3.2 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
This ones a little to light for me. Good quality, but go with Urquell.
3.6 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
Same here:
Nice Pils but I prefer Urquell. Good
3.3 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 14/20
Nice Pils but I prefer Urquell. Good
3.5 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 5/5 OVERALL 14/20
Nice pilsner - rivals Urquell
3 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
has a slightly ’scorched’ flavor to it....Urquell is much better
3.7 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
A fine pilsner, perhase not quite the beer Urquell or Budvar is but I will stil take it over many others. Not quite a hoppy as Urquell and has a fine malt flavor
4.3 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 9/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 18/20
A VERY good example of the brewers skill. A good beer to begin to introduce friends to something besides Bud and Coors
3.4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Just another good Czech pilsener. But nothing more than that.
2.1 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 5/20
Simple and lifelessly bland. Below standard for a Czech Pils. Malty sweet and weak bodied. Oh hell, it’s just a boring pedestrian example.
4.2 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 18/20
Nice sweet maltiness, almost like a darker beer. Some hop bitterness apparent, more so than Pilsner Urquell but not as much as Crystal. I really have to say that I owe the Czechs bigtime for introducing me to ’lager as quality drink’ as opposed to my previous concept of ’lager as inexpensive summer thirst-quencher.’
|
