beerhugger (542) - Oshawa, Ontario, CANADA - JUL 2, 2005
2.5 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
Not being a huge lager fan I am ready for another basic bland Eastern European offering fo m the unimaginable number found at the LCBO.Happily it was better than most. Clean golden colour lead to light grassy floral notes and a clean malty flavour. It wasn’t great but there was a slight bitterness in the finish and it was certainly drinkable.
haukur (1515) - Reykjavik, ICELAND - JUL 31, 2005
1.2 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 3/20
UPDATED: MAR 13, 2013 canned; quite unusual, it´s sugary but not sweet, some nice bitterness, a bit special taste to it, nothing wrong with this brew, but fails to be anything else then a decent lager,
dwyerpg (4918) - Las Vegas, Nevada, USA - JUL 8, 2005
3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Smells, looks, and tastes better than expected. Very bubbly and heady, but unlike most lagers, the head is not atrocious. A pretty darn good lager (either that or its just really hot out).
chriso (7513) - London, Greater London, ENGLAND - JUL 16, 2005
2.7 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
OK, so I didn’t drink this in ideal tasting conditions - from a can at the Oval watching England getting trounced by Australia at cricket. Couldn’t tell you anything about the appearance and getting the aroma through the little ring pull hole was a bit difficult too. I got some strange looks for trying. This came over as a decent enough lager with some soft malt and a touch of hop. Maybe a touch of sweetness, but there was reasonable bite and kick. Not surprisingly, there was a metallic edge. Nothing to write home about though.
MIBRomeo (2570) - Wisconsin, USA - JUL 16, 2005
1.8 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 7/20
light yellow small white head decent lacing. I smell nothing, palate is like carbonated water. Flavor a bland corny carmel blah.. not good.
harrisoni (15792) - Ashford, Kent, ENGLAND - JUL 26, 2005
2.1 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 8/20
Bottle. Sickly nose, golden thin white head, this taste, Not used to drinking lager for so long not sure what to make of it. Nothing wrong with it, but that sickly first aroma stayed with me throughout the bottle
trokini (1025) - San Diego, California, USA - JUL 5, 2005
2.8 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
First Polish beer I’ve tried. Thin but sweet. Better than a Budweiser. Probably would not drink again.
DerWeg (1568) - Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - JUL 9, 2005
2.5 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
A pretty okay EastEuro lager with workmanlike hops and smooth, thin malts. Refreshing but not all that interesting. I sometimes get small hints of some weird mid- and after-taste. Budvar or Staropramen are far better.
demitriustown (1156) - Sterling Heights, Michigan, USA - JUL 7, 2005
2.5 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
Aroma is skunky, overtones of alcohol, a slight hit of malts. Appearence is a clear golden. Poured with a medium foamy head. Bitter sweetness comes through at the end. Clean and clear palate. Decent nothing special probably will stay awy too. Average.
D (577) - Gdynia, POLAND - AUG 2, 2005
2.6 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
UPDATED: JUL 22, 2006 Pale, slightly bitter lager. Head goes off fast, almost completely. A decent taste in the beginning, but at the end you feel a slight yet unpleasant alcohol note. Heavy carbonation. The most popular and widespread Polish beer, sort of a mainstream standard. Not bad, used to be much better though - it’s either that my taste has developed throught the years or this beer is constantly deteriorating.