ultraspank (867) - Alverca, Lisboa, PORTUGAL - NOV 20, 2002
2.8 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 11/20
Nose of flowers, caskwood, resin, caramel and just a hint of dried fruit. Pours a clear flat orange. The huge off-white fluffy head is mostly lasting with good lacing. The flavor though balanced is way to shallow for this style. The middle is flowery and soapy with a very average finish. The medium oily body is fizzy and finishes metallic. A poor representative of an excellent style.
Drew (2411) - Kent, Ohio, USA - NOV 12, 2002
2.2 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 7/20
Thin, thin thin thin; tasted of tin. the light bitterness was thin. the malts were thin. Palate - thin. The best thing about this was the big fizzy head and the gorgeous sheets of lace that totally covered the glass. Otherwise, THIN.
jpfrog (130) - Bellingham, Washington, USA - NOV 9, 2002
2 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
Smells like piss. Good head. Nice amber color. Not that bitter, but for a macro it is. OK, and better than reg, fosterís.
Aurelius (4657) - Tallahassee, Florida, USA - NOV 3, 2002
2.4 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 7/20
I should have become worried when I saw the words íUnion Madeí on the label. The version that I had was from Canada. This was easily the worst bitter that Iíve ever had. Tasted like the lager with a bit more sugar thrown in. But it came in an oilcan which could easily be smuggled onto Amtrak. Clingy, thin palate. Buy the lager instead.
kmeves (1098) - Mount Pleasant, Wisconsin, USA - OCT 30, 2002
2.8 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Nice light malt flavor, strawberry blond hue, very easy drinking. Doesnít resemble a lot of English Bitters. Very smooth!
MOboy (505) - Kansas City, Missouri, USA - OCT 20, 2002
1.5 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 5/20
Why is this so carbonated? Anyway, this is a bad beer. what else can I say that its score doesnít.
Admiral (524) - Schnecksville, Pennsylvania, USA - OCT 13, 2002
2.6 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
Greatly superior to regular Fosterís. Notwithstanding this fact, itís still mediocre.
Trappist (286) - Knoxville, Tennessee, USA - OCT 10, 2002
3.4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 15/20
Well I love bitters, but I have drank much better than this one. It is not the worst bitter I have ever had though, it does however have a nice clean taste to it, but not the dry bite I was used to that most bitters produce. I want to try it one more time however.
krisbierjaeger (844) - dolores, Colorado, USA - OCT 6, 2002
2.7 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
oh, i dunno, itís not so bad. i was thirsty, took a sip... that seemed okay. then i found a stick and jammed it in my eye... ouch. not okay. so, choosing between those two, iíd have to go with the fosters. the amber color is superfluous since thereís nothing in the flavor suggestive of a dark malty wort. the head was perfunctory with cobwebby bubbles. some diet pretzels in the aroma, a bit of orange kool-aid. flavor is okay, nothing offensive, goes down smooth, and stays down. light bodied, watery at the edges, kinda ritz crackery, tho a little sweeter. there IS that moderate bitterness, but itís not apparent that it derives from hops-- could just as well have come from the judicious addition of a few rusty hubcaps and horseshoes.
Slovak34 (99) - Raleigh, North Carolina, USA - SEP 25, 2002
3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
This is much better than regular Fosters. Itís not especially bitter, but itís surprisingly good.