cathcacr (642) - Oregon, USA - JUL 1, 2002
4.4 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 10/10 PALATE 5/5 OVERALL 18/20
UPDATED: MAR 26, 2014 update 2014: this has to be tried in box-packaged, non-skunked bottles.
Well, first, let’s not kid ourselves: the new big kid on the block as far as pilseners go is the Victory Prima Pils. But this, I actually liked, which I wasn’t expecting. It sure is the ’original pilsener,’ ain’t it. PLZEN!, spake the beer bottle. Sort of the standard-bearer of what’s good for the style without getting specialized (like the Prima Pils). I was skeptical of going after bottles of this because of the green bottle, but I bought a 6-pack and have had 2 so far, and no problems yet. What can I say: it’s just real pilsnery. I don’t have the hop lingo down, but I believe this one falls into the ’floral’ category. Good, enticing aroma, pretty uninteresting appearance, though. Golden. That’s about all I can say for it. No head. But taste is most important, and this has got a robust enough taste to hold my interest. Nice mouthfeel and all that, yadda yadda yadda. What’s interesting is how an ’inferior’ lager can sort of beat up on one of those ’superior’ ales in a back-to-back taste test. Had an ESB right before this, and not all ales are made better than lagers, folks. Well look at me, I’m rambling again. Well, that about does ’er. Wraps ’er all up. And it was a purty good story, too, wouldn’t you say? Hope you enjoyed yourselves too. Yeah, I found this beer so durned interestin’, that I’d buy it again. And, ultimately, that’s the test of a beer’s worth, now isn’t it. Say, friend, you got any of that good sasparilla?
bigal9699 (152) - Orange County, California, USA - JUL 1, 2002
2.8 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
Medium, foamy white head. Light golden yellow color. Medium strength nose - hoppy and vegetable notes. Light and crisp palate. Typical pilsner taste: light hops, skunky, vegetal. Pretty standard in my book and boring in my book.
npdempse (934) - St. Petersburg, Florida, USA - JUL 1, 2002
3.7 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 15/20
Don’t know why it took me so long to get around to trying this stuff--must be my ale fetish keeping me away from the pilseners. Anyway, really enjoyed this. Malt flavor dominates, sweet and slightly caramel flavors complement a taste not unlike good artisinal bread. Finishes with a nice crisp hop bitterness.
brewbandit (312) - Marietta, Georgia, USA - JUL 1, 2002
2.6 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
Slightly skunky aroma. Good clean looking beer. Skunkiness evident in flavor. Must find this on tap somewhere. It has got to be better than this.
friejose (24) - Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA - JUN 26, 2002
3.9 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 16/20
Terrific, great mouth feel, very enjoyable
JPDIPSO (4958) - Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, USA - JUN 21, 2002
4 AROMA 9/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 17/20
I’ll rate the fresh samples i’ve had. Although the hops and body have diminished in the last few years the sharp spicy saaz aroma is one of the tops. Dark clear straw color. Nice malt body that has also thinned as of late. Still a nice dry bitter finish. When fresh - still one of the best examples.
Bolt (117) - Boulder Creek, California, USA - JUN 21, 2002
1.1 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 2/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 3/20
I’ll have to try this one again and re-rate it because I think what I had on tap was spoiled. It tasted skunky, and sour.
VA Homebrewer (525) - Portsmouth, Virginia, USA - JUN 21, 2002
1.7 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 7/20
With all the hype surrounding this beer, I can only conclude that the keg at the bar was infected. I’ll have to try it again at another bar to know for sure. ADDENDUM: I tried Urquell on draught at a different bar and it was infected again. Tasted exactly like the first sampling - vinegary. 2ND ADDENDUM: Three strikes and you’re out. Bud, Foster’s, Sam Adams and Urquell were my choices so I went for the Urquell with a great deal of scepticism considering my two previous experiences. Vinegar strikes again, making Urquell 3 for 3 on that score for me. There comes a time when you just have to accept the truth and quit fighting, and I think I’ve reached that point with this brew.
AceOfHearts (1374) - Mountain View, California, USA - JUN 20, 2002
3.3 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 13/20
Not nearly as bad as I expected. I drank it on draft and it wasn’t as skunky as everyone says it is in the US. Probably the best pilsner I’ve had, but that doesn’t say a hell of a lot. Light, slightly hoppy, very clear.
bubslang (438) - Kentwood, Michigan, USA - JUN 20, 2002
2.9 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
not much of a pilsner fan but this is pretty good, nice hop presence, aroma was a tad skunky, if I have to drink a pilsner this is the one i prefer