Official Policy on Sour Stouts

Reads 2469 • Replies 42 • Started Wednesday, July 3, 2013 7:11:08 PM CT

Thread Frozen
 
Drake
beers 14059 º places 831 º 20:00 Wed 7/3/2013

It’s also important to differentiate that admins make decisions with vastly different information at times. Sometimes I verify a beer based on a very limited amount of information. Sometimes I’m drinking it.

Usually when it’s not a controversial case and it makes sense, when someone sends in feedback I’ll just change it.

 
puzzl
beers 3260 º places 138 º 20:04 Wed 7/3/2013

Originally posted by TheAlum
JP Brewers want their beer under their base.


Hasn’t the protocol always been that it’s not what brewers want, it’s what’s right? I have all the respect in the world for Ron and his fantastic creations, but that beer is not a stout. It is a sour, by our measure; a sour stout, if you will, but we don’t list that, and under no definition of stout will you find the characteristics of that beer.

We have done it to other brewers in the past, why do we make exceptions for only certain ones? God knows how many brewpub kolsches are rightly listed as pale lagers or golden ales, or how many IPAs are listed as wheat ales, or porters as black IPAs, or IPAs as pale ales. We have, and have always made the call on what a beer actually is, not what the brewer wants to call it. We shouldn’t make exceptions.

 
TheAlum
beers 7164 º places 10 º 20:09 Wed 7/3/2013

Originally posted by puzzl
Originally posted by TheAlum
JP Brewers want their beer under their base.


Hasn’t the protocol always been that it’s not what brewers want, it’s what’s right? I have all the respect in the world for Ron and his fantastic creations, but that beer is not a stout. It is a sour, by our measure; a sour stout, if you will, but we don’t list that, and under no definition of stout will you find the characteristics of that beer.

We have done it to other brewers in the past, why do we make exceptions for only certain ones? God knows how many brewpub kolsches are rightly listed as pale lagers or golden ales, or how many IPAs are listed as wheat ales, or porters as black IPAs, or IPAs as pale ales. We have, and have always made the call on what a beer actually is, not what the brewer wants to call it. We shouldn’t make exceptions.


No. I don’t think that’s the case.

If it was, Hill Farmstead certainly would not dominate so blatantly a couple select categories they currently do..

 
puzzl
beers 3260 º places 138 º 21:14 Wed 7/3/2013

Originally posted by TheAlum
Originally posted by puzzl
Originally posted by TheAlum
JP Brewers want their beer under their base.


Hasn’t the protocol always been that it’s not what brewers want, it’s what’s right? I have all the respect in the world for Ron and his fantastic creations, but that beer is not a stout. It is a sour, by our measure; a sour stout, if you will, but we don’t list that, and under no definition of stout will you find the characteristics of that beer.

We have done it to other brewers in the past, why do we make exceptions for only certain ones? God knows how many brewpub kolsches are rightly listed as pale lagers or golden ales, or how many IPAs are listed as wheat ales, or porters as black IPAs, or IPAs as pale ales. We have, and have always made the call on what a beer actually is, not what the brewer wants to call it. We shouldn’t make exceptions.


No. I don’t think that’s the case.

If it was, Hill Farmstead certainly would not dominate so blatantly a couple select categories they currently do..


Yes, Hill gets away with it too. Doesn’t mean it’s right, though.

 
JoeMcPhee
beers 9517 º places 536 º 02:58 Thu 7/4/2013

Originally posted by TheAlum
Originally posted by GT2
Mostly JP Madrugada Obscura. Haven’t had the new Anchorage Darkest Hour but that could be one as well.


JP Brewers want their beer under their base.

That’s not changing (And my own feelings have moved closer to yours over the years.. but ultimately.. not my call one way or the other).

Not always - they want them under the base beer, but they don’t always land there. ESBam is a good example - sourness just has no place in a bitter, regardless of where you have it - hence it’s in the sour ale category.

 
caesar
beers 7170 º places 389 º 03:05 Thu 7/4/2013

Interpretation of styles can be a thin line. I don’t agree on a lot of the style-policies on this site actually :P

But there’s nothing wrong with corresponding with the brewer. If you agree on the interpretation on the beer, it’s easy. If not, I’d say Ratebeer should choose the category and inform the brewer why you do so. You can even add it to the beer description. I’d love to see as much info as possible :-)

I agree with GT2 that a sour stout most of the times should fall in the sour category. Sours can be all colors, so it would be strange to put a sour stout in the stout category, but a sour golden ale in the sour instead of the golden ale category.

Also, smoked (imperial) stouts should be in the smoked category IMHO, next to the smoked lagers, smoked weizen etc.

 
77ships
beers 10770 º places 235 º 03:09 Thu 7/4/2013

Two examples - maybe not stouts but still

http://www.ratebeer.com/beer/de-molen-rook-leer-smoke-leather/175860/ -> more sourness than some sours

http://www.ratebeer.com/beer/gulden-spoor-druivenbier/211078/125231/ -> pretty much every review mentions this being sour or tasting like a lambic & this was intentional

 
drowland
beers 8939 º places 283 º 04:46 Thu 7/4/2013

Many to consider under CIB as well

 
chriso
beers 7586 º places 718 º 05:00 Thu 7/4/2013

Originally posted by caesar
Interpretation of styles can be a thin line.

Sure can. And, even if if were possible to achieve 100% consistentcy, with huge numbers of beers in the database it would be immensely time consuming. Time that is in short enough supply already. Life’s too short for that. And for arguing the toss with brewers. And for having extended discussions about every borderline case.

New style: Stour ale