wildbill99 (13) - Charlevoix, Michigan, USA - JUL 5, 2002
1.2 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 4/20
Well, my sons and I had three brews out in the boat for a great Fourth of July sail on lake Charlevoix. Iíll rate them, worst to best, starting with this one. Actually, the only thing good about this beer was that I was drinking it out on a beautiful lake in the sunshine with great company!
bluemeow76 (693) - Lewis Center, Ohio, USA - JUL 4, 2002
2.2 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
OK, if I am at a bar and they donít have any decent, interesting beer on tap (other than Bass - b/c Bass is my standby) So the bar doesnít have Bass on tap and my choices are like Bud, BudLight, Miller, etc. AND Fosters...I will get the Fosters. So I guess I am saying it is usually the best choice out of a bunch of crappy beers at a typical American bar.
anticop (79) - Porterville, California, USA - JUL 3, 2002
3.1 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
big ass cans
kumite56 (473) - Cordova, Tennessee, USA - JUL 3, 2002
2 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
Better than the standard american lager swill but not by much. A little more flavor (light hopps, some malt) but the operative word here is light. Would be good to slam a cold one down after mowing lawn but not good for much else.
davidoc (113) - Chicago, Illinois, USA - JUL 2, 2002
2.5 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
UPDATED: MAR 21, 2008 Fosterís, Australian for ripoff. Not a bad beer, but donít believe the hype.
Mads Langtved (2244) - Copenhagen K, DENMARK - JUN 29, 2002
2.7 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
Very close to water, no bitternes or power at all!
VA Homebrewer (525) - Portsmouth, Virginia, USA - JUN 28, 2002
1 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 1/5 TASTE 2/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 4/20
A touch better than the average macroswill in that it does have SOME malt flavor and less rice/sugar/adjunct flavor. Still, itís not very impressive.
MuddyFox99 (16) - Adelaide, AUSTRALIA - JUN 25, 2002
2.1 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 7/20
agree with smc123, success in marketing than taste, which is watery, bland and with little hoppyness at all
SJP (483) - Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA - JUN 24, 2002
2 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 8/20
I think this is a waste of my time. Tastes like anything from the big American breweries, but since it comes from Australia some people seem to think its exotic. The can is nice, but then I could just buy a 40oz.
smc12399 (25) - Tennessee, USA - JUN 19, 2002
2.5 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
Not too bad actually. Have enjoyed them from time to time. I think the success here is more marketing than taste.