Sour and Bitter Fest

The 4 year was totally boss. Have a bottle picture to upload for whatever entry the admins decide to put it in.

I’m not sure the policy on new geuzes but if there is a new geuze that comes out with a new name, isn’t it given a new entry? They allowed Nomad to stand as a new entry from Cantillon. You could say that’s normal Cantillon Geuze. But Monk’s Cafe is aliased. So who knows the protocol.

Originally posted by Travlr

Originally posted by phredrik

Originally posted by lushawn

Originally posted by JulienHuxley
Hey, does anyone know what’s up with the 4 year Drie Fonteinen? Is it still supposed to fall only under the regular Oude Geuze?

This one?

http://www.ratebeer.com/beer/3-fonteinen-oude-geuze-golden-blend/167701/

Nope - there was a 4 year old unblended lambic from 3 Fonteinen.
It was SO delicious!!

All the people I know who have rated it have just submitted their rating under the 3 Fonteinen Oude Lambiek which was already in the database.

IMHO, the 4 yr lambic at CBC should be a separate entry because it’s entirely different to the existing unblended oude lambic in the database - the existing one is draft only, and is normally 6-18 mos old when served. 4-yr lambic is very special, rarely produced, and even more rarely bottled. If it’s lumped into "oude lambic," you’d also have to lump Cantillon LH-12 into Cantillon Oude Lambik.

IMHO #2, the Armand and Tommy blend (love that spelling!) should be lumped into Oude Geuze Vintage 2002-, since it’s no different than other oude geuzes, except that Tomme was in the same country (not the same room) with Armand when Armand did the blend.

Maybe the Belgian admins can weigh in??

Yeah, it’s not my area.. but I was under the impression Armand and Tomme’s Blend would be alted..

Originally posted by Travlr

Originally posted by Jeppe

Originally posted by Travlr

Originally posted by Forgetfu

Originally posted by GT2
I’m working the Struise booth with Travlr at CBC. I’ll be wearing a neon blue Pizza Port shirt tomorrow at Sour and bitter. Come say hi.

Wish I’d seen this post earlier! I’m sure you poured me quite a few beers. Oh well, I’ll meet you two in DC soon hopefully.

Come to DC any time, we’ll give you a tour of the cool bars and new breweries....

i might actually take you up on that ;)

any time. You’ve been to Churchkey I think, yes? or was that Mikkel? You guys look so much alike.

was there about a month ago, awesome place!

You could make the argument for all special blend geuzes. But they are usually quite different.

Originally posted by Travlr

Originally posted by phredrik

Originally posted by lushawn

Originally posted by JulienHuxley
Hey, does anyone know what’s up with the 4 year Drie Fonteinen? Is it still supposed to fall only under the regular Oude Geuze?

This one?

http://www.ratebeer.com/beer/3-fonteinen-oude-geuze-golden-blend/167701/

Nope - there was a 4 year old unblended lambic from 3 Fonteinen.
It was SO delicious!!

All the people I know who have rated it have just submitted their rating under the 3 Fonteinen Oude Lambiek which was already in the database.

IMHO, the 4 yr lambic at CBC should be a separate entry because it’s entirely different to the existing unblended oude lambic in the database - the existing one is draft only, and is normally 6-18 mos old when served. 4-yr lambic is very special, rarely produced, and even more rarely bottled. If it’s lumped into "oude lambic," you’d also have to lump Cantillon LH-12 into Cantillon Oude Lambik.

IMHO #2, the Armand and Tommy blend (love that spelling!) should be lumped into Oude Geuze Vintage 2002-, since it’s no different than other oude geuzes, except that Tomme was in the same country (not the same room) with Armand when Armand did the blend.

Maybe the Belgian admins can weigh in??

Just so you know Tomme did the blending with Armand! The blend is special, just like Millenium, Roze, Blauw, 50th Anniversary etc. It should get its own entry or we should merge all other Oude Geuzes such as the above as well!

I agree the 4 yr lambiek should have own entry as it is indeed a special lambik. The only time you could get Armands own brewed lambiek in bottles!

Originally posted by Jeppe

Originally posted by Travlr

Originally posted by phredrik

Originally posted by lushawn

Originally posted by JulienHuxley
Hey, does anyone know what’s up with the 4 year Drie Fonteinen? Is it still supposed to fall only under the regular Oude Geuze?

This one?

http://www.ratebeer.com/beer/3-fonteinen-oude-geuze-golden-blend/167701/

Nope - there was a 4 year old unblended lambic from 3 Fonteinen.
It was SO delicious!!

All the people I know who have rated it have just submitted their rating under the 3 Fonteinen Oude Lambiek which was already in the database.

IMHO, the 4 yr lambic at CBC should be a separate entry because it’s entirely different to the existing unblended oude lambic in the database - the existing one is draft only, and is normally 6-18 mos old when served. 4-yr lambic is very special, rarely produced, and even more rarely bottled. If it’s lumped into "oude lambic," you’d also have to lump Cantillon LH-12 into Cantillon Oude Lambik.

IMHO #2, the Armand and Tommy blend (love that spelling!) should be lumped into Oude Geuze Vintage 2002-, since it’s no different than other oude geuzes, except that Tomme was in the same country (not the same room) with Armand when Armand did the blend.

Maybe the Belgian admins can weigh in??

Just so you know Tomme did the blending with Armand! The blend is special, just like Millenium, Roze, Blauw, 50th Anniversary etc. It should get its own entry or we should merge all other Oude Geuzes such as the above as well!

I agree the 4 yr lambiek should have own entry as it is indeed a special lambik. The only time you could get Armands own brewed lambiek in bottles!

Sweeeeet

De Cam Oude Lambik bottles and draft have always been under the same entry. I believe Lindeman’s is the same.

Originally posted by 3fourths
De Cam Oude Lambik bottles and draft have always been under the same entry. I believe Lindeman’s is the same.

Ok though I’m not sure I get your point ;)

Originally posted by Jeppe

Originally posted by 3fourths
De Cam Oude Lambik bottles and draft have always been under the same entry. I believe Lindeman’s is the same.

Ok though I’m not sure I get your point ;)

if this is oude lambik in bottle, I don’t see how we can consider it different or special if it’s the same oude lambik available before draft, even though most draft samples are younger than a year and a half. I’m not the one making the decision, and I don’t care which way it goes. in the past, bottle and draft of oude lambik was combined, so that seems to be the way to do things around here, unless it’s now time to hear reasons why they should be separate that includes details of the beer or thoughts about how the beer changes enough from draft to bottles and age to warrant a separate entry. like the armand & tomme blend having a unique name, that’s the sort of thing that signals brewer intent. the new 4 year lambik bottle says just oude lambik.

Originally posted by Travlr

IMHO #2, the Armand and Tommy blend (love that spelling!) should be lumped into Oude Geuze Vintage 2002-, since it’s no different than other oude geuzes, except that Tomme was in the same country (not the same room) with Armand when Armand did the blend.

Maybe the Belgian admins can weigh in??

Why weren’t they in the same room?