WHAT, GLB lost to Summit.

[redlem]

I have actually tried both of these beers and am astounded that GLB lost. Summit is OK but it is watery, not as complex, and does not have that chewy/oily mouthfeel that Edmund Fitz does. I cant believe that anyone who has tried both of these beers would vote for Summit. Anyone who voted for Summit please explain your reason. I want answers, damnit. I want retribution. I want......oh whatever, its a game:)

[tavernjef]

I totally agree with you Redlem, Summit is watery and not as complex as the GLB, but some people like that style sometimes.
This whole tournament is upset city in my books, nearly all my favs are done. Oh, well. Game on.:rolleyes:

[warmstorage]

PHEW: it's a good thing this whole thing is a game, since yesterday's results are almost uniformly ridiculous, and suggest that it's largely a matter of which beers have larger markets and distribution systems, and more active fan bases (though... Summit, based in the notoriously passive St. Paul, MN?) ahhhh, well:

one by one:

Summit Great Northern Porter 50.2%
GLB Edmund Fitzgerald Porter 49.8%
have had lots of both, and almost anything GLB makes beats almost anything Summit makes. as others have noted, Summit tends towards thinner, lighter beers, and the Summit Porter is almost a weak-ish brown ale it's so thin. at least it was close, but the Fitz beats the crap out of Gross Northern Product.

Tabernash Weiss 48%
Widmer Hefeweizen 52%
sigh. a great, deep beer, Tabernash probably suffers from more limited distribution circles. i mean, sure, the Widmer is fine, but that's all: fine. again, at least it was close, unlike:

Lagunitas IPA 33%
Victory HopDevil IPA 67%
c'mon, now! this is the one that finally spurred me to write and whine. while i can accept HopDevil winning (it's a nice beer, both in style and overall) it's silly for it to pound a solid beer this way. must be the cool name, which seems to go a long, long ways among newer, hipper micro drinkers, and is such a theme with IPAs and beers for people who think themselves cool and sophisticated merely for being "Hopheads". (don't get me wrong: i LOVE hops: i'm a HUGE fan of, e.g., Magnolia's Proving Ground Pale. but i generally laugh when people on pubcrawler prattle on about disliking great stouts and porters b/c "I'm a HopHead...") anyway, back from that tangent: HopDevil has a cool name, but arguably a much less competitive market to compete in (no offense, PA, but the Keystone (ouch!) State is not quite california, the land that basically invented hoppy ales).

Goose Island Honker's Ale 51%
Full Sail Amber 49%
at first it seems a somewhat strange pairing: GI describes Honker's as an APA with a "spicy hop aroma with a rich malt middle"; IMO, however, it's a decent, but unexceptional PA with limited hop aroma: flagship beer or not, it's a weak offering from the otherwise very solid brewery. then again, FS Amber, which FS describes as an "American style amber ale" (what other kind is there?) is also pretty boring, even in a boring class. i guess as long as i'm thinking/typing out loud, i really don't care here: both are pretty boring offerings, from brewers (especially Goose Island) who do much better beers.

there's my $0.08 ... good thing it's only a game. it is, right? right? i guess i better relax and have a homebrew...

-dan

[tavernjef]

Welcome 'warmstorage', way to jump in.

As I said earlier, its been all upsets in my book.

That Lagunitas/ Victory Hop Devil should have been closer. I love them both and made that vote a hard one, as are many unless you favor local no matter what. which seems to the case with some. It came down to what the voting procedure explained "Which beer would you rather drink", if side by side in a store I reach for Victory cuz thats what I'd rather drink. I'm not a Hop head or whatever, I like just about everything and anything good, no watered down taste, no bittery beers unless they're intended ie England style. Smooth, warm, complex, bright, what have you. If it raises my eyebrows and makes me take another sip and go "Wow, that's some good shit." Well nuff said.
Drink on:)

[fishingthor]

Hats off to Great Lakes Brewing, fantastic beers all around. I do have to say the Summit Great Northern Porter is still my favorite porter around. Complaining about its light body would be acceptable had they been trying to make a more "stout" porter. The light bodied porter I think is truer to style. A perfect session beer for the colder months, or warmer months, or just anytime.:D

[warmstorage]

with all due respect to fishingthor,

i respect and understand having a favorite beer, and a preferred style of brewing. it goes directly to the "what beer would you prefer to drink" question, and it's a totally reasonable response. one question, though, is this: a justification for a light bodied porter, or any light bodied beer (read: all Summit beers), as a winter session beer, is strange to me. isn't winter the time when beers should get more robust, deeper, thicker, chewier, etc? and aren't most good (even great) porters about providing a slightly thicker, more satisfying quaff? i'm not demanding an imperial stout, or even a dry, export-style stout when i order or buy a porter: i would go to the appropriate category for those.

what i'm looking for are tasting notes which include words like: "Compare the sweetness, the chocolate notes (in the aroma, the palate?), the body, if you find a beer roasty, coffee-like, even burnt. "
( see: http://www.realbeer.com/library/beerbreak/archives/beerbreak20010125.php , Beer Break Vol. 1, No. 21: "Let's try some porters")

and sure, if we have a style called "light bodied porter" or "thin bodied porter", then Summit could possibly compete. it's worth noting that GABF has two style categories for porter: 'brown porter' and 'robust porter'. (granted, GABF categories could be argued about, and regularly are, but realbeer.com tends to agree with these characterizations for American porters, see above link...) the 2002 GABF winners of the 'brown porter' category were:

Category: 49 Brown Porter - 33 Entries
Gold : Sweetwater Exodus Porter, Sweetwater Brewing Co. (GA)
Silver : Pioneer Porter, Fredericksburg Brewing Co. (TX)
Bronze : Black Butte Porter, Deschutes Brewery (OR)

and the robust porter category, you ask?

Category: 48 Robust Porter - 51 Entries
Gold : Edmund Fitzgerald Porter, Great Lakes Brewing Company (OH)
Silver : Cutthroat Porter, Odell Brewing (CO)
Bronze : Pig Iron Porter, Iron Hill Brewery & Restaurant (PA)

hmmmmm...

realistically, Summit GNP as brewed and distributed is more like an American brown Ale, e.g., Pete's Wicked, than a porter. not a bad beer, just not, in my opinion, a better beer than Fitz.

now, that said, as realbeer.com and Michael Jackson himself note:

"The history of porter is long and interesting. Jackson writes: '... no style of beer is so shadowy and elusive.'"
(same source as link above)

so, while i agree it's a category which can be debated, and argued, and varying conclusions reached by reasonable people, it's also a style which generally implies dark, chocolate, roast, coffee, burnt, etc... all things which Summit GNP doesn't exemplify...

respectfully,
dan

[fishingthor]

I understand your point. Fitz is a fantastic beer, well deserving the gold medal. Each person has individual taste preferences. I luckily live in a market where Summit reigns supreme, Minneapolis, Minn. The beers may run on the "thin" side, but are quality products nonetheless. If you ever are in St. Paul, stop into the brewery, it is a great tour. You'll also have a chance to look at the gold medal they won at the GABF in 1987 for the porter.

[davesarman]

I quote from the Beer Judge Certification Program Guide to Beer Styles (this is what sanctioned judges use to judge home brew contests):

Style 15a. Robust Porter
Flavor: Malt flavor usually features coffee-lie or chocolate-like roasty dryness. Overall flavor may finish from medium sweet to dry, depending on grist composition, hop bittering level, and attenuation. May have a sharp character from dark roasted grains. Hop flavor varies widely. Diacetyl moderate to none.
Mouthfeel: Medium to medium-full bodied. Low to moderate carbonation.
Overall: A substantial dark ale with complex roasty malt, hop and fermentation characteristics.
Comments: Although rather variable in style, it may be distinguished from closely related Stout as lacking Stouts roasted barley character.

Style 15b. Brown Porter
Flavor: Malt flavor will include mild to moderate roastiness. Hop flavor low to none. Hop bittering will vary the balance from slightly malty to slightly bitter. Diacetyl, and sourness or sharpness from dark grains should be low to none.
Mouthfeel: Medium to medium-light bodied. Low to moderate carbonation.
Overall: A fairly substantial dark ale with some roasty characteristics.
Comments: Softer flavors, lower gravity and less alcohol than robust porter.


In addition, from All About Beer Magazine's May 2003 issue (I just got in the mail yesterday), the Beverage Tasting Institute panel (who includes Michael Jackson among other beer luminaries) had only one broad category for Porter and scored Edmund Fitzgerald a 92 and Summit a 90, which in my opinion are two very good scores.

Just thought those that are slamming Summit's porter should know the differences porters can have and still be very good beers. I've had both and love both, although they are in two subcategories of the same style. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. I happen to like Summit's beers. I also happen to like many others as well, including Great Lakes. I hope this was informative.