comp scoring question

[boobookittyfuk]

I have judged in several comps, but by no means am very experienced as a judge.

I have noticed a willingness of judges to not go above a score of 40 when judging a beer. One very experience BJCP judge (dont know his level) told me a beer was a perfect example of the style and when he thought of that style, he pictured this beer in his mind; yet he still only gave it a 38. I have heard explained that those final ten points are for national level beers. I have to admit, I havent read every word of the BJCP instructions to judges, but this just doesnt sound right. If you have a scale that goes to 50, why not use the full range?

Can anyone lend some insight into this thought process?

Sean

those judges are called LSB (low scoring bastards)

personally i think the highest score i've ever given was a 44 on a mead. Then again, I've only judged about 400 beers and at least 50 of them got a 19. 19 is my sympathy score. I think a lot of judges stay out of the 40s because its rare to get a beer that is made well enough for that kind of a score. And when that beer comes around, you think to yourself that you are missing something and that you are going to score it a 45 and the other judge is going to give it a 28.

judging isn't easy and it surely isn't meant for all to do.....i almost think that they should not allow apprentice judges to actually judge. If you fail the exam, there most likely is a good reason for it. But i guess that some regions are in need of anyone willing to fill out score sheets for no pay.

[boobookittyfuk]

I have also seen judges up their scores to just be within 3 points of the other judges. They'll say, "well, I can give it another point or two here to get closer to your score." As I look at the score sheets, I see that there will be no particular faults listed in a category, yet the judge deducted several points.

you are supposed to do this. the scores have to be within 7 points of each other but within 5 is prefered.

[ApresSkiBrewer]

I have also seen judges up their scores to just be within 3 points of the other judges. They'll say, "well, I can give it another point or two here to get closer to your score." As I look at the score sheets, I see that there will be no particular faults listed in a category, yet the judge deducted several points.

you are supposed to do this. the scores have to be within 7 points of each other but within 5 is prefered.

What if somebody is just being a duche, got dumped, and drank 20 beers the night before, has a cold, and can't smell or taste shit. Is there like a Judge's Octogon in case somebody is really outta line?

[boobookittyfuk]

What if somebody is just being a duche, got dumped, and drank 20 beers the night before, has a cold, and can't smell or taste shit. Is there like a Judge's Octogon in case somebody is really outta line?

you should watch the BOS judging....it can get bloody

[barleypopmaker]

I think what happens most of the time, at least this is what happens to me, is that I judge based upon what the beer is, but you want to leave room in the flight for beers that may be better. This can be tricky if you score your early beers too high. Let me give an example. If you have a flight of 12 beers and your first one is good, but not great and lets say it gets a score of 33. The next beer has some more flaws than the last one and you end up giving it a score of 26 in the end. Now your next beer may be excellent. If this was the only beer you were judging you would probably end up giving it a score of 45 in the end. But you are only 3 beers into a 12 beer flight. Here is where event judging from my past comes into play and right or wrong this is the way I end up doing large flights . Every beer from that point on is now a bit more complicated because you have so many to go. It was obviously better than beer#1 and beer #1 got a 33. So you have to score it above a 33, this beer deserves it. But you need to leave room for the possibility that there may be an even better beer in the mix. So in the end I shoot for a 40 for that beer, still a great score and this beer was good enough to be in the 40's. The next beer was better than the 33 and worse than the 40 so that score should fall in between based upon how much better it was than the 33 and how close it is to the 40. And so that is how the scores fall for me in a large flight. The rest fall between the numbers based upon how they stack up agains the other beers in the flight. It was good thing I scored that one beer as a 40 and not a 50, because 8 beers into the flight there is a beer that the hop profile is just a bit brighter and overall just a touch better than the 40 pointer, so this one gets a 43, still leaving room for an in between beer and room for the possibility of a better brew. In the end you have to remember that it is a competition and you don't know what may be coming up so giving a 50 to a beer in the beginning or middle is just not a good thing to do. You never know if there may be an even better one, and how do you give that beer a top spot if that top spot has already been taken? With the way I do it, I still know that I scored the best beer in my opinion the top spot in the flight. Even if the top spot is a 39, it is still the first place winner, and on to the best of show regardless of if I scored it, 30 or 50 (as long as the competition doesn't have a rule that no beers enter BOS under a score of 35 )
I think the best score I ever gave out was 48, but I had to come down a bit to meet another judge in the middle. I don't recall the final score I gave, maybe like a 44 or something. But when I review beers individually I end up scoreing them a bit higher. So I don't think I will ever give a 50, unless it's the last beer for the flight and it is the single best example I have ever seen of that style.

[barleypopmaker]

I have also seen judges up their scores to just be within 3 points of the other judges. They'll say, "well, I can give it another point or two here to get closer to your score." As I look at the score sheets, I see that there will be no particular faults listed in a category, yet the judge deducted several points.

you are supposed to do this. the scores have to be within 7 points of each other but within 5 is prefered.

What if somebody is just being a duche, got dumped, and drank 20 beers the night before, has a cold, and can't smell or taste shit. Is there like a Judge's Octogon in case somebody is really outta line?

It's come close before. But when it's all over it all good.

[drewbage1847]

I guess, I'm an LSB because I've only ever scored a handful of beers over 40. But yeah, there are no hard and fast rules about reserving 40+ for any special purpose.

But suffice it to say, if you get a 40+ from me, that's a damn, damn fine beer.

And yeah, BOS judging is vicious, mean, cut throat and a hell of a lot of fun.

[Otter]

I have also seen judges up their scores to just be within 3 points of the other judges. They'll say, "well, I can give it another point or two here to get closer to your score." As I look at the score sheets, I see that there will be no particular faults listed in a category, yet the judge deducted several points.

you are supposed to do this. the scores have to be within 7 points of each other but within 5 is prefered.

Like I said, I've only been to a few competitions. I can understand that you want to get some kind of agreement on the particular beers in a flight.

On another note, shouldn't the beers be judged against a "calibration beer" or something that exemplifies the style, as opposed to being judged against each other? Isn't BOS the place to judge beers against the other beers?

I've never taken the BJCP test, or even looked at one of the study guides, so I'm a bit ignorant of the process other than what I've seen while stewarding.