Kodos (205) - USA - DEC 30, 2002
3.4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
SS needs to use better glass. Their stuff just doesnt make the trip across the pond very well. 3 bottles of this = 2 skunks and 1 good version. Good version rating: Interesting orange color, well formed lasting head. Sweet with a good drying/bitter finish. Nothing special about this beer at all. Rating given for the good version.
BŁckDich (5464) - McCall, Idaho, USA - DEC 30, 2002
3.4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 15/20
Light aroma, skosh of hops. Pour was unimpressive. Sweet initially but finishes very dry and bitter, pine finishes off the flavor. Really spendy where I got it, so Iíll stick to Celebration Ale for this season.
TheRimmer (483) - Florida, USA - DEC 29, 2002
3 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
UPDATED: NOV 25, 2004 I wasnít too impressed. Awesome packaging though. It reminded me of, dare i say, Miller cold filtered. It had that ery clean, unasseritve taste. There was some hops in the finish and it reminded em slightly of almonds. However much better than the ghastly miller, this still wasnít TOOOOO impressive. Nice big bottle, nice abv., and a decent effort. Could have used some more xmas spice. And everyone below me is right, there IS a bit of a skunk to the nose. What the previous yearsí efforts yeilded I canít say, but the 2002-2003 was below par for this brewery.
JMerritt (1841) - Macomb, Illinois, USA - DEC 26, 2002
2.6 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Hey, glad to see that I wasnít the only one who thought the aroma was skunky. Flavor is roasted malt, slight hops, and finishes rather malty and dry. I was quite disappointed with this beer.
MrRomero (1976) - Nolanville, USA - DEC 24, 2002
3.1 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Skunky nose but once I got past it, it was a decent brew. Had sort of a coffee smell to it and a mocha drink kind of flavor. Go figure. Well balanced and enjoyable.
boto (1891) - Granby, Connecticut, USA - DEC 20, 2002
3.4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
Good, but not great. Has a bit of hoppiness to it, but not all that much. Slight maltiness too. Hint of spice. Perhaps I was expecting more, but it is a fairly non-dememo beer.
npdempse (934) - St. Petersburg, Florida, USA - DEC 19, 2002
2.7 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Nose: skunky. Flavor: kind of skunky, though there was an interesting fruity/hoppy thing going on under the skunkiness. I wish Sam Smithís would stop putting beer in clear bottles to get lightstruck on the shelf.
Re-Rate: got a non-skunky one. Nice sweet, caramelly malt flavor. But nothing too special. And not special enough to make me reconsider my low rating when Smiths continues to put this in clear bottles year after year.
kyzr (1153) - Belgrade, Montana, USA - DEC 19, 2002
3.2 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 13/20
Been judged by many, nice easy drinking Sammy.
bsii99 (13) - Berkeley, California, USA - DEC 18, 2002
3.1 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 12/20
Fruity, easy to drink, and a very nice finish... I was kind of in a hurry when I had this, so I didnít have a chance to spend much time thinking about it. Iíd have it again, though.
jpknight22 (171) - Charlotte, North Carolina, USA - DEC 18, 2002
4 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 16/20
2002-2003: Iím not going to jump on the bandwagon and rate this in the 3.5 range because Iím a big fan of Sammy Smith and also because I enjoyed this beer. Great hop balance and malty flavor. Strong nose with fruity/floral aromas and great carbonation. Not Sammyís best, but far from bad... Left me with a ncie winter buzz.