RBL99 (2) - CANADA - JAN 24, 2002 does not count
4.1 AROMA 10/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 10/10 PALATE 5/5 OVERALL 11/20
omhper (18721) - Tyresö, SWEDEN - JAN 4, 2002
1.7 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 6/20
Golden coloured. Clean with grassy flavour.
Radek Kliber (6297) - Toronto (Can) Krotoszyn (Pol), POLAND - NOV 24, 2001
2.8 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 11/20
Hey ! It looks funny sure its true , but the taste is not that bad .Yes ,its not great but I cold sense that rice used in brewing . Maybe others tryed not to fresh beer mine was not bad .
40oz (181) - Newport Beach, California, USA - OCT 22, 2001
1.6 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
Slight hop and malt aroma. Medium modied, crisp, mildly bitter with solvent like chemical taste that lingers in mouth after swollowing. At 99 cents for a 22oz bottle, it gets the job done.
Oakes (11363) - Vancouver, British Columbia, CANADA - OCT 16, 2001
1.7 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 7/20
Fresh-tasting, grassy lager with a hint of malt, and bready notes.
joet (2038) - Santa Rosa, California, USA - OCT 15, 2001
0.5 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 1/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 1/20
Distinctly catty with suggestions of lime. The hops have done something ugly -- hints of bathrooms you’d rather hold it and wait than visit. I won’t even ask him if he’s thirsty -- my dog is not going to come close to this. Barring a teenage brewing experiment of mine using raisins and bread yeast, this may be the worst fermented beverage of any kind I’ve ever had. Though it’s appearance doesn’t itself warrant a 1 (it’s a 2 and has a tin oily film over the top), as there isn’t a black mushy cloud or worse, I can justify the one by contending other collective negatives drag the appearance score down to it’s lowest possible level.