the BJCP so called certification drives me crazy

[Qhrumphf]

I struggle with descriptors like awful, less than good etc. only because a person might get low scores solely due to something not being to style. It may be a very good beer, but get a low score due to style variances, right?

Style flaws and technical flaws are both flaws.

It depends on the extent that they're present. An IPA without hop character (and, unless it's a NEIPA, without bitterness) or a Berliner Weiss without sourness I would hit hard, as those are "core" attributes to the style missing. Putting new world hops in a Strong Bitter? Not technically to style per BJCP (though one could rightfully take issue with that assessment) but if the balance is there, it's a pretty minor style knock in my eyes. Might not hit the 40s, but could still score very well.

When it comes to an excellent beer that was blatantly miscategorized, I do sometimes give a courtesy 29 (say an entrant entering an excellent specialty beer in its base category). But I usually don't knock people for which specialty category they choose as long as effort was there/unless it's blatantly wrong.

 

[chewse]

A question was asked as to my motivation in entering beer in competitions. I guess early on it was more about getting feedback but today I would say its mort about supporting my local home brew club through the bottle fees I pay. I truly appreciation the time, effort and resources it takes to put on a competition. My comments were more in line of “I’m an a home brew expert” just because he/she passed a rudimentary beer test. And, what makes things worse, IMHO, is that so many BCJP judges that I know through the clubs I’m a part of rarely brew or if they do brew tend to brew only one or two styles. It really a disservice, for instance, when a BCJP judge only brew meads and then is slotted to evaluate DIPAs. Circling back to the beginning of my comment her, I will continue to enter competitions with the purpose of supporting my local home brew clubs. Which means I really need to shut my mouth about the work put in by those to put on the competitions.

 

[dmtaylor]

Entering just to give a club money or to make them feel important seems kind of sad to me. Save your money if you're not getting what you want out of it.

That being said..... I personally haven't entered any competitions for the past 3-4 years. I've judged several, but not entered.

 

[radwizard]

I enjoy submitting beers to Competitions, however, I don't really get to stressed about it. I have done pretty well, and it is a good feeling when others credit your hard work.

Honestly, my best beers don't fit well into style guidelines and I don't enter them into Competition.

I have been thinking a lot lately about hosting a Non-AHA/BJCP Beer Competition. Has anyone ever done this or have any advice? I'm interested in a Farmhouse Ale Comp. Judging would be based more on taste and theory. I think it could be a good opportunity for some homebrewers to showcase great beers that don't fit into BJCP.

 

[lowtones84]

I have to say that I'm very surprised that there is no hard and set rule for "judges must be within x points of each other." That's standard for any type of competition where opinion/subjectivity is at play, and should be taken care of immediately. I've never entered a comp because I haven't felt the need, but reading a lot of this makes me even less likely. No disrespect to the individual judges for volunteering their time, doing their best, etc.

I also tend to brew a ton of English styles, even historical ones recently, as well as a lot in the rustic Belgian area. I don't feel that these will be judged well when the BJCP guidelines for these styles are so inaccurate, as discussed already in this thread. There's nothing wrong with wanting a competition to do better, but I do agree that if you don't find them valuable, don't enter.

 

[Punx Clever]

I have to say that I'm very surprised that there is no hard and set rule for "judges must be within x points of each other." That's standard for any type of competition where opinion/subjectivity is at play, and should be taken care of immediately. I've never entered a comp because I haven't felt the need, but reading a lot of this makes me even less likely. No disrespect to the individual judges for volunteering their time, doing their best, etc.

The competitions that I've stewarded (I fully recognize that I don't have the palate to judge beers, and am perfectly OK with getting to drink all the same beers without having to work at describing them) usually have that rule... for the most part it's been a 5-point spread. Still, I was a little miffed by a recent comp where I had a beer score 37-38-30 from three judges, all of them ranked. C'est la vie.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

I have to say that I'm very surprised that there is no hard and set rule for "judges must be within x points of each other." That's standard for any type of competition where opinion/subjectivity is at play, and should be taken care of immediately.

For the two annual competitions that I was a steward at, they had a "hard and set rule" that they followed year after year after year after year: agree within 5 points. As a steward, I saw the numbers - the judges were almost always +/- two or three points. If they were a long ways apart, they brought in a 3rd person to help understand what was going on.

@lowtones84, this isn't aimed at you specifically, but your captured one side of the discussion well. My reply is to "those on the other side" of this discussion, not your specifically.

... but reading a lot of this makes me even less likely. No disrespect to the individual judges for volunteering their time, doing their best, etc.

I've entered competitions, been a steward at competitions, showed up for bottle sorts (including opening shipped packages at regional events).

If you evaluation competitions

based on what you read here,
you are missing out
on what homebrewers,
in the real world,
can do when they come together.
​

​

 

[lowtones84]

Still, I was a little miffed by a recent comp where I had a beer score 37-38-30 from three judges, all of them ranked. C'est la vie.

Yeah, that just...shouldn't be allowed. Very easy for a comp organizer or head judge to lay that ground rule, or even the BJCP itself. It might sound a little over-reaching, but if you're using all BJCP certified judges then I think it would be understandable.

 

[Qhrumphf]

Yeah, that just...shouldn't be allowed. Very easy for a comp organizer or head judge to lay that ground rule, or even the BJCP itself. It might sound a little over-reaching, but if you're using all BJCP certified judges then I think it would be understandable.

The BJCP explicitly doesn't set comp rules. There are a few conditions of sanctioning, the biggest ones being blind judging and published and publicly available rules/guidelines (though those don't have to be BJCP guidelines). But apart from those, competitions are allowed to do pretty much whatever they want. The BJCP has recommended best practices, which IIRC includes a max 7 point spread between judges, though I haven't read it in a while. But comps are under no obligation to follow that.

 

[lowtones84]

Yeah, I get that. Is there anything like a BJCP "sanctioned" event? Then they could have a little more control I suppose. 7 point max difference over a 50 point spread is quite high....

 

[tmendick]

I guess I'm spoiled, every comp I've ever judged was 4-5 point spread max, as requested by the comp coordinator. I would say there are maybe 1-2 beers that I judge per competition (usually 3+ sessions) that I end up more than 3 points away from the person I'm judging with.

 

[TheMadKing]

Just to pile onto this. I am a certified judge, and really do work hard to give feedback that will help the brewers I judge to improve their craft.

That said I have 2 experiences to relate:

In judging a recent competition I was paired with a gentleman 30 years my senior, also a certified judge, and a very good brewer (I've had his beer). We were judging historical beers and on one particular beer I came in at a 38 and he was at a 23. He even agreed that it was better than a beer of the same style that he had just given a 30 to. So I took a stand and really fought for that beer. It was uncomfortable, it took about 20 minutes of discussion and arguing, and eventually he relented and we agreed on an average score of 34. That pushed the beer into a mini-bos round (which was my goal) and side-by-side it was "slap you in the face" better than all the others in the flight except 1, and ended up taking second place by consensus of all the judges present. My point in relating this, is that judges are not always rational or logical in their approach to judging, and their partner will not always push against a score that clearly doesn't fit the beer.

Second, I entered 7 beers in that same competition and took 3 golds and a second place BOS. One of my golds was for a stout that scored a 40. Two of my beers that didn't place were and IPA that scored a 38.5, and a Helles Bock that scored a 31

I entered those same beers (bottled on the same day, in new bottles) into a second competition and just got the results back. The stout scored a 27 (compared to 40 the week before), and the IPA scored a 23 (compared to 38.5) and the Helles Bock scored a 37.5 and took a gold.

I'm very interested to get the scoresheets back to see the feedback to see if there was an infection or something because that point spread is very strange.

What I tend to do in this situation and go with the opinion of the judge who's feedback matches my own perception, and who clearly put more thought into describing what they are tasting. If a judge gave me a score of 23 and wrote "funky roast character, not a fan" (I have seen that on a scoresheet), then I tend to discredit their scores and ignore them.

For example on my scoresheet for the Helles Bock that scored a 31, one judge provided a very well written description and could clearly taste a touch of DMS and sulfur. The second guy said my malty clean lager tasted like "pumpernickle, and honey coated toast with plum jam".. a comment which is not only not helpful, its inaccurate since there's no rye in it at all. But based on these sheets it's pretty easy to tell who's opinion to take more seriously.

At the end of the day, your own opinion is the only one that matters.

 

[dmtaylor]

What I tend to do in this situation and go with the opinion of the judge who's feedback matches my own perception, and who clearly put more thought into describing what they are tasting.

and

At the end of the day, your own opinion is the only one that matters.

Exactly.

 

[Spikybits]

It drives me crazy when I submit the same beer to two local competitions; each competition within 2 weeks of each other. And, in one competition my average score is 22 and comments say the beer is out of style. And in the other competition, I receive a score of 37 and get a red ribbon.

Those doing the judging all have BJCP so called certifications.

The same story repeats itself year-over-year for me; at least over the last 15 years.

Having a BJCP certification is sooooo meaningless.

This just happened to me at a local club comp - BJCP approved comp. Scored 38.5 took bronze at our state fair for specialty IPA. Same batch, bottled 10 seconds after the fair bottles, scores 19. lol....

The bottom comment from the club read, this is not a flawed beer, but needs more hop aroma. Pretty sure a 19 is for a flawed beer.

Outstanding (45 - 50): World-class example of style.
Excellent (38 - 44): Exemplifies style well, requires minor fine-tuning.
Very Good (30 - 37): Generally within style parameters, some minor flaws.
Good (21 - 29): Misses the mark on style and/or minor flaws.
Fair (14 - 20): Off flavors/aromas or major style deficiencies.
Unpleasant. Problematic (00 - 13): Major off flavors and aromas dominate. Hard to drink.


The only negative comment I received from the fair was slight vegetable flavor - I mash hop my White IPA so I wasn't too surprised on this note.

 

[dmtaylor]

@Spikybits And what ranks were the judges? My bet is there was one Recognized or Certified jerk who gave you the lowest score, and another one or two unranked judges with him who just plagiarized the ranked guy's comments without trying to fight him.

 

[Spikybits]

Lol. Didnt check at first but the first beer was by a sensory trained and by a certified. My other was by a certified and "pro-brewer". I mean I have had tons of flawed terrible pro beers too... go figure....

@Spikybits And what ranks were the judges? My bet is there was one Recognized or Certified jerk who gave you the lowest score, and another one or two unranked judges with him who just plagiarized the ranked guy's comments without trying to fight him.

To be clear, my 38.5 scored beer was scored locally by the sensory trained and certified pair. Which resulted in the 19

My american ipa scored also a 19.. but I wasn't concerned. It was a good smash but not an amazing one

 

[dmtaylor]

Lol. Didnt check at first but the first beer was by a sensory trained and by a certified. My other was by a certified and "pro-brewer". I mean I have had tons of flawed terrible pro beers too... go figure....

To be clear, my 38.5 scored beer was scored locally by the sensory trained and certified pair. Which resulted in the 19

My american ipa scored also a 19.. but I wasn't concerned. It was a good smash but not an amazing one

Yeah... And were the Certified scores the lowest of all for each of the 19's?

 

[Spikybits]

Yeah... And were the Certified scores the lowest of all for each of the 19's?

certified was 17 and sensory was 21


Really - oh well! I have better luck at the fairs at those actually give you ribbons! i just chalked it up to two judges that this really wasnt their cup of tea(beer).