I must note that this information came (almost) straight out of the latest draft version of the “2008 Australian Amateur Brewing Championship Style Guidelines“. So a big thanks to the folks at the AABC and the contributors that helped to put these guidelines together. I say “almost” above because I did make one edit that I felt needed, which I will denote below with italics.

One of the main distinctions of Australian beers in general is the use of unique Australian hops and yeast strains. So, if you’re making any of the below, make sure you get the appropriate hops and yeast.

Note that the descriptions below are in flux, and the AABC will be revising these later this year. More Specifically, Australian Pale will probably have a big revision, the Dark Ale will probably be merged with Mild Ale and the Wheat ale will move into Kristallweizen. If and when these things occur, I’ll edit this post to reflect any changes made.

Next time, I’ll be continuing with Australia - posting about a few Australian Lagers: Australian Lager, Australian Bitter, and Premium Australian Lager.

Appearance: Gold to deep amber. Traditionally cloudy from chill haze and/or suspended yeast, but not dark and murky. Moderately high to high carbonation. Head retention reasonable to very good.

Aroma: Medium to high fruitiness from high primary fermentation temperature, supported by a light malt aroma. Hop aroma low to none. Distinctive fruity ester profile - especially pear. No diacetyl. No DMS.

Flavour: Initial light, sweet, or bready malt flavour. Caramel malt flavours absent. Medium to high fruitiness. Even malt/hop balance in flavour. A mild but distinctive peppery, herbaceous flavour from Pride of Ringwood hops is desirable. (English or German hop character acceptable for historical versions). Medium to high bitterness, which should never be crude or harsh. Dry finish from high attenuation and sulphate water. Bitterness may linger, but should not completely overpower the malt flavour. The best examples will display a long dry finish with a balanced aftertaste. No diacetyl.

Mouthfeel: Light to medium body from high attenuation. Suspended yeast and/or protein may give an impression of substance, but heaviness of body or syrupiness from residual dextrins should be penalized.

Overall Impression: Similarities to British IPA, but more even malt/hop balance from absence of late or dry hopping. Always a fruity, full flavoured session beer, with a dry finish well suited to a hot climate, but open to some interpretation by brewers: historical versions may give an impression of wholesome sustenance - modern versions may be of a lighter, more refreshing nature.

Comments: An early Australian style which has evolved very little, but stood the test of time owing to its uniqueness and depth of character. The cloudy appearance, light bready flavour of Australian malt, distinctive yeast signature, and peppery character of Australian Pride of Ringwood hops, combine to produce a unique pale ale of substantial flavour and character. Bland examples, particularly those lacking fruitiness, should be penalized.

History: Brewed in Australia from the early 1800’s by British immigrants to the new colony, as an alternative to the expensive imported Burton pale ale of the day (eg. Bass). Distinctive in its use of local ingredients and water, and high temperature yeast strains, which generate a unique ester profile. In the hotter climate, these high attenuating, low flocculating strains may have evolved from powdery Burton yeasts through top-cropping over time. The style itself is not well documented, but fortunately an original example has survived in the form of Coopers Sparkling Ale. Founded in 1862 in Adelaide S.A., the family owned and operated Coopers Brewery is Australia’s only surviving independent brewery from colonial times. Coopers have steadfastly resisted the trend to lager brewing – their distinctive ale yeast strain has been in continuous use for almost a century. As recently as the 1980’s Coopers ales were still brewed in open fermenters of native jarrah wood, and matured in oak casks prior to bottling. Something of a misnomer, Coopers Sparkling Ale is traditionally cloudy. A lighter version, brewed since the late 1800’s, was re-released in 1988 as Coopers Original Pale Ale. Both are unfiltered, non-pasteurized, and bottle conditioned using the same yeast as in the primary fermentation.

Ingredients: Lightly kilned Australian 2-row malt, eg. Schooner, infusion mashed. Judicious use of crystal malt may add some colour. No adjuncts, cane sugar for bottle priming only. Originally a proportion of cane sugar was used to dilute excessive protein levels of early colonial malt. Early versions used English, German or locally grown hops - nowadays Pride of Ringwood, bred in Australia from English Pride of Kent in 1965, is used exclusively in Coopers beers. Coopers yeast, readily cultured from the bottle sediment. (Whitelabs WLP009 Australian Ale Yeast may be similar). Moderately carbonate water, high in sulphate. Note: Carbonate (alkaline) water may impair clarity, but excess levels can lead to astringency, or inappropriate coarseness in flavour and/or harsh bitterness in aftertaste.

Vital Statistics:
OG: 1040-1060
FG: 1006-1012
IBU: 30-45
ABV:4.2-6.2%

Commercial Examples: Coopers Sparkling Ale (5.8% ABV), Coopers Original Pale Ale (4.5% ABV)

Appearance: Mid-brown to dark brown, sometimes almost black and opaque. Low to medium carbonation. Excessive carbonation or flatness should be penalized.

Aroma: Mild malt aroma, with low to moderate fruitiness and toasty or light roasty notes. No to low hop aroma, caramel or diacetyl. Any yeasty notes or phenolics should be penalized, as should any excessive fruitiness or sweet caramel characters. Slight chocolate is acceptable. Clean aroma is essential.

Flavour: Mild maltiness with no hop flavour or diacety. Low to moderate fruitiness, light roastiness can be evident. Dry maltiness on the finish. Clean and quaffable. Low to medium carbonation. Any phenolics, diacetyl, yeasty flavours, astringency, harshness, or noticeable sweetness or alcohol, should be penalized.

Mouthfeel: Light to medium body.  Low to medium carbonation.

Overall Impression: A dry, mildly flavoured session beer. Malt evident but evenly balanced by hop bitterness.

Ingredients: Pale and chocolate malt, clean bittering hop such as Pride of Ringwood.

Vital Statistics:
OG: 1040-1050
FG: 1010-1016
IBU: 15-25
ABV:4.5-5.3%

Commercial Examples: Toohey’s Old Ale

Appearance: Pale straw to light gold. Excellent clarity. Large creamy head with excellent head retention. Generally very pale. High carbonation and protein content contribute to a thick creamy head.

Aroma: Wheat malt aroma complemented by hints of clove, vanilla and banana. Little or no hop aroma. Wheat malt aroma should dominate with underlying spicy clove-like phenols and fruity (banana) esters complementing. Hop aroma, if present, should be subtle.

Flavour: Mild, slightly sweet beer with low hop bitterness and little to no hop flavour. Wheat malt flavours should dominate providing a slightly sweet finish to the beer. Hop bitterness should be low and hop flavour low to undistinguishable. Only noble hops should be present.

Mouthfeel: Light.

Overall Impression: A mildly flavoured, malt dominated, session beer with excellent head retention.

Vital Statistics:
OG: 1040-1050
FG: 1006-1010
IBU: 10-15
ABV: 4.2-5.1%

Commercial Examples: Redback.

Other Missing Styles to Be Covered Soon:
Kellerbier, Gose, Wiess, Honey Beers (not Braggots), Classic American Cream Ale, Czech Dark Lager, English Pale Mild, Scottish 90/-, American Stock Ale, English Strong Ale, Non-alcoholic “Beer”, Malt Liquor, Imperial/Double Red Ale, Imperial/Double Brown Ale, Imperial Lager, Imperial Pilsner, Imperial Porter, Rye IPA, Dark American Wheat/Rye.

The SF Chronicle article notes that there are other businesses doing this in Santa Cruz, Boston, and Washington D.C.

If you’re a entrepreneurial gardener, perhaps your city is ripe for this type of business too. Or if you’re a potential customer, look out for one in your area…

For the week of 19 May 2008…
Belgium: $8.84
France: $8.48
Germany: $8.75
Italy: $8.65
Netherlands: $9.54
UK: $8.31
USA: $4.02
Source: US Department of Energy

And we’re complaining about that measly $4.02 per gallon. Just be glad you aren’t making that 64 mile commute to work in the Netherlands!

Recently, many politicians, Democrats in particular, have been promoting ways of trying to lower the gas prices.  At the same time they’re the ones wanting big increases in fuel efficiency for cars (which would be great) and promoting alternative fuels.

The thing is, high gas prices are just what’s needed to push the market in that direction.  Trying to lower gas prices by using temporary tax cuts, etc, is just hindering their long term goal of getting more efficient cars on the road and increasing mass transit ridership.  What are they thinking?

Just Buffooneristic “food for thought”.

I wanted to do something new with the salmon, yet something Californian.  So I grabbed my 3 books on Californian Cuisine and found a recipe for Kale-Wrapped Wild Salmon, with red bell pepper, almond and garlic sauce.  It’s a recipe from San Francisco restaurant Jack Falstaff that has been printed in the book Savoring San Francisco, recipes from the city’s neighborhood restaurants.

I didn’t have any kale, but I had collard greens.  Close enough.  The recipe calls for blanching the greens in water and wrapping them around salmon fillets that have been coated with salt pepper and oive oil.  The fish is baked and a sauce is prepared from red bell peppers, sliced almonds, garlic, olive oil, sherry vinegar and paprika.  The sauce itself is just fantastic.

To round out the meal, I made some Basmati rice to which I added a few dashes of Chiang Mai, a Thai Red Curry powder consisting of red chili powder, garlic, galangal root, lemon grass and coriander.  To save water, and add a hint of flavor and color, I cooked the rice in some of the left over water used to blanch the collard greens.  I then steamed some zucchini on top of the cooking rice.  Almost a one pot meal!

So, pictured here is my prepared dish.  It took about an hour to put it all together.  Not bad for a week-night meal, if I do say so myself.

I don’t want to print the recipe here, as I don’t want to violate any copyrights.  So I encourage you to buy the cookbook.  I bought Savoring San Francisco several months ago and have made 4 or 5 dishes from it already. So far, every one has been fantistic, especially tonight’s Salmon and the Roasted Pork Tenderloin with Figs and Marsala.  The book has a good variety of recipes from many restaurants covering just about every cuisine of the world, but all done in a very Californian/San Franciscan style.

Just the sound of that piqued my curiosity, but not necessarily in a positive way.  For starters, the “beer in the can” part brought about visions of bad tasting, cheap American mega-brew.  And well, if you watch the video (or take a look at the screen shot below), you’ll see that it doesn’t disappoint.  But the second thing that got me wondering was the mention of the can.  You can make all sorts of brines, gravies, sauces, and what have you, with the actual beer, but why mention the can?  Well, I was in for a big treat!

The video starts with the chef’s co-host reading aloud a letter that a viewer had sent in — something to the effect of: “My son is a truck driver and can’t have any alcohol in his system if he gets pulled over.  Can I make ‘Beer Can Chicken’ with a can of soda instead?”  Ummm…  Alcohol has a boiling point that’s even lower that that of water’s.  Hint:  there won’t be any alcohol in your chicken!  However, the host passes over this most obvious of responses, and simply answers the question…

Yes, we are assured, you can make beer can chicken with a can of soda.  Mmmm, soda can chicken.  And you can even do it with Lemonade, she adds.  (That comes in a can?)  Her cinematically naive co-host then ever so purposely chimes in with the question, “What about the wine and cheese folks?”  ….”There’s no wine in this one”, she replies.   No kidding?

Then, shortly after, the chef picks up a can of beer and announces that you can’t use a full can or it’ll boil over.  (I wasn’t let down, she was using a can of Budweiser!)  So, she proceeds to pour some out into a glass for her co-host, takes a sip out of the can herself and with a split-second look of forced ecstasy exclaims, “Mmmm, that’s good”, and conveniently sets the beer can down with the Bud label in perfect alignment with the camera.  Now that’s product placement!

The climax of all this culinary buffoonery is when the chef and co-host are outdoors, and after prepping the BBQ, walk over to the table showcasing the chicken and the beer.  The chef grabs the chicken, and prepares to lower it, end first, onto the beer can — and I don’t think it would be completely out of line to say she was preparing to “molest the chicken”. At this point, her co-host boyishly exclaims, “I’ve been waiting for this part.  This is the fun part of this recipe.”  And then, as if he hadn’t made himself clear, the host asks, “Are you excited?”.  ”Yes I am”, he replies.

As the chicken comes to rest on top of the can (depicted in all it’s glory in the accompanying screenshot), a proud host exclaims, “Voila”, to which the co-host replies, “That was easy!”   And he was expecting?

Cooking just doesn’t get any better than this…

Watch the video for yourself

(I just love a post that covers Food, Beer and Buffoonery!)

Several of the scientists interviewed for the film are saying they were duped into the interview’s under very false pretenses given to them by the film’s producers and then, of course, their comments were used completely out of context.

From Wikipedia: The film “contends that [the theory of evolution] contributed to the Nazi Holocaust, communism, atheism and Planned Parenthood.”  Say what?!?!  They also seem to claim that there is basically a world-wide conspiracy of scientists out to silence people who espouse Intelligent Design.  Well, I can tell you there’s not conspiracy, scientists are usually pretty frank about ripping apart a very bad theory, Intelligent Design included.  This is all absolutely ridiculous, and I hope that everyone can see the absurdity of these claims.  Especially in the case of the Holocaust. To say that a biological theory formed to explain mechanisms seen in the natural world somehow led to the killing of thousands of people in the Holocaust is not just untrue, its disgusting — which actually means Ben Stein has gone beyond buffoonery, because there’s nothing amusing about such claims.

So for some further reading, I’ve gathered up some good links:

• Richard Dawkins’ response to a letter sent by a recent viewer of the film
• Expelled Exposed Website
• Expelled Exposed: part 1 - including “How Ben Stein duped Michael Shermer into interviewing for the film”
• Expelled Exposed: part 2
• Sexpelled: No Intercourse Allowed (spoof)

Well, that should be enough to get people thinking critically about the absurdities portrayed in the film.

I’ll use this opportunity to plug a three recent books that Ben Stein and crew should read — and soon (though I’d recommend these to everyone!):

• Don’t Believe Everything You Think: The 6 Basic Mistakes We Make in Thinking by Thomas E. Kida
• Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts by Carol Tavris & Elliot Aronson
• Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters by Donald R. Prothero

If that weren’t enough, the band Killers were duped into licensing their song to the film’s producers.  How?  The producer’s asked them if they could use a certain song in a documentary about academic freedom.  Period.  The producers were purposely being vague in order to fool the band and record company into giving them permission to use the song.  It seems the band is not too happy about this and have posted about it on their forum.

More info on these two topics can be found on this repost of a Wall Street Journal article.  Don’t miss the two updates below the article.  They are the most telling…

Additionally they are being sued for directly copying a Harvard University/XVIVO produced animation “Inner Life of the Cell”.  They claim they they hired an independent video artist to create their film and any similarity is due to the animations depicting the same process.  However, it seems the animations not only depict the same process, but it is noted by David Bolinsky, the medical illustrator chiefly responsible for the original Harvard produced animation that, “it is astonishing that among well over a dozen functional kinesins from which an animator might choose, we both chose the same configuration of kinesin, pulling the same protein-studded vesicle, on the same microtubule” and “Can YOU believe we coincidentally picked the same camera angles and left in the same specific structures in the background, positioned with the same composition?”  Not to mention the Expelled animation is accompanied by the same music.   And they didn’t copy the Harvard video?  Right.

The lies, deceptions and copyright infringements perpetrated by the producers of this film speaks quite clearly about their ethics and true intentions.  Their tactics even make Michael Moore look like an amatuer. Even Unintelligent Design promoter William Dembsky has admitted that the film’s producers, “made sure to budget for lawsuits” and that they have retained “one of the best intellectual property attorneys in the business.”  Yeah, they obviously knew what they were doing - and what they were getting themselves into.  But to them, its all publicity!

My list is by no means exhaustive, but just a few of the beers, that to me, are the most obvious of the missing styles in the BJCP style guide.  Since there are still, quite a few of these missing beer styles in my list, I’ll break my post up into several installments, each covering a few of the “missing” styles.

Some of these styles even get brief mentions in the BJCP Style Guide as part of another similar or contrasting style.  Others are mentioned in BJCP Style Category 23A which is purposely labeled a “catch-all” category of beers that don’t have their own category.

The following style guides won’t be thorough style descriptions since, being relatively obscure styles of beer, data on these is hard to come by.  However, in the desire to make these (and futures posts) as complete as possible, I’ll update these posts indefinitely as I’m able to collect more information.

In trying to keep a theme here, I will start with the missing German beer stlyes, and Part 1 will focus specifically on two of the missing German beer styles: Sticke Alt, and Münster Alt.

Aroma: Malty, fresh, flowery.  Big noble hop aroma.

Appearance: Deep gold to dark-copper in color. Pours with a long lasting white head.

Flavor: Big malt and hops.

Mouthfeel: Malty yet crisp.

Overall Impression: Well balanced, with a light hoppy nose, middle maltiness and a dry finish.

Comments: A darker, stronger and hoppier version of the Düsseldorf Alt.  “Sticke” is sometimes said  to mean secret in the local dialect, though Uerige states that the term comes from “stickum”, the local dialect term for “whispering”, based on the story that that when tasting the strong beer, the customers would whisper to each other that the brewmaster must have been a little too generous when weighing out the ingredients. These beers are made seasonally to surprise the customers.  They are often brewed just once or twice a year and within a few days of tapping the kegs are gone. Sticke Alts are often dry-hopped in the conditioning tank for four to six weeks. Another name for these specialty Alt beers is “latzenbier” which means “slab beer”. Uerige also brews a Doppelsticke at 8.5% that is soley exported to the United States.

Ingredients: Two-row Pilsner malt, Munich malt, Caramel Malt and Black Malt.  Spalt hops are preferred in Düsseldorf, but Hallertauer Mittelfrüh, Mt. Hood and Perle can also be used for bittering and flavor hops, while Tettnanger will work as an aroma hop.

Vital Statistics:
OG:  1.053 - 1.066
IBUs:  35 - 60
FG: 1.010 - 1.014
SRM: 15 - 25
ABV: 5.2 - 6.5

Commercial Examples: Uerige sticke, Schumacher latzenbier, Schlüssel stike, Füchschen Weihnachtsbier

Real Stats
Füchschen Weihnachtsbier:  ABV: 5.2%
Uerige sticke: ABV: 6.5%
Schumacher latzenbier: ABV: 5.5%
Schlüssel stike: ABV: 6%

Aroma: Pilsner malt, slightly sour, with a delicate noble hop nose.

Appearance: Pale, golden color.

Flavor: Excellent, herbaceous aroma, slightly sweet with a hint of sourness, delicate fruit-acid palate, and long dry finish.

Mouthfeel: Medium-light to medium body. Moderate to moderately high carbonation. Smooth mouthfeel.

Overall Impression: ?

Comments: A regional Altbier that is brewerd in and around Münster, which is about 80 miles (128km) northwest of Düsseldorf.  Münster alt is typically lower in gravity and alcohol, slightly sour, and lighter in color than other Alts.

Ingredients: Pilsener malt, light caramel malts, can include Munich or Vienna malts, can contain a significant portion of wheat.

Vital Statistics:
OG: 1.044 -1.050
IBUs: 30 -45
FG: ?
SRM: 7 - 10
ABV: 4.3 - 5.1

Commercial Examples: Pinkus Organic Münster Alt

Other Missing Styles to Be Covered Soon:
Kellerbier, Gose, Wiess, Honey Beers (not Braggots), Classic American Cream Ale, Czech Dark Lager, English Pale Mild, Scottish 90/-, American Stock Ale, English Strong Ale, Non-alcoholic “Beer”, Malt Liquor, Australian Sparkling Ale, Imperial/Double Red Ale, Imperial/Double Brown Ale, Imperial Lager, Imperial Pilsner, Imperial Porter, Rye IPA, Dark American Wheat/Rye.

Today we picked up our first batch of veggies (we also opted to get weekly flowers too, for a few extra dollars. Why not?). In the bag we brought home were bundles of Erbette Chard, Spigariello Greens, Chantenay Carrots, Agretti, French Breakfast Radishes, Fennel, a few Leeks and some Sweet Dumpling Squash. All organically grown at a nearby farm. There’s just something nice about knowing where your food comes from — and supporting the “little guys”.

The batch of vegetables came with a few recipes than can be made with this week’s selection. The roasted fennel recipe sounds good. You just slice the fennel bulbs lengthwise, toss with olive oil, salt and pepper and bake at 425°F for 25-30 minutes. Though, I think I’ll spice this up a bit, tossing with some crushed garlic and parsley as well. Wondering what I could do with the fennel leaves, I consulted an Italian cookbook I have and found a recipe for a fennel cream sauce. Cook up some pasta and we’ll be set. Although I’d like to round out that meal by maybe roasting some carrots with the fennel bulbs.

Another item is the box was Spigarielo, also known as “leaf broccoli”. I think I’ve only had this once or twice, but it does have that broccoli flavor, so I’m thinking maybe a Thai Red Curry might make good use of this.

Getting a new bunch of “surprise” vegetables and fruits in each week should be an excellent challenge. I’m always trying out new recipes, but I always start with the recipe first and only then look for the food I need. Now I’m getting the food first… Which perhaps, is how it should be. Everything I’ll be making is fresh, local, and in season. And I’ll be getting some new and exotic vegetables, creating a culinary challenge. I can’t complain.

There are similar CSA programs all over the United States, and elsewhere. The USDA has a few links to help you find a CSA program in your area. But I imagine a quick internet search of “CSA ‘Your City Name’” would come up with some options as well. And if you need additional convincing in order to give your local CSA a try, Two Small Farms has posted a list of 10 reasons to buy local food.

The start of our Community Supported Agriculture pickups is quite fitting, as I am (coincidentally) currently reading a book that’s all about where your food comes from, Michael Pollan’s “The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals”. It’s quite a good book, so I highly recommend it!

Take the current top story on CNN’s RSS feed, “Poll: Three-quarters think U.S. in recession“. They needed to take a poll on that? Of course the people think that! CNN and other media outlets have been TELLING THEM that for several months now. And now, as soon as the population knows that 75% of us think we’re in a recession, CNN can take a poll again next week and they’ll probably find that 85% now think so.

Interestingly, another recent poll of “101 senior decision makers at U.S. companies with at least $500 million in annual revenues” by the Boston Polling Group found that only 37.6% think we are currently in a recession. Now, what do they know that the general population doesn’t? There’s an obvious discontinuity here. Ok, sure, another 15.8% of those executives that don’t think we’re in a recession now, do think we’ll be in one soon. But that’s still less than the nearly 75% that CNN found in the general population. And besides some of those execs are also certainly influenced by the inundation of grim doomsday recession news spewing out of every media outlet in the US and beyond on a daily basis.

At least a portion of all this recession stuff has got to be a vicious self-fulfilling cycle, predominantly perpetuated by the mass media. Tell them they’re “in a recession” enough, and they’ll act like it. The media tells us of this gloom and doom so often, that even the people who haven’t “felt” a recession personally start acting like their in one anyway. They worry about their savings more, their future. They limit spending. Less spending hurts retailers bottom lines, they report reduced sales, the media eats this up and reports on even further economics woes, creating even further paranoia in the unfortunately all too gullible public.

The media tends to do this for more than just recessions and slow downs. For many people, mass media helps to create reality. Several theories on this exist and while there’s some debate as to what extent it affects people’s reality, there is little debate about whether the media has influence at all. Skeptic.com posted a really good article recently on how broadcast journalism is flawed. It touches on the media/reality topic quite nicely. Here’s just one cited example on how the media affects our reality. Think of the prevalence of reporting on child abduction and molestation cases:

“According to the U.S. Department of Justice, in a given year there are about 88,000 documented cases of sexual abuse among juveniles. In the roughly 17,500 cases involving children between ages 6 and 11, strangers are the perpetrators just 5 percent of the time — and just 3 percent of the time when the victim is under age 6. (Further, more than a third of such molesters are themselves juveniles, who may not be true “predators” so much as confused or unruly teens.)

[...] if your child is not molested in your own home — by you, your significant other, or someone else you invited in — chances are your child will never be molested anywhere. Media coverage has precisely inverted both the reality and the risk of child sexual assault. Along the way, it has also inverted the gender of the most tragic victims: Despite the unending parade of young female faces on TV, boys are more likely than girls to be killed in the course of such abuse.”

Here we see a perfect example of media distorting and thus creating reality. It makes a good sensational story, kinda like economic woes — let’s go to press! Reminds me of the “Satanic Panic” of the 1980s when the media (and a huge number of evangelical Christians) reported a flurry of ritualistic Satanic crimes, that included child molestation (of course!), which when investigated, turned out to be a non-issue, probably started by a hoax, and was perpetuated by bad investigation and interviewing techniques, and of course, “the media”.

Admittedly, the cases above didn’t start a wave of copycat molestations or satanic abuse, but they did change peoples behaviors — creating multitudes of overly protective parents that are spending way too much time worrying about the wrong things (or in the case of the satanic ritual abuse cases - completely ridiculous things).

So, while there certainly is some current economic slowdown (in large part due to the bomb dropping in the housing market) one does have to wonder — “Is it really this bad?” Probably not. And it will probably get as bad as it does simply because the media is blowing it completely out of proportion — or rather, creating a reality that is worse than reality.

“In some senses, it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy, [...] The idea that consumer confidence can crash the market or boost it tells you that it’s not always about reality.”

And also in this quote:

“I think what is at issue here is: Are people responding to real things, or are they just responding to fear?” said N.C. State University economist Michael Walden. “I’m not sure you can separate the two.”

So….. I’ve taken up the effort to update the XML version of the guidelines for the 2008 version. It’s a whole lot of copying and pasting. I’m on category 7 now. I do a little bit each evening. I figure it’ll take a month or so. Seems like a lot? Just take a look at how extensive the 2008 BJCP guidelines are. You’ve got 23 categories, each category divided into 1 to (around) 6 styles of beer (or mead, etc). In pdf format, it’s 51 pages.

So, while I’m at it, I figured, well, I’m reading all these style guidelines, perhaps I should taste the beers too. I don’t plan to taste the beers in sync with my editing of the XML. I think that would be a tad on the dangerous side. It’ll take quite some time, but in the end, I’m sure I’ll be ready to take the BJCP exam!

My good friend Dean, and fellow BrewSession author has taken the exam and is a certified beer judge. So, I guess I’m playing catch-up!

Tonight I decided to go out an get the first beers, representing the first two styles in the BJCP guidelines. Here’s where problem #1 arises. The first two styles in the guidelines are: “Lite American Lager” and “Standard American Lager”. Probably my least favorite of all beer styles! But you gotta do what you gotta do (even if it means typing out phrases in terrible grammar).

So, take a look at my fridge in the above photograph. Now THAT is a scene that you will never EVER see again. I promise.

To represent the Lite American Lagers I purchased Amstel Light (yeah, it’s made in Holland, but it’s “style” is in this category), Miller Lite, and Bud Lite. Tonight I split a Miller Lite and Amstel Lite with my wife. She hated them. In fact, I was given a lecture for actually wasting money on such awful beer. Depending on your outlook, this sort of lecture from a wife can be a really bad thing, or a really good thing. I choose to see it as a very positive thing. A toast to wives with good taste everywhere!

To represent the Standard American Lagers, I bought: Pabst Blue Ribbon, Coors, and Miller High Life. Ouch, ouch ouch. Sometime later in the week, or more likely, on the weekend when I have help, I’ll sample these beers.

So, problem #2 arises in the fact that I was stupid enough to buy two bottles of each beer (note again, the photo). What was I thinking?!?!? Two bottles of Fullers ESB might be considered “not enough”, but 2 bottles of Coors? Damn, I wasn’t thinking. I must know SOMEONE who I can invite over for a “beer” this weekend.

In any case, both of the Lite American Lagers we sampled were watery, had what I’d call an “odd bitterness” and were generally unpleasant to drink. The BJCP guidelines say these are very thirst-quenching. I’d rather just drink water. It also states, “Strong flavors are a fault”. That almost needs revising…”flavor is a fault”. Okay, they do have some flavor. It’s just not particularly enjoyable. There’s a bitterness, but it’d be difficult to identify it as a “hop bitterness”. Could be anything. There’s little maltiness to these beers. There’s little to enjoy.

Going forward with this little endeavor, my goal is to try and get beers that are actually stated as “examples” for each style in the BJCP Guidelines. I may or may not succeed, but occasionally, I’ll update you here on how it’s going.

By all means, if you’re interested in going through all these beers with me…post a comment here, drop me a line, whatever. It’d be great to get a discussion going.

My analysis for tonight? Both beers are extremely bland. Amstel light is a bit more watery than Miller Lite — which strikes me as odd because I always heard that Amstel is one of the better light beers. Well, I think it’s the sophisto-foreign aspect of Amstel that causes people to say such things. Trust me. It’s not any better (than Miller Lite, at least), just more watery. Both beers are light in body, light in color, light in mouth-feel, and low on taste. I don’t see any reason for anybody to drink such a beer. Honestly? I’d rather have a Clausthaler non-alcohol beer. At least you’re just going all out at that point — and Clausthaler is actually not bad, considering. The BJCP doesn’t seem to have a non-alcoholic beer category though.