highlandlad (1480) - Blue Mountains, AUSTRALIA - MAR 27, 2006
Catfight: Tiger Lager vs Tiger Special Classic Edition rated head to head in an unsensational winner-takes-bugger-all contest. This one-off all-Singaporean bout comes courtesy of Bridge (Classic Edition) and Nice Houseguest With Poor Taste In Beer (Tiger Lager). Does Tiger Lager have the claws to see off the Classic Edition? Or will the CE’s vaunted addition of crystal malt turn the contest? Does anyone care? Let’s find out... Appearance (both poured simultaneously into identical chalices): a clear win for Classic Edition. TL arrives with a watery gold body and skinny head that vanishes immediately. CE is brighter, deeper and has a head that not only lasts but also laces. TL 2/5, CE 4/5. Aroma: TL is sugary sweet, with cardboardy malt. Uninspiring. Can it get worse? Surprisingly, yes. CE smells stale, despite being well within its ’consume-by’ date. It’s fruity, with some wet dog. TL 3, CE 2. Palate: TL is surprisingly oily, with a dry finish. CE is fizzier. TL 3/5, CE 3/5. Flavour: TL is all sugary cornwater, with faint banana and a dry, mildly grainy finish. CE benefits from the crystal malt, but marginally. It has Juicy Fruit chewing gum and canned pear notes. It’s much maltier and just as sweet. TL 3/10, CE 4/10. Overall: I expected the Lager to win this hands down, but there was no contest. The CE is no classic, despite the name, but it’s superior in most aspects. Total Scores: Tiger Lager 1.6, Classic Edition 2.0. (Tiger Lager: 330ml bottle, bb Dec 2006; Classic Edition: 330ml can, brewed Dec 30, 2005) motelpogo (7704) - Plzen, CZECH REPUBLIC - MAY 4, 2004
not all that bad, tasted of sugared pears and sub-tropical humidity. a bit too sweet, i think i’d prefer regular tiger. thanks to sully for bringing this along bitter (1136) - Henderson, Nevada, USA - JUL 25, 2006
i found this in a conveinant store in thailand and decided i needed to give it a whirl. not much of a whirl at all. tasted basically the same as tiger to me...they all are about the same. maybe a slightly more malty character, not sure about the color it was in ze bottle. Spiesy (2338) - Sydney, Greater London, AUSTRALIA - MAY 3, 2004
Canned. Credits to sully for this rare rate. Didn’t manage to note anything more then ‘thin’ but to quote ecz’ on the night ‘it tastes like tiger with crystal malt’. eczematic (1325) - Adelaide, AUSTRALIA - APR 27, 2004
The gathering: duff, eczematic, motelpogo, Spiesy, Sully and late arrival Linc.
wow a singaporean märzen. take a bland sweet lager and make it sweeter, what a concept. toffee smells, taste is sweet, grainy and then tangy and metallic in finish. not sure whether it's an improvement on ordinary tiger, at least you can swill tiger with a curry and not notice it. thanks neil for the opportunity to try this rare brew.
Rastacouere (6177) - Montreal, Quebec, CANADA - NOV 12, 2007
Considering the style, Scores ranging from 1 to 5, 5 being the most intense
duff (5484) - Copenhagen, DENMARK - MAY 2, 2004
Body:   Clear(1)->Murky(5) : 1     Pale Yellow(1)->Copper(5) : 1     Still(1)->Sparkling(5) : 1
Head:   None(1)->Large(5) : 1     Lasting: 1     Lacing : 1
Intensity : 1
Yeast : XX   Bread : XX   Apple : XX   Tropical Fruits : XX   DMS : 3   Diacetyl : XX Sulphur : XX
Malt : 2   Pilsner : 2   Pale : XX   Vienna : XX   Biscuity : XX   Hay : 1   Toasty : XX   Caramel : 2   Honey : 2   Cereals : XX   Grainy : 2
Hops : 1   Noble(1)->American(5) : 1   Leafy : XX   Floral : XX   Lemon/Lime : XX   Herbal : XX   Grassy : XX
Initial Flavor : Dry(1)->Sweet(5) : 4   Finish Dry(1)->Sweet(5) : 4   Sourness : XX   Bitterness : XX   Farmy : XX   Complex : XX   Length : XX
Light(1)->Full(5) : 1   Flat(1)->Fizzy(5) : 1   Clean : 1   Crisp : XX   Sharp : XX   Watery : 1   Oily : XX   Chalk : XX   Astringent : XX   Alcohol : XX   Mineral : XX   Oxidation : XX
Comments: Vegetal, corny and sweet lager.
Not good. Sweet and sticky malts. Little hops or bitterness to speak of, pretty bad, i haven’t had regular Tiger in a while, but it would probably be better than this.