TC2642 (265) - Worcester, Worcestershire, ENGLAND - NOV 27, 2004
3.4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 13/20
Bottle. I got a lot of citrus and orange in this, some sherbert. I also found it quite smooth and fairly light.
imdownthepub (11392) - Banbury, Oxfordshire, ENGLAND - NOV 9, 2004
3.1 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Bottle Conditioned. Amber colour with short lasting head. Bitter citric hop notes, a beer with a one track message and that is a big hop note. Dry, grassy with some apricot, but mostly hops.
Ungstrup (30468) - Citizen of the universe, DENMARK - SEP 9, 2004
1.7 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 2/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 5/20
An amber beer with an OK, but disappearing white head. The aroma is weird with spices and hop notes, doesn’t the weirdness come from the Progress hops? The flavor is very hoppy and very weird with a dry end. I wonder if it is the Progress hops, that makes this beer weird?
Spiesy (2338) - Sydney, Greater London, AUSTRALIA - JUL 9, 2004
2.7 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
Bottled. Golden, foggy from the stirred sediment of its days travel. Citrus hop aroma. Citrus bitterness and tang. More yeasty tang. Possibly better if not drunk by a greedy drunk without patience.
BrainDead (30) - Derby, ENGLAND - MAY 13, 2004
3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 11/20
Light and fragrant. An easy drinking golden bitter with clean flavours from an average brewery.
chriso (7482) - London, Greater London, ENGLAND - MAY 12, 2004
2.9 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
UPDATED: JUN 12, 2008 I expected something tangy and citric but, although this was perfectly acceptable, nothing really leapt out and grabbed me. Everything was a bit restrained and muted. Pale amber colour, faint lemony hop aroma and vague sweet & sour finish. Overall, rather short on flavour and lacking in zing. Not bad but I agree with Gazza that an extra shot of hops wouldn’t have gone amiss. Cask (handpump), Lord Moon of the Mall (JDW), Whitehall, London SW1.
RE-RATE 500ml bottle. No BBE date but probably rather old. Dull creeal malt aroma. Touch of citrus in the flavour with moderate bitterness. Rather dull mouthfeel with very little condition. Seemed very tired. 5/3/5/3/10. Original rating retained.
maeib (8750) - Wootton, Northampton, Northamptonshire, ENGLAND - MAY 11, 2004
3 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Bottled. Is this BC? The bottle doesn’t say so and it doesn’t behave like one. The aroma is very interesting. A sort of spritzy apples and caramel smell. The beer is mid brown and has no head. The taste reminds me of a saison; it is slightly salty and apple-like and is quite interesting and tasty,
Gazza (726) - Worcester, Worcestershire, ENGLAND - APR 2, 2004
2.6 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
A beer i'd not tried for years, but I'm sure it used to be better than this! Nice amber colour, but that's the best bit. Faint malt on the nose, a plain malty body with a sort of appley bitterness and a dry, balanced but still malty finish. Brewed only with progress hops; not enough of 'em for me though. (sampled on cask in Wetherspoons, Wigan, UK)
SilkTork (5407) - Southampton, United Kingdom, Hampshire, ENGLAND - MAR 17, 2004
2.8 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
UPDATED: MAY 24, 2004 JDW, Penge Golden amber colour with mixed foam and bubble head - loose slipping lace. Sweet with a vague brown sugar on banana flavour. A light citric note plays above the malt. An OK Blond, but little happens. [2.8]
JDW, Faversham. Citric notes, but a bit murky. Pleasant juicy malt that goes rancid in the middle. Lingering dusty finish. Progress? Not in great condition. [2.8]
fiulijn (16428) - Vancouver, British Columbia, CANADA - DEC 25, 2003
2.9 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
Cloudy light amber color. Light hop aroma, and malt. Thin mouthfeel, some malt, caramel, hop, light liquorice. Bold bitterness, but not enough aromatic. Disappointing.