SETANTA (582) - Bangor, Pennsylvania, USA - JUL 19, 2002
3.1 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
This will do if I can’t find Guinness
elickd (7) - Cincinnati, Ohio, USA - JUL 12, 2002 does not count
3.6 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 17/20
If you’re looking for a beer to increase your manliness quotient, go slumming with the Budwieser or Miller crowd; after all, they do attract hot chicks with wet T-shirts. Oh, wait, those commercials don’t reflect real life? I suppose the rest of us’ll just drink beer because we like it.
Like most of the Samueal Adams beers, this is a top notch brew.
No, this is not Samuel Smith’s Oatmeal Stout (my benchmark), but is a fine macro-microbrew none the less.
Not much in the aroma department, but has a decent head and a deep, rich color.
Has a good coffee, chocolate, creamy taste with a subtle roast undertone, but isn’t the richest beer on the block. Has a reasonable palate, but the followup can get wierd sometimes. I blame this on the heathens in my area who would turn over truckloads of Bud Light for every Samuel Adams 6 that gets sold. A solid performer in the ’easy to find supermarket pseudo-microbrew’ catagory. A very drinkable concoction, all in all.
hopscotch (10015) - Vero Beach, Florida, USA - JUL 10, 2002
4.2 AROMA 9/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 17/20
UPDATED: MAY 30, 2003 This beer rocks.
Very dark with a beautiful, tan head. The nose of a mocha cappacino and the creamy flavor of milk chocolate and coffee. A very well-balanced flavor with a crisp, dry finish. Not sweet. Hopped perfectly. Yum. Bartender! Draw me another.
beerlovinman99 (124) - USA - JUL 9, 2002
3.1 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
This is a stout for people who don’t particularly like stout. It’s not very sweet and it’s on the thin side. Looks better than it drinks.
ClarkVV (4088) - Allston, Massachusetts, USA - JUL 9, 2002
2.7 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
UPDATED: AUG 8, 2004 wasnt impressed at all. Too weak, definitely dont think it would have hurt to put some more malt/coffee roast in here. Leaves you wanting more, and i hate beers that do that. ok im probably being too harsh. it wasnt that bad. Looks the usual, thin, clear but in this case actually a dark brown. Fizzy, light, no complexity. 2004 bottle. Much better than I remember, still a bit on the lighter side, but there is a decent roastiness there that I enjoyed, quite bitter and oily. Amp up the sweetness and they could be on to something, because as it is, this just dosent have the balance or complexity I would like.
MartinT (8396) - Montreal, Quebec, CANADA - JUL 7, 2002
3.5 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
Nice milk chocolate and soft prunes…Nice coffee vapors and smooth undergarments…A good introduction to stouts…
Gusler (2653) - Tucson, Arizona, USA - JUL 6, 2002
3.6 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
Re-Rate 07/06/02: Deep garnet, almost brown, the head is beige and adequate, as is the lace. Nose is caramel and lightly roasted grain. Front is sweet, the top is llight to medium, the finish is dry, acidic, nicely hopped, and sweet, a ’BEGINNERS’ stout? Drinkable, but a bit light for me.
stoutosaurus (157) - Clinton, Mississippi, USA - JUL 6, 2002
4.3 AROMA 9/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 17/20
Roasty chocolate and coffee flavors, creamy head. One of my favorite sweet stouts. I like to drink this stuff.
MMM...Beer (385) - Las Vegas, Nevada, USA - JUL 1, 2002
4 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 9/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 15/20
Love them stouts!
pilsnerrogge (2608) - Finspång, SWEDEN - JUN 24, 2002
2.4 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
Didn’t like tis one very much, tasted like burnt cocoa!