Does the BJCP System Stifle Innovation?

Even if you got rid of the guidelines, we all like to categorize things. It’s how you know what to expect. If you ordered a pale ale at a bar and got a black IPA, you might acknowledge that it was tasty, but you would definitely say "that is not a pale ale."

BJCP Styles were developed for homebrew competitions as guidelines. "This is the target. It’s this big and you’re going to shoot at it from this far away". It has always had the Experimental category if you want to innovate and brewing to style is good practice. Two things stifle a homebrewer. One is only brewing for competitions and the other is having a goal of brewing an exact clone of something like Sierra Nevada Pale Ale or Guinness Stout. Otherwise, using the style descriptors just makes taking about beer easier if we assume similar attributes when talking about 2 different beers.

Originally posted by HornyDevil
First let me give my answer to the initial question. NO. The BJCP system can only stifle innovation if you blindly follow it thinking "this is the only way to brew beer". I don’t think that many brewers do that, even the ones that like to win BJCP competitions by following their guidelines to a T.

Originally posted by FooFaa

Originally posted by bitbucket

Originally posted by spacecoyote
Some styles, more so than others, should be considered sacred, such as kolsch, lambic, gose, "saison", pilsner, Berliner weisse, just to cite a few examples.

I’m confused by this. Some styles, such as Kolsh and Berliner weisse have fairly narrow definitions... at least in my mind. Others, such as saison and pilsner seem more open to interpretation or local version.

Agreed. "Saison" and "Lambic" could only scarcely, if at all, be considered styles.

OK . . . you guys are confusing things here.

Styles like Kolsch and Pilsner have fairly narrow definitions. The term Kolsch even has appellation as defined by the Kolsch Convention. Though I’m not saying that brewers that brew this type of beer outside of Cologne can’t call it Kolsch, what I am saying is that if you don’t brew the beer as traditionally defined, then it isn’t a proper Kolsch. If you add pineapple to it and call it a Kolsch, you should be slapped. Have some respect and call it what it is. A Pineapple Blonde Ale.

Berliner Weisse and Gose, though simple beers, are also decently well-defined. The "problem" is that Berliner Weisse had the tradition of being flavored, at service mind you, with syrups to cut the tartness and make them more drinkable. The recent trend of fruiting both beers is completely untraditional, though it does produce interesting beers. Just call them " _____ (insert fruit name(s) here) sour" and everyone will be happy.

Saison is one of the most, if not THE most, ill-defined styles in the entire beer world. End of story.

Lambic is one of the most well-defined, especially when referring to process and provenance. The problem with Lambic is that the members of HORAL make such different products and Cantillon, probably the most recognizable maker in the world, is not a member. If however, you want to call your beer a Lambic, you must do the following. You must construct your grist of pilsner malt and unmalted wheat. You must perform a turbid mash. You must hop the runoff with a high level of aged hops. You must boil for an extended time. You must cool your wort in a coolship before transferring to wood for fermentation. You must age your beer in wood and blend the resultant beer into a uniform end product. If you don’t do all of these things your beer cannot even dream of being called Lambic and if you don’t even attempt to do these things and you call your beer a Lambic, then you, sir or ma’am, are an asshole, plain and simple.

Betteridge´s law seems to apply here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge’s_law_of_headlines

Originally posted by bitbucket

Pilsner is a single style?

Originally posted by ekstedt
Betteridge´s law seems to apply here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge’s_law_of_headlines

Originally posted by spacecoyote

Originally posted by bitbucket

Pilsner is a single style?

Not according to BJCP.

None the less, "any pilsner" has a narrow definition. If a brewer throws kumquats and ancho chilies in a pilsner, it’s no longer a pilsner.

Originally posted by HornyDevil

Originally posted by spacecoyote

Originally posted by bitbucket

Pilsner is a single style?

Not according to BJCP.

None the less, "any pilsner" has a narrow definition. If a brewer throws kumquats and ancho chilies in a pilsner, it’s no longer a pilsner.

Exactly.

Originally posted by bitbucket

Originally posted by HornyDevil

Originally posted by spacecoyote

Originally posted by bitbucket

Pilsner is a single style?

Not according to BJCP.

None the less, "any pilsner" has a narrow definition. If a brewer throws kumquats and ancho chilies in a pilsner, it’s no longer a pilsner.

Exactly.

If it contains adjuncts it’s not a German Pilsner or a BoPils. If it doesn’t contain adjuncts, it’s not a CAP. And then there’s the hop business, not to mention the host of pilsner-ish beers. I’m also trying to figure out what beers remain true to style if you throw in kumquats and ancho chilies. I’m not coming up with much of a list.

Originally posted by HornyDevil

Originally posted by bitbucket

Originally posted by HornyDevil

Originally posted by spacecoyote

Originally posted by bitbucket

Pilsner is a single style?

Not according to BJCP.

None the less, "any pilsner" has a narrow definition. If a brewer throws kumquats and ancho chilies in a pilsner, it’s no longer a pilsner.

Exactly.

If it contains adjuncts it’s not a German Pilsner or a BoPils. If it doesn’t contain adjuncts, it’s not a CAP. And then there’s the hop business, not to mention the host of pilsner-ish beers. I’m also trying to figure out what beers remain true to style if you throw in kumquats and ancho chilies. I’m not coming up with much of a list.

So there are certain specific sub-styles within the Pilsner style. Stop being a pedantic douche.