Brewed by Desnoes and Geddes (Diageo PLC)
Style: Pale Lager
Kingston, Jamaica


on tap

Broad Distribution

Add Distribution Data
RATINGS: 2361   WEIGHTED AVG: 2.17/5   EST. CALORIES: 141   ABV: 4.7%
First brewed in 1938.
It is a light alcohol drink with not too strong bitterness but rather soft taste; therefore, it’s easy to drink it up.
Brewed for the UK market by Charles Wells since 1976.
Brewed for US market at City Brewery’s Latrobe plant since 2012.

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

thehoff (598) - Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA - OCT 22, 2003
Light looking small head, sour smelling. It really has the smell of a watermelon dum dum. Slightly fruity undertones, like when the lines are bad on the beer taps and you haven't run the beer at all. No bad aftertaste but no good beforetaste either.

bu11zeye (13029) - Frisco (Dallas), Texas, USA - OCT 16, 2003
(Bottle) This beer is a classic example of good marketing. Overall a below average tasting beer.

tsarman (794) - Northern, New Jersey, USA - OCT 15, 2003
Typical American Standard, this time Jamaican. Had this one in the islands before I was 21 when I had mono. Tastes like an average normal beer. Only thing really good about it is the commercials. H I L A R I O U S.

auto (163) - California, USA - OCT 15, 2003
UPDATED: OCT 30, 2003 cute lil bottle. horrible aroma. not very much flavour either. the head was very large when i poured it but that might have been because i used a tall thin glass from the old spaghetti factory. embarassing, i know.

direwolf600 (37) - Philadlephia, Pennsylvania, USA - OCT 14, 2003
Tasty and generally satisfying but far short of a great beer. Love the bottle though.

gjamieson (80) - Canton, Georgia, USA - OCT 6, 2003
I was NOT impressed with this, especially after forking out $8.50 for sixer. Poured pee-pee yellow and thin, little aroma, and the flavor left much to be desired. Mouthfeel was average, and finish was lacking.

elnadeau (786) - Laguna Niguel, California, USA - OCT 6, 2003
Looks, smells and tastes like a typical macro, but doesn't even measure up to Budweiser. Drinkable in the right situation, but not worth paying a premium for.

dwyerpg (6180) - Las Vegas, Nevada, USA - OCT 4, 2003
Pours and looks like your typical bad beer. Thankfully it tastes better than it looks. Reminds me of Corona.

DuffManOhYeah (133) - USA - OCT 3, 2003
Not bad at all. Looks like Budweiser. Pretty decent though. It tastes unlike anything I have had before. Almost no head and even less tapestry. Pretty sweet, but finishes slightly bitter and pretty dry. I enjoyed it, but at this price, almost wish I has just bought some bottles of Budweiser.

aaronh (201) - McMurray, Pennsylvania, USA - SEP 29, 2003
This golden lager pours with a thin white head that quickly fades and becomes only a memory, leaving no hint that it ever existed. The smell was also very faint, with a grassy malt smell somewhat detectable. The taste was crisp, and strong on malt sweetness. The finish was a little dry, like flat champagne, and tasted very acidic. It made my throat feel like I was drinking strong lemonade. The mouthfeel was adequate, but the finish was too dry.

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 « 200 201 202  203  204 205 206 » 237
Tick this beer for your profile
  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5