2017 National Brewing Championships

[Leann ull]

Great Work Giacomo!

[danger_zone]

Bit of copy paste and I grouped back the entries by Competition category, which should give you a better view of which medals were awarded in each category.
Remember is not an official document, just my own hand-driven copy-paste from the Competition awards page

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_3ZhvbObI0WvvrvI7sWtD8HGjXuEiHicXvvXQYPwkTw/edit?usp=sharing

Category 18:strong american ale,2nd place, Wee Amateur Brewers???Freudian slip?

[giacomo]

That's exactly what is on the competition page

[mick02]

...
But don't lie to me and tell me my beer was poor ...

I understand the disappointment of seeing what you think is an excellent beer not doing well. I had a stout in that I was convinced would score well but alas it didn't.

What you have to remember is that no one is lying to you... The judges are analysing an anonymous beer and are giving it honest feedback.

My advice to you is to take the judges comments, adjust your recipe/process/ingredients and go at it again. This is the best path to improvement.

Good luck with v2.

[giacomo]

I understand the disappointment of seeing what you think is an excellent beer not doing well. I had a stout in that I was convinced would score well but alas it didn't.

What you have to remember is that no one is lying to you... The judges are analysing an anonymous beer and are giving it honest feedback.

My advice to you is to take the judges comments, adjust your recipe/process/ingredients and go at it again. This is the best path to improvement.

Good luck with v2.

I totally agree.
It's worth adding that judging is an intrinsically subjective process, to which we try to give an objective framework: your judges might have been incompetent, or suffering from palate fatigue, or in the middle of hay-fever... their feedback is (and remains) their most honest and open impression of the glass they had in front of them, and all of them tried to do their best to both objectively assess the samples and provide the most detailed and knowledgeable feedback to the entrant.

The NHC has been (and will be) working hard to improve the quality of the feedback and judging level (one of the reasons, I personally believe, why the scoresheet might have had an overall lower scoring this year ), but this remain nothing more than a feedback and a subjective assessment

It's just beer, in the end...

[LordEoin]

what happened with the pilsner/pale lager grouping?

[mick02]

what happened with the pilsner/pale lager grouping?

That was judged in there first leg. No medals awarded.

[Jonnycheech]

No Bren = No medals! 

[phynes1]

Well done Phynes

Cheers CH!

[guest1906]

Mead and Ciders in one category!!!

Bollocks to that lads could you have expanded it a bit better or did you do it that way because of a low entry. As a first time entry I was expecting all the cider categories to have their individual awards. I'll know now for next year.

[giacomo]

I put them together, since they nicely complemented in terms of medals (1x 1st, 2nd and 3rd); the category itself is not on the grouping published by the NHC.

[Will_D]

How many Mead entries were there?
How many Cide entries?

[Simon_]

what happened with the pilsner/pale lager grouping?

That was judged in there first leg. No medals awarded.

But why have no scores have been returned for the category?

[mick02]

what happened with the pilsner/pale lager grouping?

That was judged in there first leg. No medals awarded.

But why have no scores have been returned for the category?

I don't know for sure but I'm guessing that the score sheets from the first leg of the lager category weren't available to the person entering in the data.

[mr hoppy]

I got my score for a pale lager


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk