dropped it since I haven't received my original scores yet. IME, the drops start about 30 days out and sometimes increase all the way up to the last minute.
MindenMan
Well-Known Member
The first beer I entered into a competition, looking back I shouldn't have. I was proud of it and wanted get some feed back. I got creamed, and rightly so. I have since won a Best of Category: Stouts, and Porters, and if it wasn't for my amazing wife prodding me to enter it I wouldn't have done it. I was having flashbacks to the first contest, and I didn't want that kind of embarrassment again. At this point, I don't need to enter any more contests, because I know I must be doing something right, or I wouldn't have won that contests.
I dont know if anyone has said this yet cuz im to drunk to set and read this but ive never got the whole compitition thing i mean we all make beer cuz the big guys suck azz or the craft stuff we love cost like hell. or maybe you just want to get goofy with your brew im all three. hell do you like it? who cares what someone elses palite thinks. i know i know some people live for the compitions but ive read on here about 18 year old stouts entered into comps and getting results that it could use a little more cellering. man just make beer and enjoy it sorry for the long winded drunk rant just my 2 cents.
This isn't my excuse for not doing well, this is me telling new brewers to not believe the myth that if they enter that one beer they have they will get good feedback and might even win. I believed that and then got bummed out after getting my first score sheets back. I realized that it was pointless to enter a beer that wasn't brewed specifically for competition as all my scoresheet just had style issues listed. Now I don't bother entering stuff that isn't on style, I've done a lot better and I'm not bummed out with stupid comments about how I can make my beer more on style. And yes there is lots of room in the BJCP guidelines but there are a lot of ****ty judges which was kind of the point of this thread. I've entered beers that were well within the guidelines but the scoresheets told me how I could make the beer more like the first commercial example.
jmitchell3
Well-Known Member
After entering a few comps, I'm entering now just to help identify process flaws rather than recipe flaws. After I fix all my process issues, I should be able to brew flawless beers. Then if I and my friends think the recipe makes a good beer, I'll make it again.
Sent from my iPad using Home Brew
Sent from my iPad using Home Brew
Similar threads
