kratbox (7) - WALES - DEC 16, 2004 does not count
1.8 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 5/20
Bland, pointlessly-foamy, pale imitation of the once-classic. That said, itís strangely easy to drink when itís the token canned bitter at parties, probably because itís either that or Fosterís. A small consolation is that InBev is slang for cunnilingus in their home country of Belgium, also the home of beers somewhat better than this
beerandrugby (210) - Nashville, Tennessee, USA - DEC 3, 2004
1.9 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
Draft. England. Not a particuarily good brew, I hadnít had it and upon trying it I was disappointed. I found it to be bitter in a bad way, lacking a good balance of flavor, or even a pleasing flavor. Alas, all is not lost because I had it for free at an open bar party at the Old Brentwood Club in Essex.
Hbie (133) - Essex, ENGLAND - NOV 8, 2004
1.1 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 2/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 3/20
Can draught. Creamy head from the widget. The aroma was a bad start sharp and chemically. The body was thin sour and sharp not at all pleasant and I am sure worst than it used to be. No wonder it is not selling well and the brewery is closing. Poor quality.
DanielBrown (3488) - Birmingham (via Leicester), West Midlands, ENGLAND - OCT 28, 2004
2.7 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
On tap at the Hogshead, Birmingham. Slimline, lagery smooth Bitter. Some toffee, but fairly sparse flavour. Overwhelmingly quick across the palate - sweet and inoffensive. Undemanding and ultimately not too much to get excited about.
Joeh (2038) - Buckinghamshire, ENGLAND - OCT 9, 2004
1.3 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 3/20
Canned & keg a few times. Nitrogen removes any carbonation and with it any thoughts of a natural tasting beer, add to that the Gillette styled (and tasting) head, and itís not off to a very good start. Soapy and annoying, some coarse bitterness and crude malt. Truly hideous spawn of Interbrew.
Spiesy (2338) - Sydney, Greater London, AUSTRALIA - MAY 13, 2004
2.3 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
Canned. Flat amber beer. Pleasant sticky malt aroma. Sugary malt flavour with moderate bitterness. Not offensive but nothing to rave about either. Just says mass production to me.
haddonsman (1234) - Derby, Derbyshire, ENGLAND - APR 27, 2004
1 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 2/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 3/20
Canned. Like real beer, only with all the beer taste and texture taken out. Slippery head (creamy? more like oily yoghurt), insipid taste, dull colour, no bitterness, no refreshment, no point.
Jeppe (2631) - ōlbutikken, DENMARK - FEB 15, 2004
2.2 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 8/20
Canned. Beautiful creamy head, thin light amber colored body. Weak fruity aroma. Thin and watery flavor with a slight bitterness. The taste is nice but it is way too thin.
r464 (1655) - Earth, Pennsylvania, USA - OCT 13, 2003
3 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
UPDATED: OCT 19, 2003 On tap in a London hotel bar. I love bitters, but this was a bit weak in the flavor department. Creamy and light bodied. Not my first choice for a British bitter.
jonas (5260) - Garching b. MŁnchen, GERMANY - SEP 5, 2003
2.1 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 7/20
Slight honeyish malt aroma.
Amber, after the effect of the widget no carbonation left, but the 2 centimeters of creamy head seems to linger on.
A bit strawberries, a bit flowers, but everything seems to be in a extreme homeopathic solution - quite watery.
Mouthfeel is somewhat creamy and there is a very slight flowery aftertaste