VENOM (941) - Connecticut, USA - JUN 11, 2001
2.3 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
Weird for an IPA. Sourish bitter style flavor with a decent dose of hops. From tap so maybe the bottle version is better but this just made me not want another.
Saad (104) - Jacksonville, North Carolina, USA - JUN 7, 2001
4.3 AROMA 9/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 18/20
A fantastic IPA! It instantly became my favorite!
Stove Top (43) - Kenmore, Washington, USA - APR 29, 2001
3.6 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
Average compared to many others. For an IPA I want to be overwhelmed with hops and this beverage is lacking in the hop aroma and flavor category. As mentioned before, in the PNW area this beer can be purchased for 4.99 a sixer and that is two to four bucks cheaper than most.
scrawfis (143) - Naperville, Illinois, USA - APR 29, 2001
3.8 AROMA 9/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 15/20
Very nice aroma. The beer had a nice
bitterness indicative of the IPA style, but
perhaps too much aroma hopping and too little bitterness.
StoutOrDeath (121) - USA - MAR 17, 2001
2.5 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
It really made no huge impression on me. Not bad, but not great. I do like the label, though. I guess thatís what made me buy it. Iíll drink it again, but wonít pursue it like Guinness.
blatz (138) - Palm Beach Gardens, FL, Florida, USA - FEB 16, 2001
3.8 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 15/20
Was happy to find this in F(indnogoodbeerorabletovote)lorida. Appearance was nice - the head poured to a creamy white froth, although I was disappointed to see it fade so quickly. The beer itself was lighter in color than some other IPAs but nonetheless was golden with a red tinge. Taste was good - nice hop bite - though watery at times - unlike McNeil I did not detect diacetyl in this one. Palate - one thing I donít like about IPAís is the bitter hop remnants that stays with you. Overall - IPAs are not my favorite (although I am enjoying them more) but this one seems pretty good, as to be expected from RH. Cheers!
HoppyKev (50) - Redford, Michigan, USA - FEB 12, 2001
3.2 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
This IPA will not be on my must drink list, but itís ok. There really isnít enough hops to balance the malt that I taste let alone overpower them like a good IPA does.
Indra (2593) - Overland Park, Kansas, USA - JAN 23, 2001
2.8 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
UPDATED: JUN 26, 2004 Sorta indicative of many Redhook beers: Not bad, just not great compared to others of the style that I tend to rave about consistently. Bitter and refreshing, but not much else.
Oakes (12234) - Vancouver, British Columbia, CANADA - JAN 5, 2001
3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
UPDATED: MAY 30, 2006 Golden-bronze colour. Aroma is light mixed toasted malts and woody, slightly grapefruity hop. Lightish body for style with a moderate bitterness, woody notes and a bit of toastiness. Clean, dull, dry finish. (original rating Ar 7, Ap 3, F 6, P 2 O 13 = 3.1)
mike mcneil (660) - St Augustine, Florida, USA - DEC 29, 2000
3.4 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
One of Redhookís top products but not a top American style IPA. Nice full body and palate with admirable balance between the toasty malt flavors and hop bitterness. The shortcoming is in the lack of a typical aggressive hop nose as found in most top shelf IPAís. Probably not dry-hopped. Has the typical Redhook buttery diacetyl profile, but not as noticeable as their ESB. A solid everyday IPA,