• Home
  • Education & Training
  • Judge Training and Study Programs
  • Beer Part 2 – Perception & Descriptive Ability

    • Beer Part 2 – Perception & Descriptive Ability

    Recommended Reading:

    These documents will provide insight into what is expected not only in the Exams, but as a judge in the real world. These documents should be referenced throughout the course.

    Overview

    Many newer judges, and some experienced judges, have difficulty describing what is in front of them. It can been seen fairly easily if one is simply “parroting the guidelines” (i.e., writing only what is mentioned in the Guidelines rather than describing the beer in front of them), and an effort should be made not to do this. The goal should be to produce quality score sheets, build the participant’s vocabulary, and help them adequately communicate to the entrant what they are perceiving and experiencing from the beer sample.

    Some items that can be used to reach the participants in the course:

    • Have you ever received a scoresheet from a competition and have been discouraged by its quality?
    • Do you critique the review written by another judge or do you agree with it?
    • What makes you able to agree with the words written or disagree with them?
    • Judges by default come with a certain level of credibility:
      • If the judge can accurately describe the beer, the layers of sensations within the beer, and can provide meaningful feedback they are more likely to maintain that credibility with the entrant.
      • If they cannot do these things they will lose credibility and not take the feedback seriously.
    • Entrants pay money to enter the competition.
    • Entrants have invested time, money, and energy into producing the entry before the judge.
    • Entrants sometimes enter competitions for feedback or to verify feedback they have received from others, not necessarily to compete.
    • Would you find the score sheet you just completed useful? Would you want to receive it?

    What is meant by Perception & Descriptive Ability?

    By definition, perception is what a judge or taster senses with the nose, eyes, tongue, and mouth. By definition, descriptive ability is being able to use evocative and meaningful language to capture the essence of what is sensed. Judges will obviously need the ability to perceive what is in front of them and communicate this via descriptive language to the entrant. These two skills are what separate the good judges from the great judges, which is why both should be practiced throughout one’s judging career.

    On the Beer Judging Exam, the perceptions communicated on the exam scoresheets are compared against both the proctors and in some cases the remaining examinees. In judging the team of judges and the entrant will consciously or unconsciously pick up on similarities and differences. This is not a bad thing because people perceive things differently. For instance, one judge may insist that a beer does not have diacetyl, when another insists that they can perceive it. Judges should know that diacetyl has a wide range of perceptive range depending on the person (and that perception is subjective), so being insistent only serves to make them look silly. Good judges know that their perception is different than other judges, while great judges know how their sensitivities line up with accepted standards and their fellow judges.

    Perception

    Review the BJCP Grading Score Sheets Guide, pages 8-9.

    From How to Write a Master Level Score Sheet on perceptions:

    1. They need to be accurate; practice! At all judging levels, it is a must to hold tastings with peers to analyze and discuss the beverages.
    2. Always portray the hallmarks of style, whether present or not.
    3. Learn how flavors interact with each other, especially for areas where a judge may have a blind spot. This can help a judge recognize that they may possibly exist even when they don’t initially perceive them.
    4. Slickness is not always diacetyl! If it can not be identified by taste or smell it, how can it detract from the score? Slickness is a clue to look for diacetyl, not a determination that it is there. Treat all other aspects of the beverage the same way.

    In order to practice and hone the above-mentioned perception skills, there are several things one can do in a group or individual setting.

    • Judging with other judges & conversing about perceptions is an obvious path.
    • Host an off-flavor session using the BJCP Sensory Kit and the Guidelines for Doctoring Beers in the Beer Study Guide.
    • Experience foods and flavors outside of beer that can be referred to on scoresheets.
      • Example: try examples of “stone fruits” in order to identify which stone fruit is perceived.
    • Sampling beer using the Beer Flavor Wheel (external link)

    Descriptive Ability

    Review the BJCP Grading Score Sheets Guide, page 10.

    From How to Write a Master Level Score Sheet, descriptions should be:

    1. Easy to understand
    2. Terms that people can relate to.
    3. Have adjectives to further define basic flavors. Example “hops versus citrus hops.”
    4. Intensity of character. Example “hops versus moderate citrus hops.”
    5. A lot of descriptors.
    6. Always describe the hallmarks of style.
    7. Always describe the basic defining element of a beverage. In the case of beer, describe the malted grain, mead the honey and cider the apple or pear character.
    8. Looks past the “flaw” to continue to describe and score the beer.
    9. When combined together, the beverage becomes vivid to the reader. They should be able to read the scoresheet and taste the beer.

    Several common judging issues that should be avoided, both in the exam and in normal judging practice, are:

    • Not describing the beer in front of them.
      • Commonly referred to as “parroting the Guidelines”, meaning that the judge simply reads the Guidelines while filling out the scoresheet and writes, more or less, what is in the Guidelines.
    • Using vague words for descriptors, such as “nice” or “good”.
      • “Nice” or “Good” does not describe anything.
      • Entrants will need to infer what is meant, which is not the goal of the scoresheet.
    • Not providing the intensity for each descriptor, example:
      • “Grainy and sweet” versus “Moderate grainy character and low sweetness in finish”.
    • Only providing “primary” descriptors. Better judges provide not only secondary descriptors but also tertiary descriptors. Example of the evolution of descriptors to more clearly convey what one means:
      • Expansion of “malty”
        • Primary: Malty
        • Secondary: Grainy malt
        • Tertiary: Grainy-sweet malt with a hint of honey
      • Expansion of “fruity”
        • Primary: Fruity
        • Secondary: Stone fruits
        • Tertiary: Mangos (or cherries, or peaches – “stone fruit” is a broad category of fruits)

    Completeness

    In reading the BJCP Grading Score Sheets Guide, pages 12-13, it is clear that being able to fill out a complete scoresheet is critical to earning all points available in not only completeness – but perception and descriptive ability as well. The exam scoresheet, as well as the standard scoresheet, have a list of all of the items that require comment. They are below. (These are referred to as the AAFM sections, after the first letter of each title.) Do remember that it is important to comment on items that are expected but not in the beer, e.g., a Hefeweizen with no banana aroma or an oatmeal stout without a smooth silky mouthfeel.

    It may be helpful to develop a cadence of writing a scoresheet, which may allow for a judge to shave time off of filling out scoresheets without sacrificing quality or completeness.