homerman (40) - Clinton, Iowa, USA - FEB 4, 2002
0.9 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 2/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 2/20
It’s a good thing Bud knows how to advertise. I might drink one if the only other choice was Corona. This stuff gives me a headache just looking at it.
crazydiamond (48) - Michigan, USA - FEB 4, 2002
1.4 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 6/20
Hopefully, if your friend has Bud Light, he also may have one or two of these lying around for a slight upgrade in body. If I’m at a bar with my friends, and there are no ale, Canadian or brown colored beers, this one is still palpable.
zygomatic99 (17) - Little Rock, Arkansas, USA - FEB 3, 2002
1.1 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 3/20
Mass produced with a great marketing campaign. This beer sucks. The only reason to drink it is to pop the top, expecting some blonde chicks in bikinis to suddenly jump out and throw a party in your honor.
Tom Ciancia99 (1) - Georgia, USA - FEB 3, 2002 does not count
3.2 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 15/20
This scores high for what it is...to me, it is the standard that beers are rated by. Cheap, tastes like ’beer’. You get the same Bud everywhere in the states, unless your lucky enough to get a ’fresh’ one (2 days old). Than it actually has a creamy look and taste. Its old faithful - and yes, its mostly driven by advertisement...aka brainwashing!
jmusial99 (27) - USA - FEB 3, 2002
1 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 2/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 2/20
I do not know how this beer has made it so popular this beer is over carbonated with very little but bad flavor. I think this beer only made it becase of its advertising.
jtharv3399 (6) - USA - FEB 3, 2002 does not count
2.9 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 12/20
Today we salute you Mr. Internet Beer Rater. You don’t just drink the beer you give it 1 to 5 stars. You dedication to let other internet nerd beer drinkers know what you think a beer is worth in stars shows the whole world how drunk you really are.
MrRomero (1975) - Nolanville, USA - FEB 2, 2002
1 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 1/5 TASTE 2/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 5/20
The King of Beers doesn’t score very well.
Murphy (1759) - Fort Collins, Colorado, USA - FEB 2, 2002
1.3 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 1/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 9/20
this beer is shit, nothing more
NOSHOWJONES99 (22) - USA - FEB 1, 2002
2.6 AROMA 9/10 APPEARANCE 1/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 8/20
A GOOD BEER FOR THE PRICE HOW CAN YOU CNPLAIN ABOUT ITS DIRT CHEAP WHEN DRINKING AMERICAN DRINK BUD
darkvibe (68) - Rochester, New York, USA - FEB 1, 2002
0.8 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 2/20
This is my least favorite beer. I think it should be called malt liquor instead fo beer.