PorterPounder (5355) - Tallahassee, Florida, USA - OCT 20, 2002
3.7 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
UPDATED: AUG 13, 2004 Rerate Revisited this one - still a tasty brew with a lovely pour and aroma, just not worth a 4.0 upon further reflection. Original 4 I'm a sucker for the dramatic pour that the widget produces - so it gets high marks for appearance. Thick, creamy head with a lot of lace, sweet, but not too fruity flavor. Nice strong malty aroma. Good all around bitter.
Allseeingeye (223) - Vero Beach, Florida, USA - OCT 19, 2002
2.3 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
Widget can. This one is just OK. Drinkable but watery. Fruity and sweet but not me tup o’ tea.
austinpowers (2826) - New York, New York, USA - OCT 15, 2002
2.9 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Nitro can: a bit fruity and a touch sweet. Less hoppy than Greene King’s Ruddles County ale. You could surely do worse, but the Greene King line comes across to me as being a touch watery and undercarbonated.
UnionMade (621) - Connecticut, USA - OCT 7, 2002
4.1 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 9/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 17/20
UPDATED: JUL 19, 2003 Rerate as a draft sampling. Deep rich amber brown, with a thick creamy almond head. My mouth is watering like crazy. Rating is for the second one, because I drank 3/4 of the first pint in one pull. I absolutely love beer like this. Rich full aroma, with a distinctive east kent goldings scent backed with lots of maltiness carrying a pear esteriness. Flavor is fantastic. Medium bodied, nitro carbonation. Lots of maltiness, with all the hops coming through in the finish, balancing some estery fruit flavors. Fairly dry, your tongue begs for more. I'm happy to oblige.
Drew (2411) - Kent, Ohio, USA - SEP 15, 2002
3.2 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 15/20
amber/brown, huge foamy head (of course). Body was medium, thicker than expected malts. Had a nice thin hop at the finish, but then all thickness disappeared in that "nitro" thin-ness, as usual. This would be a good session ale.
morty99 (371) - Maryland, USA - SEP 15, 2002
4.1 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 5/5 OVERALL 17/20
mixamatt (427) - San Francisco, California, USA - SEP 14, 2002
3.4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
Winey aroma at first, clear amber red color, slightly bitter. smooth and fairly clean aftertaste.
OlJuntan64 (1265) - Perth, AUSTRALIA - SEP 14, 2002
2.8 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 12/20
Mine was bottled (and sans widget) so it probably loses a point on appearance. Anyway, pours a medium amber clear under under a smallish creamy yellow short lasting head. Faint sappy hops and wood cask aroma with some caramel honey aroma as it warms. Medium body with full bitter, and lighter caramel sweet and wood flavoured start and middle. Lighter woody bitter sweet finish and aftertaste.
papajohn (1249) - San Diego (Mira Mesa), California, USA - SEP 2, 2002
3.2 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
Bottle: Deep golden red color. Smooth, creamy sweet malt with a touch of peach flavor. A drinkable brew, but it dosen’t stand out.
MartinKubert (862) - Copenhagen, DENMARK - AUG 29, 2002
2.1 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 8/20
This ale really are a bitter, ’cause it was a bitter experience to drink her! Very thin and harsh. A great disappointment and maybe a reason for me not to drink cask ale again!