March 25th, 2010 by Nate
(Photo was taken in the Medieval city of Toruń, Poland)
There is a great discussion over at The Brew Club that was kicked off by Bob the Brit: “How do you review your Beer?” Bob has outlined his thoughts on the site and it is particularly interesting to see how other beer drinkers, enthusiasts and web-based reviewers rate their beer. I am not going to repeat any of Bob’s work (you can read all about it here), but it’s suffice to say that it got me thinking about how I rate my beer.
I should preface this by saying that I originally started Bier Adventures purely to share my love of bier and travel experiences with the world. So my scales of measure were never correctly defined nor tuned. This becomes clear as an attached adventure to the beer tends to ‘bump up’ the rating I give.
An example of such a bump is that of the Polish Tyskie. It was consumed during a brilliant night consisting of a Chopin concert; traditional Polish dinner of żurek; a walk around the top deck of the Pałac Kultury i Nauki (Palace of Culture and Science), and then finally paired up with a glass of Żubrówka vodka. Thus the beer has a higher rating that it probably deserved.
However as I cannot always have an adventure whilst drinking, nor can I always drink a beer in mid-adventure, I have begun to try and regulate my ratings appropriately. Allow me to detail my categories for you.
Note: When possible, I do drink beers as recommended by the brewer. Such efforts drinking from the correct receptacle, in the correct temperature and very rarely with the correct food are examples. I also, like Bob, also try to drink at least 2 before rating them. However rarely do I drink in controlled environments, thus aforementioned bump in ratings.
The One Stein Rating
Put simply, I wouldn’t give these beers to my dog. This may be a little harsh and it’s intended to be. 1 Stein beers honestly leave me wondering why. Why anyone could brew something so offensive to the tastes. Sometimes I may not ‘get it’, the style may not work for me, or the beer may be stale. None the less 1 Stein beers always initially annoy me as I get frustrated at having spent the money on them. When I could have very well purchased something I know (for the same price) and actually enjoy it.
But if you never hit rock bottom, how will you ever know from where to evaluate other beers. A perfect example is that of The Noël Bière from Meteor Brasserie. It was horrid, and I threw out the remaining members of the six pack, however it allowed me to really enjoy the Boxer Christmas bier for everything it was worth.
The Two Stein Rating
Such beers tend to be the more common, mass-produced, beer conglomerate brews. You will drink them if there isn’t anything else going, but you know that tomorrow you are going to wish you hadn’t. Generally they are pale, super-cold lagers that aren’t bad in the heat of summer, because they are cold not because of anything else. Predictable, somewhat boring and sometimes drinkable. For example of this is the 1664 Blanc, a poor and weird attempt at a wheat beer.
The Three Stein Rating
Now we are getting into the range where even crappy beers, so long as they are coupled with a great adventure or experience start to be highly rated. Although 3 Steins correctly labels the beers and/or their experience as mid-range, I feel I should break down the understanding of ratings further, into two groups:
1. Those Beers that based solely on their quality, flavour, taste, texture, aroma… etc. deserve their rating.
A perfect example of this is the Erdinger Weißbräu, which is a solid Weißbier. It is something you, to quote from Bob, “can take to a friends place”.
2. The Beers that are generally poorer in quality, but have a great story or experience attached to them. The Spitfire Kentish Ale, for example, is a beer that didn’t sit so well with me, but the whole experience of drinking the pint with a pie made it oh so more pleasurable.
The Four Stein Rating
Much like the 3 Steins, I do divide between beer and ‘moment’. However as with any economy of scale, Four Stein Biers must be and really are a step up in quality and enjoyment. Take for example the Black Sheep Ale. This was a very good beer, but it was also drank in a wonderful restaurant that was at an 8 degree angle in York. So this beer not only deserved it’s rating, but the experience did as well. Whilst not the greatest thing in the world, 4 stein beers must be better than the rest. They must excel and challenge my palette. Over all the experience must be worthwhile and enjoyable.
The Five Stein Rating
You don’t create a rating system without having clear winners. 5 Stein Biers are the cream of the crop, the bee’s knees as it may. Quite simply in order to have a bier in this category, it has to completely challenge my conventional thought of what beer is. For example my experience of drinking a Cisk sea side in Malta was a true pleasure, however the beer, although a popular and mass produced lager, was brilliant and something I had not expected. It not only made me re-evaluate my position on lagers, but made me reconsider how I go about testing beers. Before I had tried the Cisk, I tended to be a little closed off to the mass produced beers. I mean when a beer of any type can make me think this way, it’s a clear winner.
I realise that this is not the most scientific of methods, but it allows me to have some fun with my drinking experiences. Any Questions? Ideas? Thoughts? Questions?
Beer, how it works, Rating, Steins
