joemacaluso (119) - Prairieville, Louisiana, USA - JAN 14, 2003
3.6 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
UPDATED: JAN 23, 2003 Deep pretty color, very floral hop spicyness. Much better of the tap, a fine beer.
tkaufman (128) - Lewis Center, Ohio, USA - JAN 13, 2003
3.5 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
Deep amber color with an ample white head after the pour. Gives off a decent hop aroma, but nothing spectacular. Flavor begins malty with some hop bitterness increasing in prevalance over the finish. A well balanced beer, but nothing remarkable.
orangelazarus (53) - USA - JAN 11, 2003
3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 8/20
UPDATED: JAN 16, 2003 Decent from the tap. Had an aftertaste like strawberries.
kujo9 (1095) - North Ridgeville, Ohio, USA - JAN 11, 2003
3.2 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 12/20
Aroma is hoppy and malty, but also with a high level of diacetyl that I’ve noticed lately. This wasn’t normally the case up until about a year and a half ago. Lots and lots of diacetyl, which I find offensive, particularly for a lager. I wonder if Jim Koch knows about this? Hop flavor and diacetyl dominate as well with some maltiness in the back ground as well. Well balanced but it needs to be more clean and crisp for a lager. Coloration is a nice light copper with white head that lasts, but I think they’re getting away from what got them this far. Just my opinion.
WISEGUY572 (1377) - Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA - JAN 11, 2003
2.9 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 12/20
UPDATED: FEB 28, 2003 As a pseudo-craft beer originally produced for Sam Adams under license by Pittsburgh Brewing, the brewers of Iron City and Old Frothing Slosh, this beer might be considered suspect. Lots of hype in promotion. however, I liked it more than I wanted to. After having another in February I think it is still easy drinking, but even less charming than I first thought. A little too sweet, a little too floral, not enough malt.
Guinness4Duff (515) - Tallahassee (and Poconos, PA), Florida, USA - JAN 11, 2003
3.8 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 16/20
I like it because its one of the few lagers out their with a decent hop presence
TheBelgian (24) - USA - JAN 11, 2003
2.9 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
Not bad. Light taste with little finish, no aftertaste. Walnut and grain flavors.
jgb9348 (5233) - Arlington (Pentagon City), Virginia, USA - JAN 10, 2003
2.8 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 12/20
Golden brown in colour, strong in smell...mild taste with little to no aftertaste, but a good overall beer that you can find just about anywhere!
elsberry (87) - North Carolina, USA - JAN 10, 2003
2.8 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
It’s a good beer, but has a lingering aftertaste that makes me unable to finish more than about three at a time. Good color, very good head. A good ale, with some complexity. Very malty, with a definitive hops aroma. Of the American ales, it’s not too bad.
Steak (124) - New York, USA - JAN 9, 2003
2.5 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
I view this beer as a landmark in the development of beer. For me, it was the beer that introduced me to the "other world" of beers so different from the Bud and Labatt’s I had been drinking. Unfortunately, being just the introduction that it is, it is not comparable to the best beers around, just as Bud really isn’t comparable to this. That being said, it’s decently malty with a medium body and little in the hops or aromatics department. It does unfortunately suffer from over-carbonation, but it is brewed in massive quantities...not that that is an excuse. What is there to say....it is so exquisitely middle of the road in the beer world.