STYLES CHANGES (including NEIPA) WORLDWIDE! discussions

[Borresteijn]

@JK

The only change to Belgian ales should be to separate Belgian strong into Pale and Dark

Agreed, but where do we keep the amber/intermediate coloured Belgian Strong Ales? All under Amber ale?

[Leighton]

I know what you mean. It’s a funny one. Breweries like Alchemist and HF might have been forerunners of NEIPA juice, but if you compare their hoppy beers to stuff from a place like Trillium or Cloudwater, you will see the contrast. Heady Topper actually has some bitterness, whereas a typical Cloudwater DIPA is like drinking a fruit smoothie.

N.B. I haven’t weighed in on how to categorise many beers since NEIPA was added as a style,

[77ships]

@Leighton

I know what you mean. It’s a funny one. Breweries like Alchemist and HF might have been forerunners of NEIPA juice, but if you compare their hoppy beers to stuff from a place like Trillium or Cloudwater, you will see the contrast. Heady Topper actually has some bitterness, whereas a typical Cloudwater DIPA is like drinking a fruit smoothie.

N.B. I haven’t weighed in on how to categorise many beers since NEIPA was added as a style,

I have actually recently had some Heady Topper side-by-side with some hyped NEIPA’s. Heady Topper is different but the connection felt very clear, the new stuff is way hazier etc. More of an imperial version than something totally different.

[Scopey]

Has anyone mentioned the much contested Scottish Ale style yet?

From the historic UK perspective these XX shilling beers have been classified as bitters and not a separate style. So unsurprisingly the database is really messy across the board. I know it is a slightly controversial topic, but we should have consistency across the worldwide database.

Much the same as the aforementioned English Pale Ale, which is either golden/blonde ale or bitter in the UK.

[SinH4]

every European agrees that Scottish Ale is not a style. I guess this will never be fixed.

[Benzai]

@LazyPyro

@Viper666.Qc

For the rest, we can’t go against the industry. If a brewer labels a beer as a NEIPA even if it’s not…we must enter it as a NEIPA

And rightly so. Honestly I know it’s not really a big deal in the grand scheme of things but I’ve always hated when admins change the style of a beer to what they think it is, rather than what the brewer says it is. Brewers who release poorly made or poorly interpreted styles deserve to have their beer rated down.

But we are not expected to rate style-wise. So for me that would lead to high scores in the NEIPA category for beers that aren’t really NEIPA’s, as I like my IPA’s to be more bitter.

[Viper666.Qc]

OK I made a lot, a lot of change to proposal 3 since yesterday based on the comments of a very few individuals. So please I want to hear you on every changes from PARENTING to STYLES that you think are good or not, but I need more comments.

If possible, create a new Post for each subject you want to talk about so it doesn’t get lost in a giant blob of replies. Polls are also Coming.

[madmitch76]

Mikkeller Weird Weather IIIPA 13.0% = Hazy IPA?

Plot lost!

That is all.

[tommann]

No idea how to start a poll but Id love to see white cider as a style.

[slowrunner77]

Obviously it’ll take a while for all the NEIPAs to be separated, but it doesn’t help that the new style is not an option when adding a new beer. Is this a problem for everyone?

[slowrunner77]

Also, where does it stop? How can you have hazy IPA and IPA, and not have hazy IIPA and IIPA. Hell, there’s tons of hazy pales too… Right now when you have an imperial ipa you have to choose between hazy and imperial (assuming you can one day add new beers to the new style)?

[beardedavenger]

At the moment only admins can do it… for some reason explained elsewhere which I forget.

Styles are being reviewed - see the pinned spreadsheet. You may well get your wish.

[mansquito]

It seems like these will be split up. As of now, I have not been transferring imperial hazy IPAs to the Hazy IPA category.

[Saeglopur]

Sorry if this has been discussed before: Does it make sense to make Kriek Lambic its own style? This has a long tradition, with a distinct regional ingredient (Schaarbeekse cherries, although today not all Krieks are made with this, I know) and there are also quite a lot in the database. Makes more sense to me than the Dortmunder/Helles split for example.

[Jow]

I’d be in favor of this.

[77ships]

@Saeglopur

Sorry if this has been discussed before: Does it make sense to make Kriek Lambic its own style? This has a long tradition, with a distinct regional ingredient (Schaarbeekse cherries, although today not all Krieks are made with this, I know) and there are also quite a lot in the database. Makes more sense to me than the Dortmunder/Helles split for example.

Don’t care much, you are splitting up already a very small style. Framboos is prob actually older.

[Jow]

Just like to say as a style collector these changes make me both excited and nervous. I like the challenge but it took years to get my current style minimums at my drinking pace. Wonder if we can get current look at 10 of every style club for before and after comparison.

[Viper666.Qc]

Don’t get excited too quickly, some new styles may be introduced, but some of these as well as some existing ones might be merged together.

[Jow]

I also have at least 7 of each non-beer style and seems at min I’ll have to drink quite a Bit more ciders and mead with those breakouts

[Viper666.Qc]

This is one of the many problems we have right now with classification…

“Regular version” substyles vs 1 Imperial substyle will always cause problem.

Same with Sour/Smoked/Specialty Grain/Spicy/Herb/Vegetable with known style (Sour IPA, Smoked Porter, Rye Pale Ale etc…)