fredandboboflo (1395), East Setauket, New York, USA
| 0.8 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 2/10 | 2/5 | 1/10 | 1/5 | 2/20 | Feb 9, 2008 Can. Maybe it would be better on tap. I kid, I kid. Aroma didn’t make me want to vomit, so it gets a 2, although it was a bit odd. All beer is somewhat pretty, so gets a 2 there also. I can drink it, so it gets a 2 overall. Way too carbonated. Yay. thooper41 (384), Oregon, USA
| 1.8 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 1/5 | 4/10 | 2/5 | 8/20 | Feb 9, 2008 Updated: May 12, 200812oz bottle: given to me from a friend, he is no longer a friend. pours golden yellow with white head. aroma has a trace of malt. flavor is like carbonated water but with a hint of malt. overall this could be one of the more drinkable pale lagers with nothing that stands out that i dont like but then again nothing stands out at all. amateurBeerfan (24), Pennsylvania, USA
| 0.5 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 1/10 | 1/5 | 1/10 | 1/5 | 1/20 | Feb 8, 2008 One of the worst beer’s i’ve ever had. I hate to even use the term beer for this watered-down piss drink. The only thing I got from this was a headache. guyinchicago (526), marengo, Illinois, USA
| 0.5 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 1/10 | 1/5 | 1/10 | 1/5 | 1/20 | Feb 7, 2008 a 0.5 is way to high for this very terrible tasteing water this dawg doesn’t drink lite BOBANDDOUG (61), Belleville, Illinois, USA
| 1.9 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 2/10 | 3/5 | 3/10 | 3/5 | 8/20 | Feb 3, 2008 First off, you guys/gals need to remember you are judging the beer, to see if it is true to the style, not personal preferance. And, this is a light American macro lager.
Not what I drink, haven’t had a "light" beer for years, but, decided to give it a go.
On tap, served in a frosted mug.
Typical appearence, maybe a shade "darker" than Bud light. White fizzy head.
Aroma: Not much, some corn, some malt
Taste: Again, not much. Nothing offensive. If you look deep, you can taste a bit of light toasted malt, and a trace, slight trace of pine/citrus.
Again, these beers are built to be flavorless, and colorless. Remember this when you review.
mtownbeerballa (8), Ohio, USA does not count | 1.8 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 2/10 | 3/5 | 1/10 | 2/5 | 10/20 | Feb 2, 2008 Nothing Great. Pours light gold with a very thick head. Has a grassy dull aroma to. Minimal hoppiness with a watery flavor. Blunt finish. Not a great product here. Find more taste in bud light. Goodgrief (1148), Middletown, Delaware, USA
| 2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 2/5 | 5/10 | 2/5 | 8/20 | Feb 2, 2008 This actually wasn’t so bad. I have very limited experience with macro lagers (I’m rare, I know) and this was available at a company function, so I figured, heck, it’s free, why not try it? Sure, it doesn’t have much taste. But it actually tasted like beer, even though the flavor was very "tame" (to but it nicely). This was actually better than the Budweiser I had a few months back. Some beerlike flavor, a little beer color, even a small head. The mouthfeel was smooth (but then again, water is like that). Don’t get me wrong, I’d never have it again and would rather drink water, but at least it wasn’t offensive. mgoy (343), Oak Brook, Illinois, USA
| 2.1 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 2/10 | 3/5 | 4/10 | 2/5 | 10/20 | Feb 1, 2008 Updated: Feb 8, 2008While much better than many of the other macro-brews (Bud light and Coors light) drinking Mller Lite in close proximity to a good beer shows how disappointing American lagers can be.
|