Deschutes Black Butte XX

Okay, how the heck can this be aliased to XXI???

"Deschutes Black Butte XXI ***

Released as Black Butte XX in 2008 to celebrate our 20th Anniversary."

Maybe the alias should have been reversed?

There shouldn’t be an alias at all.

For the same reason “The Abyss” is one entry, even though the barrel blend and ingredients in the beer are clearly different right on the label for several different vintages (that was written in sarcasm font).

1 Like

The likely answer is that policies have changed since then. Today, they would probably be separate entries. Unless XX and XXI were the same exactly.

That’s apparently the Deschutes view!

1 Like

Similar recipe and strength to Black Butte XX (2008), “enhanced by adding some Theo’s Chocolate cocoa nibs from Seattle, dry-hopping it with 100 pounds of Bellatazza’s locally roasted coffee, and then aging a portion of it in Stranahan’s Colorado whiskey barrels.”

Apparently not enough change from the Brewer’s view to make it “different”.

I’d think Brewer should trump us on the issue.

Personally, tho, I think every thing that puts on year dates on the label should be rateable by year - like Anchor Our Ale. The more potential rates the merrier.

1 Like

I couldn’t agree more.

Bill, today I would separate these for sure. If you have specific entries that need changing, let me know anytime!

1 Like

On the other hand, this means less ability for those beers to score properly without ever getting out of the statistical bias range because there are not enough raters. So many beautiful local beers here which will never get a proper score, even when you do not differentiate vintages.

But the result will be the same either way, so why not differentiate vintages?

1 Like

We only separate when there is 1) brand distinction 2) brewer’s intent to see the product as distinct and 3) some changes in the product. So, if we have a product that is exactly the same each year with different years on it, it is one entry. A lot comes down to how the brewery wants to view it. The Abyss has never been marketed as different each year.

Cool. So I’ll run right out and get Anchor Our Beer 2017!

2017 Anchor Christmas Ale. New tree. New recipe. Same traditions.

So I reckon I will enter my rating for the XX under
XXI and add my XXI rating under it.

Unless you look at the label. Abyss with cherry bark in it (as one example) is pretty different than it was before.

1 Like

Abyss through 2010 w molasses licorice 33% oak & bourbon
Abyss 2011-2015 w molasses licorice cherry bark vanilla (28% BA - 6% bourbon, 11% wine, 11% oak)
Abyss 2016 on (so far) w molasses licorice cherry bark vanilla (50% BA - 21% bourbon, 21% wine, 8% oak).

So not only are they clearly different, but that info is easily found on the labels for each vintage. It seems like laziness or stubbornness to not differentiate those 3 different recipes at this point, but I won’t hold my breath.

1 Like

If you got the descriptions, why not enter away?

Been down that road too many times (wasting time adding beers that’ll just get deleted/aliased anyway). More fun to argue :wink:

Can you send me a link to that info?