Pjones6738 (500) - Madison, Wisconsin, USA - NOV 7, 2002
2.9 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 11/20
Dark brown, with no real head. Caramel scent. Taste of caramel too, with a little coffee. No maple there as far as I can tell. Kind of watery.
austinpowers (2826) - New York, New York, USA - NOV 1, 2002
4.1 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 18/20
My first bottle had a touch of sourness (second bottle had none) and so I assumed I had a bad bottle. Upon buying another frickiní bottle, I got the same taste and have concluded that itís supposed to be that way. The headís just OK and color could be a bit darker. There is NO MAPLE here - none. As I stated, itís slightly sour (just a tidge) and comes with a fairly thin, waif-like body. FYI, a ítommyknockerí is a mischievous elf that used to wreak havoc in 1800s mining camps. Anyway, upon retaste, I can see the sweetness and think this is an agreeable session brew (even if you donít work in a Colorado mining camp). Upon each retaste, this beer gets sweeter (and better). A very mild, English-style brown, like Newcastle.
Ernest (6154) - Boulder, Colorado, USA - OCT 23, 2002
2.8 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Draught. Body is dark brown. Aroma is lightly malty (toasted dark bread, nutty). Flavor is moderately sweet, moderately bitter. Finish is lightly sweet, moderately bitter. Light to medium body, watery texture, lively carbonation. Not much of an aroma, but a nice flavor balance.
kyzr (1147) - Belgrade, Montana, USA - OCT 22, 2002
2.4 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 9/20
I really struggled to find the maple in this beer. I guess one must have to be an expert. An ok beer, like nuffield said, something was just off about it.
Nuffield (3665) - Roseville, Minnesota, USA - OCT 12, 2002
2.8 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
"Drinkable" only in the sense that this beer goes a bit flat, it wasnít the aroma that was particularly off-putting about this, but still the flavor is off-kilter. I didnít get an overwhelming sense of maple, but it is still sticky and not an improvement on a more simple malt profile. Flat body made this difficult to enjoy.
erway (1004) - Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA - OCT 2, 2002
1.3 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 5/20
I found this to be absolutely revolting. I did something I never do,... I poured it down the drain! poor body, bad aromas and a disgusting after-taste.
Aubrey (3430) - Bellingham, Washington, USA - SEP 8, 2002
2.3 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
Dark amber with a slight haze; healthy head. Up front, smooth and creamy... quickly turns to a burst of tactile sweetness that spreads in the mouth. This turns into a carbonated bitterness. Watery mouthfeel and texture. Sticky maple-ness in the finish. Synthetic aftertaste is somewhat cloying.
Ringo (963) - Loveland, Colorado, USA - AUG 29, 2002
3.2 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
Decent enough brown ale, with a little Aunt Jemima (or maybe Mrs. Butterworth?) poured in for good measure.
Panzuriel (1287) - Westerville, Ohio, USA - AUG 25, 2002
3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
Nice brown ale. A little too sweet for my tastes. Nice malt, good aroma, nice texture. Middle of the road beer, plus points for the style.
MaxPower (961) - St. Louis, Missouri, USA - AUG 10, 2002
2.5 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 11/20
Musty nutty aroma, sour carmel malt,too sweet.