overall
88
87
style
Brewed by Brouwerij Emelisse
Style: Smoked
Goes, Netherlands

bottling
unknown

on tap
unknown

distribution
unknown

Add Distribution Data
RATINGS: 83   WEIGHTED AVG: 3.5/5   EST. CALORIES: 225   ABV: 7.5%
COMMERCIAL DESCRIPTION
Brewed with water, pale malt, Heavy peated wiskey malt, caramelmalt, roasted malt, Chinook and Simcoe hops, yeast. 17° Pt.

Tick this beer for your profile
  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


2.9
BoBoChamp (5755) - Gent, BELGIUM - JUL 17, 2011
33cl, new Dutch brew Anno 2010, from Slijterij van Bergen Eindhoven, not complex smoked Porter, too heavy, roasted and spicy, not balanced, hazy, small head, nothing special

3.4
mjs (7357) - Helsinki, FINLAND - JUL 16, 2011
(Bottle, 0.33 l, at Pikkulintu, 20110716) The beer poured very dark brown and quite clear. Its head was medium sized and light brown. Aroma had a lot of smoke and tar. Palate was medium bodied with medium carbonation. Flavours were smoke, tar, smoked ham, grilled sausage, roasted malts and bitterness. Aftertaste was smoky and bitter. A very smoky porter but loosing some of the Bamberg characteristics.

2.9
Benzai (15608) - Oirschot, THE NETHERLANDS, NETHERLANDS - JUL 6, 2011
It’s a pretty nice beer but I absolutely don’t like the smell! To me it smelled like ’fingerpaint’. At least that’s what it’s called in Dutch. As a young child you painted with your fingers with some kind of special paint which had almost the same smell. Too bad, otherwise a decent beer.

4.1
fugitive (2005) - Athens, GREECE - JUL 3, 2011
Sampled @ ACBF 2011. Color dark red with large head. Aroma malt, smoke, leather. Taste sweet, smoke, leather, bitter.

3
Koelschtrinker (20399) - Köln (Cologne), GERMANY - MAY 26, 2011
Muffig malziger Antrunk mit säuerlich rauchigem, ziemlich unwichtigen Hintergrund. Etwas muffig, wenig aromatisch. Wirkt ziemlich banal. 10/9/9/9/9/9

3.7
chriso (7533) - London, Greater London, ENGLAND - MAY 8, 2011
On tap at In De Wildeman on 6 April 2011. Very dark colour. Diminishing beige head. Subtle smoke in the aroma. Dry and a little hoppy on the palate. Some powdery dark chocolate / cocoa. Smoke again quite restrained in the flavour profile. Pretty tasty and very drinkable but I would have preferred a little more smoke.

3.6
lusikka (7813) - Tampere, FINLAND - APR 29, 2011
330 ml bottle.
Pours a black colour with a medium-sized foamy head. Aroma of smoke and strong leather. Flavour of peated malts, smoked ham, tar and strong hops. Medium bodied with a thick mouthfeel and a dry, smoky finish. Heavy smoky but a little too thin.

3.8
Martinus (4601) - Baarle-Nassau, NETHERLANDS - APR 28, 2011
Bottled version, tasting at home (28 April ’11).
Dark, dark red body, beige head with brownish spots. Aroma of smoke, malts, tar (phenolic), milk chocolate and leather. Smoky flavour, bitter roasted malts, cocoa powder, ash. Sweetish, but dominated by the smoke. Finish reminds strongly of good Islay whisky. Really nice. (Marks given are for this bottle, 33cL, thanks KB for sharing. PS. Lot A, best before 03 ’13)
--
From tap @ Delta BF (20 March ’11) Heavily smoked aroma, dominates everything else. Smoked flavour, bit sweetish, harsh smoked whisky. Unbalanced. Maybe a bit young, considering the quality of the bottled version. (draught, Delta Beer Festival, Goes)

2.9
EugeneStraver (282) - Nootdorp, NETHERLANDS - APR 22, 2011
DBF Goes 20110320 (draft): A clear dark red-brown beer with a somewhat brown head. The aroma is roasted maltd (burned-like) with smoke (phenol-like). The aroma is some sweetness, roasted malt, smoke (phenol), A biter aftertaste with a long taste of smoked "fish". A little too much smoke in the beer.

0.8
j9weber (2) - NETHERLANDS - APR 19, 2011 does not count
OK, something must have gone wrong with the batch (Lot A houdbaar tot einde 03, 2013). It’s so disappointing to buy a special beer and that you are looking forward to drinking -- and instead you get a mouthful of chlorophenolic scariness. Totally undrinkable. This could be due to bleach/chlorine or chloramines in the water (at a high rate) or, more likely, an infection, because I can’t imagine they over-dosed the porter with whole hops (another cause for strong chlorophenolic aroma and taste). Hmm, it could maybe be too much peat-smoked malt plus an infection. But in any case: undrinkable. A smoked porter should be porter first, full of malty goodness, with the rauch malt adding a little extra character and interest. This little brewery contracts out some of their beers, so maybe they can blame it on the contract brewery. But to be successful, you need to have consistent good quality. This is an unfortunate beer. Avoid it.


We Want To Hear From You



Join us! RateBeer is made by beer enthusiasts for the craft beer community. Your basic membership is free and allows you to read all beer ratings. Click here to create your account... and give your opinion!

Join Us »



Page  1 2 3 4 5  6  7 8 9
Tick this beer for your profile
  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5