Dogbrick (7585) - Columbus, Ohio, USA - AUG 30, 2002
2.7 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 12/20
This was definitely better than I was expecting, although it was not very special or bitter. Brownish orange with a very thick foamy head that dissipated quicker than I expected. Light hops aroma. Flavor was really not bitter in any way, it was rather mellow with a malt presence. A little tinny and thin which I WAS expecting. Dry, lightly fruity finish. Overall I think if they tweaked this one a little it would be worth another try but as it stands it is kind of mundane.
Panzuriel (1282) - Westerville, Ohio, USA - AUG 21, 2002
2.7 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 12/20
A decent bitter. Good overall flavor. Texture is a bit thin, aroma is
okay. A little bit whimpier than I like my bitters, but a good overall beer
with consistent taste that is just a tad metallic.
SJP (483) - Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA - JUL 31, 2002
3 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 11/20
Nice amber color with a thick white head. Kind of metallic tasting out of the HUGE can, but still pretty decent. A good malt flavor and more hops than I expected from Foster’s. A decent, but not exceptional bitter.
KingPinHead (390) - Des Moines, Washington, USA - JUL 23, 2002
3 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 12/20
Nice copper-amber color with a very attractive head. Aroma malty and just a tad too yeasty for my nose, but not bad. Overall, taste was excessively mild in all important respects: malt was mildly sweet but uninspiring, and the hops didn’t make any real contribution until the finish, which is slightly dry with quite nice hints of fruit and spice. Body is about right for this type of brew. I’m actually surprised by the good balance and body of this. If the flavors were more assertive across the board, Foster’s would really have something here...Hello! Part of a plant stalk just poured out of my can! Honest to God!
cathcacr (634) - Oregon, USA - JUN 17, 2002
2.1 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 8/20
UPDATED: FEB 4, 2005 Not exactly sure what to make of this one. Supposed to be bitter, and maybe I just have a different definition of bitter, because this is more on the sweet side. (Same with the ESB’s I’ve had.) Nice orange-brown color, and this one got a pretty big head on it pouring from its 25 oz. can. Pretty mild in the taste, thin and watery in the body. Did a reasonably good job covering up the adjuncts with whatever is supposed to make it ’bitter.’ About average overall; above-average for a macro.
austinpowers (2826) - New York, New York, USA - MAY 29, 2002
1.6 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 2/20
Amber color, bitter to the taste (as billed), a little bit dry, not too pleasing.
GABeerMan (48) - HOSCHTON, Georgia, USA - MAY 9, 2002
2.8 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Smoother and better tasting than Fosters Lager
gpolice99 (32) - Arizona, USA - APR 18, 2002
4.1 AROMA 9/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 9/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 15/20
I liked Regular Foster’s ,but this one is smoother,and Tastes Even BETTER than the lager! the English Bitter is a good way to go!
Nate (3636) - Indiana, Pennsylvania, USA - APR 12, 2002
2.6 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 10/20
Much better than the lager. Only had it from the can - and I generally don’t like canned beer. Dry and not too watery.
drismyhero (815) - Tacoma, Washington, USA - APR 9, 2002
2.3 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
I was actually surprised by this one. I figured it would be Australian for wallabee piss but shone above fosters other beers. Not very bitter, but not bad. Looks really good with a nice head, goes down easy but doesn’t leave much of a lasting impression.