I have something that's been bugging me for a while. If you look at the Beer Advocate and Rate Beer sites for their top rated beers, it seems like at least 3/4 of them are extreme beers, i.e. Imperial Russian Stouts or Over-the-top hoppy double IPAs. People wait for hours and make plans for months to get to a single day release party for Dark Lord. Why?

To go along with the other threads, if you see a new brewer available in MO, do you automatically gravitate to the biggest, most extreme beer they make?

Are these really the best beers in the world or are they just so far from yellow and fizzy that we put them in high ranking?

I think its because a majority of them are small batches and limited release. As someone here once said "if its not available (or limited) it makes me want it even more".

I think this is the idea with a majority of the beers on BA and RB. Westy 12 is a good example, all in all a good beer but its popularity is primarily due to the "rarity" of it. The only way to get the beer is to go to the Abby and buy it yourself, that or pay the one company to ship it to you, or trade for it on BA with those that have "connections".

This is the crux of it for me. Lots of folks, and Americans in particular tend to be obsessed with what is "the best." It can be fun to talk about, though I prefer to frame the discussions in terms of one's particular favorites, rather than tag it with the unprovable label of "best", but it's a pretty empty intellectual exercise.

To think that there is some universal taste is hopeless over-simplification. To think that any one person's nose and palate are somehow consistent and not subject to variation each and every day, if not each and every moment, is gross self-deception. To think that the provenance of a beer plucked off a shelf is a representative sample without knowing how and when it was shipped, what temperatures it has been subjected to, and how much light exposure it has had is a fundamentally flawed assumption. Tasting and reviewing beers (or wines or whiskies) absent a host of checks the vast majority (all?) of us don't employ, and absent information we almost always don't possess, is not an act of precision.

I think there is a skew towards big beers at the top of the ratings for several reasons, none of which is anything other than indicative of the problems noted above. First, they tend to have very obvious flavors. It's hard to miss the malt load of a RIS, or the hops of a DIPA. This is particularly skewing for folks who are somewhat new to beers. These beers can undoubtedly be impressive in their scale, and mistaking "impressive" for "quality" is a common theme.

Second, many of them are difficult to come by, and people do not want to have wasted time, effort and expense on something that doesn't live up to expectations. I've seen this a lot at wine tastings too where rare bottles that are ragged on when tasted blind for various faults suddenly do a Lazarus once the bags are removed and the identity of the precious nectar revealed.

Third, these "top-ranked" beers are discussed to death, so people have a very good idea of what to expect before they ever pop the cap or remove the cork. The power of suggestion is a very formidable opponent. Try throwing out a completely ridiculous aroma or flavor at a tasting, and I can almost guarantee someone will say "I get that too!"

Fourth, is the need that lots of people have to be an "expert." It would take anyone about 5 minutes in the BA or RB fora to realize the rampancy of this in the beer world. There is a real risk to one's "expert" status to post something significantly out of the norm. It's much safer to simply taste the "great" beers and have the same or similar scores and reviews as the rest of the "experts."

Tastes and aromas, and any person's interpretations of them are ethereal, fleeting things. In a perfect world (ha!) we'd appreciate them for what they are, derive pleasure from them, and maybe even from the memory of them and move on. Our world is far from perfect, and the human instincts to grade, classify, dissect and rank are strong.

I used to get upset about this stuff (and I recognize some judgmental language remains in the post, despite attempts to clean it up), but it's just fun. Those websites set their rules and you can either play or not. I don't review beers much any more, unless it's something local that I think could benefit from having some reviews.

I love beer. I can make up my own mind what I like or don't, and I drink what I like and don't drink what I don't like, regardless of its reputation, score or ranking. But, I don't begrudge others their fun, I just choose to sit this one out at this point.

This video pretty much sums up my current ethos on beer: http://revver.com/video/330155/beer-beer-beer/ (safe for work) If you like the tune, there are a couple of remixes out there that are pretty funny too. Shoot me a PM and I can send a link.

Cheers,

Dave

That reminds me. How do I get Super Beer Nerd under my name in the postings?

Ask that question in every thread currently on the board and you should get there. I expect it's post-count-related. Folks with more than 40 seem to have it. There isn't anyone with more than 30, but less than 40 right now, so I don't know where it kicks in.

Cheers,

Dave

That's an excellent post Dave, I've always said that I've found the top ten on BA and RB a bit suspect mostly due to group think.

and the rankings are as follows, Brad:

10 Posts - Beer Nerd
30 Posts - Super Beer Nerd
100 Posts - Ultra Beer Nerd

I think beer ratings should be arranged by style. How do you say an Imperial Stout is better than an IPA or Tripel..... They need to be rated separately in their own style. Ratings based on if it is a well made beer in its style or type.

I agree with the power of suggestion. I have experienced it more in wine drinkers. We have tasting groups that do blind tastings, people will taste the wine and not like the wine at all, when it gets unveilled and they find out that it something that scored 98 points from The Wine Advocate, all of the sudden you hear--- it is getting better in the glass, it just needed time to open up. It now is a great wine that just needs time.

Paul

Like others have said, it's many things. The price, the rarity, the % ABV, taste intensity, etc.

Many of my favorite beers are sessionable brews, but you never forget the ones that sock you in the mouth and you like it or romance you like a $5000 sex monkey.

The best beers are the ones I like. I really could care less what someone else's opinion is of a beer. I'll certainly try a beer on a recommendation, but I can't promise I'll like it as much as you did. You can't convince me something tastes good if I don't like the way it tastes.

I like different beers at different times. After a softball game, I'd prefer a Budweiser over an IPA.

ive noticed this too although you can browse for the best per category and they make sense in a way. i agree with i think the best are the ones i like the most.

This started long before extreme beers were around. It's one of the reasons I stopped judging and entering homebrew competitions. The stronger beers in a category regularly beat out lower gravity beers.

I remember one year I remember reading the results from the AHA Homebrew Competition. The judges were commenting on the winner in the Scottish Ale category. The beer was entered as a Scottish Heavy (1.035 -1.040 OG) and the comment was "this is really malty for a 1.040 beer." Turns out the beer was actually something like 1.056. No wonder it was malty!