2017 National Brewing Championships

[Leann ull]

Gordon has spoken

[Drzava]

In the interim, should we just put in the 'shipping' option for drop off etc? Can't register without picking something! I appreciate BTW that all this 'background' work takes for more effort than may realise!

Just wondering if anyone has guidance on this? Don't want to miss the boat like I did last year!

[dcalnan]

I would for the meantime, it might take a while to add mine and John's details.

So I have a choice to make is a chocolate oatmeal milk stout a sweet stout or oatmeal stout?

[Dunkel]

Ok I have now registered and hope I win on beginners luck, fat chance of that happening.

  It happened to me in the cider category! 

[Dr Brown Ale]

So I have a choice to make is a chocolate oatmeal milk stout a sweet stout or oatmeal stout?

Sweet stout probably needs lactose or a huge body from high mashing.

Chocolate can be bitter chocolate, from the malt.

Taste it then decide.

[LASERBOY147]

Is there a link to the uploaded score sheets from last year? Had a look but so many threads. Ty

[Leann ull]

They were the property of the club and the entrant who paid for them. To help others they were all published. Links were in competition area. It was unique as no other competition on the planet does this to help entrants. For confidentiality reasons but more the fact that some members were analysing them not in a good way they were deleted 3 months after the event.

Not sure what's going to happen this year, after last year I wouldn't be a fan of publishing all it's not fair on judges either.

We will be publishing NEIPA comp results as we make judges anonymous and problems are resolved through organiser.

[LASERBOY147]

Cheers for update. Was just looking for my own but somewhere I did a screenshot so I'll find it on laptop later . Thanks

[delzep]

some members were analysing them not in a good way

What do you mean by this?

[fishjam45 (Colin)]

Comments were passed about the judges as far as I can remember

[Dr Brown Ale]

No.

Comments were passed about the comments some judges were putting on the sheets.

One clown, in his comments on one beer, wrote

I...

and that was all. No advice, no reasons for docking points, just that.

If you are volunteering to judge a competition, and are doing stuff like that then you absolutely deserve to be called out in public, that is downright rude, and of absolutely no help to the brewer.

[Leann ull]

And that's for the entrant to raise with the organisers rather than the individual or a third party publicly berating judges and why I wouldn't be a fan of publishing sheets. I also know good BJCP judges that don't judge if they know the results are to be publicised.
It's up to the organisers who they choose to judge and even if we had the top 100 bjcp judges on the planet there will always be somebody unhappy with something and probably why it's fairest to all to not publish or do it anonymously.

[SlugTrap]

Concerns over consistency in judging comments is one reason the NHC created the position of Judging Officer.
I'll be looking after standards for scoresheets this year, and fielding any questions from competitors that come up around this issue.

On a happier note, announcement to follow...

[SlugTrap]

Gordon has spoken

The NHC is happy to share the judging guidelines we'll be using for New England IPA:

21B. Speciality IPA: New England IPA
Overall Impression
An unfiltered, soft-bodied, American IPA low in bitterness. Showcases the bright flavors and aromas of American or New World hops through its balance, mouthfeel, and yeast character. Drinkability is a key characteristic.
Aroma
A prominent to intense hop aroma typically citrus, tropical fruit, stone fruit, floral, berry, melon; pine and spice are less common but acceptable. Most versions are dry hopped and have an additional resinous or grassy fresh hop aroma, this is desireable but not required. Some clean malty-grainy aroma may be found in the background, generally with no caramel component. Low to medium fruity esters, although a neutral fermentation character is also acceptable. A restrained alcohol note may be present, but this should be minimal.
Appearance
Color ranges from gold to light reddish-amber. Medium-sized, white to off-white head with good persistence. Hazy to cloudy, even turbid. Dry hopping contributes to haziness. The high protein content of wheat and/or oats impairs clarity in an unfiltered beer, although the level of haze is somewhat variable. Suspended yeast sediment can contribute to cloudiness.
Flavor
Hop flavor is medium to very high, with American or New World hop characteristics such as citrus, floral, tropical fruit, stone fruit, resinous, berry, melon, etc. Low to medium bitterness, any lingering bitterness should not be harsh. Low to medium-low malt flavor, generally clean or grainy-sweet; caramel or toasty flavors should be minimal. Low to medium yeast character is common, sometimes peach- or apricot-like. Dry to medium-dry finish; low residual sweetness is acceptable.  A light, clean alcohol flavor is not a fault in stronger versions.
Mouthfeel
Medium-light to medium body with medium to medium-high carbonation. No harsh hop-derived astringency. Smooth, with creaminess from wheat and/or slickness from oats. Suspended yeast may increase the perception of body.
Comments
Can range from a smoother, hazier, juicier interpretation of an American IPA to an opaque "fruit smoothie" that might seem more like fresh squeezed juice than beer. When judging, allow for differences in interpretation. May have a pungent, dank hop character usually found only in wet hop beers.
History
Based on Head Topper from The Alchemist, first canned in 2011, which became popular using an English house yeast and extensive late hopping to create its fruity character. Later producers employed a combination of hop flavor-enhancing techniques that together produce the signature haze. Variously referred to as "Vermont IPA" to reflect its origins or "North East IPA" because several prominent early producers are outside of New England in New York. This style continues to evolve.
Characteristic Ingredients
Pale, two-row or Pilsen malts, including British varieties. American or New World hops, especially newer varietals providing distinct characteristics, with a concentration on late and dry-hopping. High-protein malts such as oats or wheat contribute mouthfeel and polyphenols for enhanced hop character. Minimal use of crystal malts, if any. Sugar additions to aid attenuation are acceptable. English yeast strains are estery, medium- to low- attenuating and medium- to low-flocculating. High chloride levels accentuate mouthfeel.
Style Comparison
Cloudier, less bitter, softer and often fruitier than an American IPA. Many modern American IPAs are also hazy and fruity but have a crisp finish and a higher perceived bitterness; these beers should be entered as American IPA.
Entry Instructions
Entrant must specify a strength (session, standard, double); if no strength is specified, standard will be assumed. Entrants may specify specific hop varieties used, if entrants feel that judges may not recognize the varietal characteristics of newer hops.
Vital Statistics
IBUs: 35 - 70
SRM: 4 - 14
OG: 1.045 - 1.085
FG: 1.010 - 1.018
ABV: 4.5% - 10.0%
Commercial Examples
Tree House Julius, Trillium Congress Street, Other Half Green Diamonds, Grimm Tesseract, Great Notion Juice Box, Cloudwater DIPA v3

[Leann ull]

Great work.
These will also be adopted for GCB comp in May