Ticking, counting and beer numbers

On websites like Ratebeer.com and BeerAdvocate.com users can review beers they've tried and post them for all to see. Both websites keep track of the number of reviews for each user, and this number can be viewed by everyone on the site. This can lead to some users being motivated by 'struggle' to be the top reviewer, or more accurately, the reviewer with the most reviews.  The number of reviews gives a semi-accurate number of the number of beers a user has tried. Of course, not all people review each beer they actually try. Still, this counting can be annoying to some and the meaning of life to others.

Ticking is fairly similar, although instead of randomly trying a beer to review it and have your overall number increase, the 'ticker' has a list of beer to try (say, top rated American Double Imperial Stouts) and checks off each beer as it's tried. Each 'conquered' beer receives a tick next to it on the list.  As with counting, this ticking drives some beer lovers crazy.  But why?

One answer comes from those who detest turning beer into a means to an end. "Enjoy the beer not its number", is what they might say.  Others view 'ticking' as adding hype to certain beers that are rare for various reasons (one time brew, limited distribution...). This hype can tarnish reviews and reputation of these beers.

Tickers and Counters have their reasons; it's fun, keeps motivated to try new beers, provides marketing for brewers, etc.   Who's right? Well, first, who cares?  Both sides believe they are right, and the other wrong. It wouldn't make much difference to declare a winner in this debate.  Yet, I say they are both right and both wrong. Here's what I mean:

There are many aspects to beer that can be/are enjoyable. For me, looking at my total number of reviews on BeerAdvocate.com gives me a sense of adventure, "wow, I've traveled much in the beer world".  I don't strive for a mile-stone number, but I do recognize the current number.  I do keep a list of beers I want to try, but it's my own list, not a list of the Top 100 or Best 50.  I tick the beers from my list, which has rare beers, popular beers, beers from other regions and beer from certain styles I like.  By 'counting' and 'ticking' I have come to enjoy the beer, the allocation of beer, and the journey beer loving provides.  In the end, I don't really care how other people enjoy beer, just as long as they do.

cheers

Out of Towners

One of the many good things about being a part of a beer community (BeerAdvocate) is the chance to meet people from around the city, state, country and globe. After all, it helped me meet Nikhil in India that opened the flow of good beer for me there. And this past weekend I met up with a fellow BA-er and his girlfriend from Austin, TX as they were traveling Colorado on a beer tour.

When I met them at Great Divide Brewery they told me what places they wanted to visit and a rough route they planned to follow. Quickly I noticed two places that weren't listed and strongly suggested they visit. After a couple beers we started off and we walked to the two added stops; Breckenridge and Falling Rock Tap House. They were impressed with both. I then listed several places they should hit if they wanted to buy bottles to take back to Texas. They were quite pleased and I'm anxious to find out how they thought of the Colorado beer scene.

This goes to show that it helps to know people in all places. It helped me in India, England, Italy (thanks Alice!!) and Switzerland...and hopefully Washington state. The beer community is great.

Session beer...what the heck?

Ok, so in recent weeks some buzz has started, or continued, about session beers. The biggest debate concerns the criteria for designating a beer 'session'. Here's some background on the term. Of course it's not 100% infallible, but you'll get the idea:

Session beers, by definition, contain 4% or less Alcohol by Volume (abv). Because of this low level of abv a person may be more able to enjoy more of these beers in one sitting (session) than higher abv beers, without becoming inebriated. Orginally, these beers were English, available at the pubs in the UK and drank during lunch by laborers would couldn't afford to be drunk going back to sometimes dangerous work.  So, the 4% became the line between session and non-session beer.  Fine.

A new definition has come to the debate, this time from Americans, but I'm not sure who came up with it. It seems 'session' in America considers beers with abv of or lower than 5%.  This adds more to the 'session' labels. Yet, some are vehemently opposed to this new definition, and seemingly only because it doesn't fit the previous definition. I have asked around, and there are no other reasons given for this opposition.

Now, I'm not providing support for one or the other. In fact, my personal choice would be to scrap the whole 'session' term anyway, for it serves no purpose whatsoever. People in the UK don't ask their publican for a 'session'. They don't look for a 3.9% abv beer and discard a 4.1% abv beer if offered. The only distinction is the arbitrary line in the sand. Furthermore, 'session' isn't even a style of beer. It doesn't require a unique brewing method, ingredients or storage. The 'session' term is for historicity and the cultural books, it has no practical purpose today...or even yesterday. It's just a term, useless and silly.

Don't get me wrong, low abv beers are great. I'm not knocking them. I think there should be more of them available (aside form the 3.2% grocery store, macro crap).  Stone's Levitation Ale is a great low abv beer at 4.4%.  Is it a session?  I don't give a crap, it's good.