Probiere (992) - Iowa, USA - SEP 1, 2003
3.3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
UPDATED: APR 25, 2004 An appealing amber pour, but the head was too soapy and diminishing. Malt apparent at first sip, but was overpowered by bitterness before the swallow. Why? I don't know. It wasn't a hoppy finish, or a dry finish--just bitter. Somewhat unpleasant but drinkable. Would take it over larger macros.
jek803 (41) - USA - AUG 28, 2003
3.2 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
Smooth...light...nice lawnmowing and/or session beer. Decently balanced. I not a huge fan of this style, but I found it drinkable.
tsarman (794) - Northern, New Jersey, USA - AUG 24, 2003
3.3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 15/20
UPDATED: SEP 7, 2004 Another winner (for a lager) by the oldest brewery in the US. Comparable in price to a macrobrew, but even a cursory glance could prove this was higher quality. This is a lager that doesn't look like the urine of macro US "American Standards." Infinitely drinkable for its type, I have to convince my college roomies to make this our keg choice.
DrinkingbuddyD (129) - Warsaw, New York, USA - AUG 18, 2003
2.4 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
One of the better lagers I've had. Nothing too great though. I'm not a big fan of the style. It is alot easier to drink than many of the other macrobrewed beers.
Andrew196 (1096) - Katy, Texas, USA - AUG 10, 2003
3.1 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
UPDATED: AUG 13, 2003 (bottle, via mabdoney)Dont know how I had gone this long without having this beer. The color of the beer in a green bottle struck me as odd looking for some reason....Ive seen darker beers in green bottles and also some piss yellow ones, but this apple juice colored beer looked kinda cool with the green in front of it. Anyways, the green bottle bitch slapped this beer into skunk land. A respectable lager--much better than a heieneken, probably be a damn good beer on draught.
SirBeer1963 (14) - Tampa, Florida, USA - AUG 10, 2003
2.8 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
yuengling bought out the tampa Pabst plant and I did not think much till I tryed the beer and I was very suprised as it was not at all bad as a mild beer with a full body taste and a light but noticable hops
thedm (5067) - Fort Wayne, USA - AUG 6, 2003
2.7 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
This brew poured a small head of fine to mediumly sized off-white bubbles and a deep amber brown colored softly carbonated body. It had a very mild malt-hop flavor that was somewhat thin with a very mild malt or no discernable aroma.
YnotABeer (96) - Missouri, USA - AUG 4, 2003
3.2 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
was impressed with it on tap. went great with food. significantly better than most macrobrews and at the same price (although it's fairly difficult to find). seemed almost like an ale. smooth and well balanced; good amount of hops and just tastes nice and goes down happily.
DirtyD79 (41) - Pennsylvania, USA - AUG 3, 2003
3.4 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 15/20
Damn good beer. Has a nice taste and aftertaste isn't too bad. Definately one of the better beers on the market.
RaginCajun (320) - Houston, Texas, USA - AUG 3, 2003
2.2 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 1/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
Okay stuff, only moderately better than macroswill. Very metallic (from the can?) and light; not much taste. Gets a little sweet after 3 or 4 12oz. though, but without that nasty macro aftertaste.