heykevin (1272) - Decorah, Iowa, USA - JUN 11, 2002
3.4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
Pretty solid. Decent saaz hop aroma. Malt is forward at the beginning then hop bitterness asserts itself., with a decent hop finish. Quite solid czech pilsener and went quite well with food.
Nuffield (3549) - Roseville, Minnesota, USA - JUN 11, 2002
1.5 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 2/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 4/20
There was nothing in this that indicated the bottle wasn’t fresh. Too bad, it would have been a good excuse for being a crummy beer experience for me. Unique-ish but not to say memorable flavor--couldn’t place it exactly, there may be something in the ’canned stewed tomatoes’ suggestion. Fortunately, after a while, my meal came and I was able to drown out the beer with Thai green curry. Not a bad beer with spicy food.
BeerManiac6699 (11) - USA - JUN 7, 2002
4.1 AROMA 9/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 16/20
The original and (I wish) only Budweiser! Pretty good lager / pilsner.
aracauna (2935) - Georgia, USA - JUN 7, 2002
1.2 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 4/20
Have you ever canned tomatoes? If you have, you should be familiar with the smell and flavor tomatoes have when cooked. This beer had an overwhelmingly strong odor and taste of spicy stewed tomatoes. It wasn’t really a bad flavor but it was too strong to drink and it’s just wrong. I know this is not normal for this beer from the other reviews of it I have read (and the style doesn’t allow for many strong flavors), but it was only days past the Best By date and had been stored in a refrigerator. It should have still been good. There was also some floating particles in the beer which I also assume is not normal, Pilsners typically being filtered. I will come back and rerate, but I’ve been told by some fellow raters that I should take this beer into account for my rating.
Troobie99 (60) - Portland, Oregon, USA - JUN 7, 2002
4.3 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 9/10 PALATE 5/5 OVERALL 16/20
Because the pilsners are so perishable, and because I’ve not been to the source, the style remains slightly beyond reach to me. But I love the subtle differences between the classic (available) styles. Budvar emphasizes a gentle, full malt. The hops are floral on the nose and peppery on the palate, but play a secondary role. The finish is wonderfully crisp, accent on the malt.
DougShoemaker (3147) - Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - JUN 5, 2002
3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
Sweet scent. Golden, fluffy head. Malty, some good bitterness. Very pleasant tongue tingle, not too sweet. Pretty good.
ondrej (32) - Toronto, CANADA - JUN 5, 2002
4.1 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 17/20
A wonderful balance of hops and flavor. A beautiful well formed head, good lacing. A must try that lives up to its reputation. The only downside is that it causes headaches. Overall - thumbs up!
Prostman (1077) - Pennsylvania, USA - MAY 30, 2002
3.6 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 16/20
Interesting...but my bottle had a wierd metallic taste to it.
dolemike1 (1288) - Jeannette, Pennsylvania, USA - MAY 28, 2002
2.4 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
Light, clean, drinkable in hot weather. It’s a pilsner and pilsners don’t do it for me.
karsten (240) - odense, DENMARK - MAY 26, 2002
2.9 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
A good pilsener. Light and refreshing - easy to drink. Good balance between hops and malt.