Trafalgar ESB, Chocolate Orange Porter, Mighty Oak

[Craig]

I wouldn't expect anything less than honest feedback. Let me know where I can send the TNT Snack Pack too, which represents the new Trafalgar and Black Label line up. We're all fighting for the same thing, better craft brew. I'll let BT'ers be the judge. Talk is cheap.

So you're just mailing people beer to prove the new stuff is legit? I'm game to give it a try.

[Belgian]

I really don't follow Ontario Brewing Awards for opinions because I have networks like BarTowel.

I'd be game to try the snack pack. In the thousands of beers I've tried, a few Trafalgar ones were not bad or at least indicated potential. I saw past the inconsistency issues. I used to credit the brewery with more innovation than most. And some unintentional Flemish Sours; amazingly one of those was in the OCB promo six pack (I was chicken to drink it but remember thinking they might have been on to something Jolly Pumkin-esque with the errant microflora.)

I have generally been patient with brewers and gone back to try things. Look at what Heritage did to Scotch Irish beers, I kept hoping they'd sort it out and in the end I was returning LCBO product with detailed complaints, in faith that somebody would hear.

[sprague11]

LTM in Quebec (Hell, Dunham too) are a couple of the best turn-around stories in Canadian brewing. I'm always willing to revisit if a brewer says things have changed.

[ErkLR]

Yeah I keep hoping Kisheppi will start making the Scotch Irish beers again but I wonder how they'd hold up compared to what's available now?

As far as infection from Trafalgar, I never had one, but there were too many stories of those who did. However, I think they've been brewing the Black Creek beers that ship to the LCBO and I've never had a bad Black Creek so it seems they've got that figured out. As for Trafalgar's recipes, I stopped buying them a year or two ago because I got burned by too many bad beers; not infected, just poor. If things have turned around in that department, good for them.

[ercousin]

If you send me a snack pack I would be happy to break it out at a homebrew club meeting and share the love around. PM me if interested. Would love to try Swartzy (again), curious to know if it was one of the ones I judged in my flight at OBAs. I had a really nice sweet stout that hit "sweetened espresso" on the nose but with blind judging you never find out whos beer you are drinking.

[S. St. Jeb]

Yeah I keep hoping Kisheppi will start making the Scotch Irish beers again but I wonder how they'd hold up compared to what's available now?

Agree on both points.

they've been brewing the Black Creek beers that ship to the LCBO and I've never had a bad Black Creek so it seems they've got that figured out.

This has been my experience too.

[Belgian]

Yeah I keep hoping Kisheppi will start making the Scotch Irish beers again but I wonder how they'd hold up compared to what's available now?

Agree on both points.

they've been brewing the Black Creek beers that ship to the LCBO and I've never had a bad Black Creek so it seems they've got that figured out.

This has been my experience too.

Black Creek are always great, in fact they sort of ARE the new Grand River and Scotch Irish as far as nice classic styles with full flavor. Very consistent IME.

SI - I only really miss the really good early CK batches of Sgt Majors IPA and the Stuarts Session Bitter, the latter was an actual (not so-called) session beer I could drink all day gardening or washing the car, and not get buzzed. Sadly there's no culture here for very inexpensive low-gravity ale with that simple and brilliant flavor profile. Another topic really!

[sprague11]

Stuart's was such a great "anytime" beer. Really miss that one in the warmer months and the good batches of John By/Tsarina Katrina when it got cold out.

[Derek]

I think that strange thinness is just an infection that hasn't reached your flavour threshold yet.

They've always done some interesting stuff, and it's not bad when it's fresh from the brewery, but it ALWAYS goes downhill.

They're always making new things (or just relabelling), and I think there's a lot of people that just like to try new things...

There's been problems in the past.... but things are turning around for the better. When's the last time you sampled the product?

It has been years... I'm glad to hear that it's finally improving!

[loudman]

...
SI - I only really miss the really good early CK batches of Sgt Majors IPA and the Stuarts Session Bitter, the latter was an actual (not so-called) session beer I could drink all day gardening or washing the car, and not get buzzed. Sadly there's no culture here for very inexpensive low-gravity ale with that simple and brilliant flavor profile. Another topic really!

I remember Perry Mason (brewer and delivery guy) at ...think it was circa 2006?... TBF and Sgt Majors on tap, beautiful stuff. We only found the both towards the end of the night so we stayed there "sampling" chatting with him and his son rest of the night. Awesome guy and brewer!

[FEUO]

The OCB awards did not do their credibility any favors by awarding best newcomer to Trafalgar. The "explanation" is weak.
Don't get me started on the BJCP judges who come out for these things.
The entire thing is a joke.
In turn, awards given to any beer or brewery hold little to no water with me, and many friends and folks I've talked to on the matter.
Some insist the panel was in some way "influenced". I'm not saying that. I just think they either had little to pick from, or just not good at what they do.
Hell, just about anyone can get BJCP credentials with a time and effort.

That being said, I had Mighty Oak yesterday. Passable. But I've had equal or better homebrew from fellas who are not seasoned brewers. But I'm no BJCP or cicerone so ignore my comments.

[ercousin]

The OCB awards did not do their credibility any favors by awarding best newcomer to Trafalgar. The "explanation" is weak.
Don't get me started on the BJCP judges who come out for these things.
The entire thing is a joke.
In turn, awards given to any beer or brewery hold little to no water with me, and many friends and folks I've talked to on the matter.
Some insist the panel was in some way "influenced". I'm not saying that. I just think they either had little to pick from, or just not good at what they do.
Hell, just about anyone can get BJCP credentials with a time and effort.

That being said, I had Mighty Oak yesterday. Passable. But I've had equal or better homebrew from fellas who are not seasoned brewers. But I'm no BJCP or cicerone so ignore my comments.

Judging isn't perfect, there will always be variability in scoring because of the human factor, but it's the best system we have and has been iteratively built by thousands of people (mostly in the USA) over decades to ensure fairness in beer evaluation. BJCP is also widely respected in the brewing community with many pro brewers also being BJCP judges. Judges have to pass both a technical test (200 challenging multiple choice questions in 60 minutes) and also a practical tasting exam where they are evaluated against senior judges for scoring accuracy and perceptive ability. This is about as rigorous as it's going to get when you need 30+ local judges to get through 400+ beers in two nights. It's easy to criticize a beer competition when you weren't there but these beers were served blind and the winners were objectively the best ones that were presented to the judges. These judges are some of the most knowledgeable beer tasters, homebrewers, and pro brewers in the province and definitely aren't a joke. Judging is a difficult job since you have to be knowledgeable in many areas including standard beer vocabulary, technical brewing, and style guidelines. If you think you can do better I encourage you to become a beer judge because you would probably be a great asset to the judging community. Human beer evaluation will always have some level of subjectivity, but the BJCP does a good job of making things as objective as possible. Otherwise someone would just build a beer machine that you pour beer into and it spits out a score, how demoralizing would that be?

The OBAs isn't the best run competition I have judged at, there is room for improvement and Roger has said so in his recent blog post. Trafalgar put forth a strong effort this year and the beers they submitted turned out to be objectively better than what other brewers submitted to the same category. Beers aren't static things, and what you taste from the LCBO or a draft tap may not be the same beer that was entered. There is batch to batch variability in flavour and balance, and also freshness considerations. I agree that the choice of phrasing on the Newcomer award was unfortunate, they should have just called it "Ontario Brewer of the Year" or something more understandable. Here's hoping they can get some of these fantastic beers into bottles and to consumers.

[darmokandjalad]

These judges are some of the most knowledgeable beer tasters, homebrewers, and pro brewers in the province and definitely aren't a joke.

I appreciate your impassioned defence of the inherent value and necessity of beer judging. But Trafalgar has been around a long time, and anyone familiar with this province's beer scene knows what they are all about. You can't say that Trafalgar was voted the "best newcomer" and not immediately expect a knee-jerk "well, that's dumb as hell" reaction from the people who actually know what's up.

Yes I read the explanation for why this was able to happen; it's still dumb as hell to give a brewery that has been around since the 90s that award, whether they were a continuing presence at the competition or not. That's not even a knock against Trafalgar - the operators of the competition should have fully expected some backlash for such a silly selection. It reminds me of that episode where Homer Simpson enters a 'design a model power plant' competition for children and ends up winning. The frustration felt by many beer geeks after reading that Trafalgar was voted the best newcomer in the province (in a year where probably dozens of new craft breweries have opened their doors) must have been Frank Grimes-ian in magnitude. As was mentioned earlier, there is certainly no shortage of actual newcomers who actually could have used that bit of publicity, which makes it doubly insulting.

As for Trafalgar's awards, their 'winning' beers at this year's comp are not actually available in stores, and I don't live anywhere near Oakville, so I have no comment on their actual quality. All I know is that the stuff that they HAVE released into stores is not in any way worthy of an award, and I would really question the tastes of anyone who disagrees with that. Mighty Oak is good, but I doubt most beer geeks would spend 5 bucks at retail (regularly) for a beer that is slightly better than a middling-quality homebrew.

If the people at Trafalgar sincerely want to change their public perception, a good start would be getting their 'award-winning' beers (like the schwarzy stout and pumpkin ale) into the LCBO, instead of dropping bombs like Chocolate Orange Porter on the shelves, interspersed with passable-but-overpriced offerings like Mighty Oak and Dark Harvest Ale. I hope that's the next step, because I'd really like to review an 'excellent' Trafalgar beer some day, instead of another 'acceptable' or 'serviceable' one.

[ercousin]

These judges are some of the most knowledgeable beer tasters, homebrewers, and pro brewers in the province and definitely aren't a joke.

I appreciate your impassioned defence of the inherent value and necessity of beer judging. But Trafalgar has been around a long time, and anyone familiar with this province's beer scene knows what they are all about. You can't say that Trafalgar was voted the "best newcomer" and not immediately expect a knee-jerk "well, that's dumb as hell" reaction from the people who actually know what's up.

Yes I read the explanation for why this was able to happen; it's still dumb as hell to give a brewery that has been around since the 90s that award, whether they were a continuing presence at the competition or not. That's not even a knock against Trafalgar - the operators of the competition should have fully expected some backlash for such a silly selection. It reminds me of that episode where Homer Simpson enters a 'design a model power plant' competition for children and ends up winning. The frustration felt by many beer geeks after reading that Trafalgar was voted the best newcomer in the province (in a year where probably dozens of new craft breweries have opened their doors) must have been Frank Grimes-ian in magnitude. As was mentioned earlier, there is certainly no shortage of actual newcomers who actually could have used that bit of publicity, which makes it doubly insulting.

As for Trafalgar's awards, their 'winning' beers at this year's comp are not actually available in stores, and I don't live anywhere near Oakville, so I have no comment on their actual quality. All I know is that the stuff that they HAVE released into stores is not in any way worthy of an award, and I would really question the tastes of anyone who disagrees with that. Mighty Oak is good, but I doubt most beer geeks would spend 5 bucks at retail (regularly) for a beer that is slightly better than a middling-quality homebrew.

If the people at Trafalgar sincerely want to change their public perception, a good start would be getting their 'award-winning' beers (like the schwarzy stout and pumpkin ale) into the LCBO, instead of dropping bombs like Chocolate Orange Porter on the shelves, interspersed with passable-but-overpriced offerings like Mighty Oak and Dark Harvest Ale. I hope that's the next step, because I'd really like to review an 'excellent' Trafalgar beer some day, instead of another 'acceptable' or 'serviceable' one.

I agree with everything you just said.

If they want to change perceptions they need to get these winning beers on the market. This is a big issue with commercial competitions vs homebrew ones. In a homebrew competition you can brew a one off beer and enter it and there is no expectation that it is something you regularly brew and will be able to share later. It could be your last 2 bottles and no one would care. With commercial competitions the rules are the same, you can enter any beer, no matter how limited. However with commercial competitions it seems there is an expectation that brewers are entering fairly available beers so that way if they won they can put the award on their packaging. There is nothing to stop a brewer from brewing a special batch of their IPA with twice as much hops and entering it with the same name as their regular IPA, this needs to be addressed ASAP. I'm not sure how though since any restrictions would probably reduce the amount of beers nanobreweries can enter.

Trafalgar won the most points in the competition fair and square, however the onus is on them now to get some of those beers on the market and earn back the beer geek's trust. I believe the Pumpkin beer was in the LCBO last fall, I'll have to revisit since it's been years since I tried it.

I agree that the OBA made a mistake giving that award to Trafalgar. The award structure of the whole competition is strange, they should stick to something more similar to CBAs and GABF. "Brewer of the Year", "Beer of the Year", and "New Brewer of the Year". If I were a pro brewer at a new brewery I would feel cheated by the way that award was done.

My reply was mainly to refute the comment "Don't get me started on the BJCP judges who come out for these things. The entire thing is a joke.".

[Craig]

I've always thought the guys at Molson should brew up a couple of batches on their pilot systems and enter them in the OBA/CBAs. It would be interesting to see if, like that guy who did the Reddit AMA insists, the big guys can make excellent beers, but just don't because of business reasons.