Brookston Beer Bulletin

Jay R. Brooks on Beer

Socialize

Toasting Michael

By

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you know last night was the National Toast to Michael Jackson, a benefit for Parkinson’s Disease and a chance to all raise a glass to the leading light in beer writing. I went to the Toronado in San Francisco to join the toast. Real Beer was there with a camera, documenting people’s thoughts about Michael and his legacy. They interviewed a number of us, asking us each the same seven questions and apparently this was going on in bars across the country with the idea of editing it all together in one media package.

 

Celebrator publisher Tom Dalldorf was on hand to emcee the toast as Toronado owner Dave Keene looks on, glass in hand, ready for the toast.

And exactly 6:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time, we all raised our glasses, as hopefully millions more did across the continent.

And then drank to Michael’s memory.

Dave opened a big bottle of Russian River Temptation.

After the toast, those of us that stayed adjourned to the back room for some heated games of washoes. Dave and I won at least ten straight before finally being unseated by Rodger Davis and Melissa Myers. Dave also opened a very big bottle of the anniversary beer Vinnie Cilurzo made for the Toronado’s 10th anniversary in August at Russian River Brewing.

Celebrating their one-year wedding anniversary, Claudia and Rodger Davis. Claudia works at 21st Amendment and Rodger is the former brewer at Drake’s. Believe it or not, this was the only picture I could get where Rodger did not have his mouth open with his tongue wagging.

 

Reminder: National Toast Tonight

By

Don’t forget the National Toast to Michael Jackson will take place tonight, Sunday, September 30 at exactly 9:00 p.m. EST (6:00 p.m. for those of us on the left coast).

Find which establishments will be participating at the Michael Jackson Memorial. If Michael’s writing has touched you life and your enjoyment of good beer, join us at one of the countess bars, brewpubs and breweries across the country to drink a toast to his memory.

 

Alcohol Education Reduces Binge Drinking

By

CNN’s Health section has an interesting little item called Letting Kids Drink Early Reduces Binging in which Stanton Peele, psychologist and author of “Addiction-Proof Your Child,” suggests that educating your children about drinking by introducing it in the home is a timeworn tradition that will reduce binge drinking later in life.

From the article:

He says many of the programs set up to stop alcohol abuse contribute to the teen binge-drinking crisis. Any program that tells kids flatly not to drink creates temptation, he says. “Preparing your child to drink at home lessens the likelihood that they are going to binge drink,” he says. “Not sharing alcohol with your child is a risk factor for binge drinking.”

Missing the point, of course, Drug Free America Foundation director Calvina Fay equated Peele’s philosophy with “giving permission to your children to do harmful things.” (Though why Fay’s commenting at all is a mystery since her foundation has almost nothing to do with alcohol.) At any rate, cultures around the world have been teaching their children about drinking in the home for centuries without harming their offspring. I’d certainly be curious to know why she thinks that teaching your kids to drink responsibly could in any way be “harmful?” But I guess I shouldn’t be too surprised, most of these groups seem to take an all or nothing approach. They don’t see degrees. They see alcohol (and drugs) as all bad, not just bad in excess or if consumed irresponsibly. It almost seems like a failure of imagination. If you think all drinking is bad, then it would be impossible to understand how teaching your progeny moderate and responsible drinking for enjoyment would be valuable to them when as young adults they are faced with peer pressure and have to make their own decisions. And as Peele suggests — and I think he’s quite correct — the neo-prohibitionist’s absolutist policy of no education and just saying no is making the problem of underage and binge drinking far worse than it needs to be. There’s an old adage, “a little education goes a long way” but I guess in the mind of the neo-prohibitionist that doesn’t include alcohol education. Until it does, it’s hard to swallow that they really care at all about curbing underage drinking or stopping binging.

 

Colorado Unseats California As No. 1 Beer Producing State

By

The Beer Institute has released its 2007 Brewers Almanac with all sorts of statistics, but the one that’s getting all the attention is that California has been unseated as the number one beer state in terms of production, a position its held for several years. Colorado takes the top spot this year, besting California by just over 500,000 barrels, or roughly the equivalent of a brewery two-thirds the size of Sierra Nevada Brewing.

To Colorado, I raise my glass and toast their success. There are some fine breweries there and they deserve their moment in the sun. But just wait until next year. Let’s go breweries of California, get brewing. You’re not going to take this lying down, are you? Some kidding aside, it’s great news for everybody. A little healthy competition never hurt anybody. And with contests like this, everybody wins.

From the press release:

In 2006, the state of Colorado officially became the largest beer producing state in the country, according to newly released data from the Beer Institute. The Colorado brewing industry produced over 23.3 million barrels or 724.5 million gallons of beer. This makes the state tops in production.

“Colorado is tremendously important to the beer industry and produces a number of high quality brews enjoyed by adults around the country,” said Jeff Becker, president of the Beer Institute. “With a strong beer culture and a rich brewing history, it’s no surprise the state has become number one.”

“As a state widely recognized around the country for our natural beauty, rich history, and extensive cultural attractions, we’re pleased to now also be known as the beer brewing capitol of the United States,” added Colorado Governor Bill Ritter. “Colorado breweries are also increasingly using and producing renewable energy, which is good for the industry, good for the environment, and good for developing more home-grown sources of energy.”

Colorado is also home to other major industry trade groups such as the Brewers Association, based in Boulder, representing America’s small brewers since 1942. The state also plays host to the annual “Great American Beer Festival” in Denver.

“In addition to housing many long established large brewers, Colorado is also leading the way among small, independent craft brewers,” said Charlie Papazian, founder and president of the Brewers Association. “We invite beer lovers from every state to visit us and sample firsthand some of the many fine varieties of craft beer produced here.”

 

Here the Top 10 beer producing states:

  1. Colorado
  2. California
  3. Texas
  4. Ohio
  5. Virginia
  6. Missouri (est.)
  7. Georgia (est.)
  8. Florida
  9. Wisconsin
  10. New York

 
Surprisingly, Oregon and Washington ranked 15th and 16th, respectively. After I take a look at the full almanac, I’ll see what other interesting facts emerge. Until then, I’m drinking a Great Divide Titan IPA tonight. Or perhaps an Odell 5 Barrel Pale Ale or even a Dale’s Pale Ale. Damn, I just have too many friends in Colorado making great beer. Congratulations one and all!
 

Catholic Irony vs. Miller

By

miller-art
There’s a festival in San Francisco every year, the Folsom Street Fair, that celebrates sexual diversity, fetishes and leather lifestyles. The event has a rich history of fighting conventional wisdom and poverty, as well. It’s a registered non-profit organization and also has all the things that typical street fairs have: music, food, beer and sponsors. One of the four main event sponsors this year, known as “presenting sponsors,” is Miller Brewing Co. Which is all well and good, or at least it was until the fair organizers unveiled this year’s poster for the event.

folsomstfair

It’s an obvious parody of Leonardo Da Vinci’s painting The Last Supper, which along with his Mona Lisa, Edward Hopper’s Nighthawks, Grant Wood’s American Gothic and Edvard Munch’s The Scream, is undoubtedly one of the most parodied works of art in the world. Do a Google Image’s search for “last supper parody” and no less than 6,360 images pop up. The poster is meant to show diversity in many forms; racial, gender, sexual preference and lifestyle. If you’re deeply religious it’s possible that you won’t like the image but that’s the price you pay for living in a free society. Everybody wants tolerance in the first person, such as “tolerate my beliefs” but it’s gets harder for those same people in the third person, as in “tolerating his beliefs.” Enter the Catholic League, which bills itself as a “Catholic civil rights organization” and states its purpose is to “defend the right of Catholics – lay and clergy alike – to participate in American public life without defamation or discrimination.” Their mission also includes working “to safeguard both the religious freedom rights and the free speech rights of Catholics whenever and wherever they are threatened.” All laudable goals, except that it appears the free speech rights of non-catholics count for naught. Since Tuesday the Catholic League has put out five press releases “calling on more than 200 Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu organizations to join with [them] in a nationwide boycott of Miller beer.”

Yesterday, SABMiller released the following statement:

Statement Regarding Folsom Street Fair

While Miller has supported the Folsom Street Fair for several years, we take exception to the poster the organizing committee developed this year. We understand some individuals may find the imagery offensive and we have asked the organizers to remove our logo from the poster effective immediately.

Not good enough, sayeth the Catholic League, calling Miller’s press release a “lame statement of regret.” Then they kicked things into high gear. “We feel confident that once our religious allies kick in, and once the public sees the photos of an event Miller is proudly supporting, the Milwaukee brewery will come to its senses and pull its sponsorship altogether. If it doesn’t, the only winners will be Anheuser-Busch and Coors.” See, even Catholics aren’t aware of the craft beer movement and believe there are only three breweries in the U.S. And certainly imports were overlooked, too. Some kidding aside, this is certainly a quagmire for Miller, and this has been receiving a lot of media attention, as stories involving sex usually do in our society. There’s nothing like titillation to increase reader- and viewer-ship.

Locally, at least, not everybody agrees as one gay member of the clergy had this to say via the Bay Area Reporter.

“I disagree with them I don’t think that [Folsom Street Events] is mocking God,” said Chris Glaser, interim senior pastor at Metropolitan Community Church – San Francisco. “I think that they are just having fun with a painting of Leonardo da Vinci and having fun with the whole notion of ‘San Francisco values’ and I think it’s pretty tastefully and cleverly done.”

Glaser added, “I think that oftentimes religious people miss out on things because they don’t have a sense of humor. That’s why being a queer spiritual person we can laugh at ourselves and laugh at other people.”

Even Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, herself a Catholic, issed the following through her press secretary, Drew Hammill. “As a Catholic, the speaker is confident that Christianity has not been harmed.” Exactly. And while the people Fox News interviewed called it a “mockery of religion,” “blasphemy” and suggested that it’s “bad for society,” I can’t see the Catholic League’s point.

First of all, they don’t own the image of Da Vinci’s Last Supper and it’s already been parodied countless times. The event itself has been painted by numerous artists over the centuries. Honestly, I don’t see how the “religious freedom rights and the free speech rights of Catholics” have been infringed upon or how catholics have been in any way defamed. The Last Supper even as an idea is not the exclusive province of Catholicism. If they had left it alone, it would have been a minor event in a local community.

And why pick on Miller? There are dozens of other sponsors, too, including SF Environment, an environmental group, and the San Francisco Bay Guardian, a local weekly newspaper. I almost hate to wonder, might this also be a little bit because it’s beer? Many neo-prohibitionist groups are also religiously based. But really, what did Miller do wrong? They sponsored a local event that’s perfectly legal, has the support of the local community and government. They’ve been sponsoring it for years. Then suddenly the event does something that the Catholic League doesn’t like. They’re offended. So what? Miller tries to soothe the situation, obviously seeing it for the powderkeg it is and asks to have their logo taken off the offending poster, but bravely continues to sponsor the event. Good for them. Why shouldn’t they? How is that in any way the “corporate arrogance” the Catholic League accuses them of? What’s arrogant about that? If you want to talk arrogance, then we need to look at the Catholic League. Being arrogant is defined as “making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights,” which is exactly what they’re doing by asserting that their “right” to not have their religion criticized or challenged — if indeed that’s really what’s being done, which I seriously doubt — is above the free speech rights of the criticism or challenge. I doubt many in the Catholic League have read Richard Dawkin’s The God Delusion, but one of the book’s soundest arguments is that religion has become the only idea, concept, belief, whatever that can’t be criticized. That we’re taught we must respect one another’s beliefs and not question them. Why? Why is every single other idea in the world able be talked about critically but not religion? It just doesn’t make sense to me. Obviously, the Catholic League believes that or they wouldn’t be misreading this so badly. It seems obvious to me that the Folsom Street Fair poster isn’t attacking or criticizing religion and certainly isn’t targeting the Catholic religion. It’s obviously parody, which is protected speech under the First Amendment of our Constitution. Even the Supreme Court has said so, thanks to an unlikely person, Larry Flynt, publisher of Hustler, whose story is chronicled in the film The People vs. Larry Flynt.

But again, why pick on Miller? They didn’t make the poster. They didn’t print the poster. They didn’t approve the poster. All they did was sponsor the event. The Catholic League is the bully in this passionate play, and they’re the ones that deserve to be crucified, not Miller. It’s one thing to disagree with another point of view or not like what you perceive as criticism of your own, but it’s quite another to attack it and try to harm their business over that disagreement. That’s what bullies do. But there’s one more bit of irony in all this that needs saying. Obviously, many catholics and other religious conservatives have a great deal of difficulty dealing with non-traditional sexual lifestyles, some of which are center stage in the Folsom Street Fair. But the Catholic Church is no stranger to non-traditional sexual practices among its own clergy and has systematically been suppressing its own sexual misconduct literally ruining the lives of hundreds, maybe thousands, of children in the process. Check out the film Deliver Us From Evil for just the tip of iceberg. That’s really offensive, worthy of people being offended, not like this fake controversy and complaints of being wounded simply by an image they don’t like.

Frankly, I thought I’d never utter these words, but “It’s Miller Time.”

Shuck and Jive

By

There is little doubt that hops are or soon will be in short supply. I heard it at “Hop School” in Ralph Olson’s “state of the hop crop” report and I’ve heard it from almost every other quarter, as well. Belmont Station’s blog has a good summary of what Ralph had to say via Dave Wills at Freshops and Rick Sellers at Pacific Brew News has another summary from Deschutes brewer Larry Sidor, as well as a summary of world hop news. There have even been two recent fires at hop kilns, and while crop damage was minimal (though the kilns were destroyed) it still further reduced an already thin harvest. Lew Bryson also posted David Edgar’s summary from today’s Brewers Forum. Overall, there’s some good but mostly foreboding on the future availability of hops, and most notably prices may skyrocket. There simply isn’t enough hops to meet current demand and acreage has been declining for several years.

Enter corn into the mix. When George Bush started touting ethanol he increased incentives and subsidies for farmers to grow corn to make the alternative fuel. If you’re barely getting by growing a difficult and fragile crop like hops, switching to corn with all that federal moola looks mighty attractive. I’ve heard that now from a variety of sources. According to an Iowa State University study, food prices have risen an average of $47 per person as a result of the ethanol surge since last year. So it’s not just hops, but farmers are replacing a number of other crops with corn, too. This has been widely reported to be effecting food prices across the board. But once on a gravy train, few will voluntarily jump off, no matter that the train may be headed for a collision. And corn has been riding those amber waves for quite some time, especially once high fructose corn syrup made its debut in 1980. HFCS is now in what seems like every processed food you could name. So if government policy makes their situation even better, you would expect the corn industry to be overjoyed.

There’s a little interview today at Retail News online (subscription required) with S. Richard Tolman, CEO of the National Corn Growers Association, trying to allay fears that the corn subsidies are having unintended consequences. And if you want to lay such fears to rest, who better to ask than someone with a totally vested interest in convincing you that black really is the new white. Here’s the forthright honesty he employs to counter numerous claims and studies that suggest “ethanol production is exacerbating environmental impact problems.” Tolan’s answer: “Those claims are simply not true.” Deny, deny, deny.

To the final question, “Critics contend that American farmers will be unable to keep up with demand for corn needed to produce ethanol. What’s the short-term and long-term thinking on this from corn growers?” he answers:

Short-term the question has already been answered. Farmers have planted more acres of corn this year than any time since World War II. If we have merely an average yield, there will not only be enough corn for all current food, fuel and export markets, we will build our carryover (surplus) stocks.

It’s that “planted more acres of corn this year than any time since World War II” line that should concern beer lovers everywhere. More acres of corn means less acres of something else. Believe it or not, when I was in the nation’s “hopbasket” — The Yakima Valley, Washington — last month I saw several large fields of corn.

Ethanol production has doubled over the last three years, and in 2006 accounted for almost 5 billion gallons. But that’s still only around 5% of total gasoline needs, and corn growers are hoping to increase that to 10%. Doubling again the acreage for ethanol would mean a pretty substantial amount of land on which one thing — hops perhaps — would be converted to grow corn. It seems naive to think that’s not going to raise the price of whatever is no longer being grown on the land that’s now growing corn. So while it may seem odd to blame corn for the hop shortage, it is at least one of the factors that’s contributing to it. I’m certainly no energy expert, but I haven’t seen anything to convince me that ethanol is the panacea so many seem to believe it is. Even if planting all that new corn provides us with 10% of our fuel needs, we’ll pay for it somewhere else, either in higher food prices or a potential beer shortage. Frankly, I’d rather walk, bike or take mass transit than give up beer.

But nothing’s going to change if people continue to give a voice to industry stooges like Tolman with so obvious an axe to grind. Why would anyone, and especially people in the retail business, believe such pernicious propaganda? He’s telling retailers the goods they sell will not go up in price if there is less acreage of land to grow the ingredients needed to make or grow the things they sell. On top of that, he represents the very people changing the way that land is used. That’s shuckin’ and jivin’ of the first order.

 

Big Brewers Spending Less on Traditional Advertising

By

According to a article at Advertising Age today, the three biggest brewers are spending less these days on traditional advertising, such as television, print and radio.

From the article:

According to TNS Media Intelligence, top brewers cut measured media spending a whopping 24%, about $131 million, during the first six months of 2007, following a 12% cut during 2006. At the same time, the brewers insist they haven’t cut spending at all — and in many cases have increased it.

What that means is that the dollars they are spending are being spent on things that traditional media folks don’t usually keep track of, such as sponsorships, promotional activity, product placement, bar events, concerts, stadium signage, specific sports promotions and local media. Part of that is simply to focus advertising on the dozens of test brands, the stealth micros and the alternative products that all three, though particularly Anheuser-Busch, have been experimenting with lately to compete with the craft segment, which is the only beer segment that’s been showing robust growth over the last few years.

So is this the traditional advertising world starting to panic? They talked to death about the big brewer’s forays into advertising on the internet and what that’s meant for them. They’re also equating trying to reach a younger demographic as another reason for the sharp declines in traditional ad buys. Does that mean since the younger generation has gotten wise to advertising, we’ll see traditional forms of it decline as a whole as they age? Somehow that seems doubtful, especially since in my humble opinion people aren’t really getting any smarter and advertising is certainly becoming more scientifically based. As a result, it’s hard to swallow the notion that young people are too savvy for advertising to work on them.

Citing a Beer Marketer’s Insights statistic that beer shipments from the big guys rose 2% at the same time traditional ad revenue fell, AdAge concludes that the non-traditional advertising must be working and even may be the key to that growth. They do qualify the 2% figure as “healthy,” at least “by the mature beer industry’s modest standards.”

But I seem to recall that the shipments figure is almost always around 1 to 2%, every year, no matter what. Maybe somebody has those figures in hand, but that’s certainly my memory. Other statistics like revenue, market share, and others have been fluctuating more, but not shipments, which have been fairly steady. At any rate, it seems hard to draw a conclusion from that statistic, even if my memory is faulty.

What really concerns me, if indeed what the article is suggesting is true — and the big three are throwing their massive resources at local media and cheaper, more targeted marketing — then they’ll be infringing on the only kinds of advertising and marketing craft brewers have been able to afford. Only a very few of the biggest microbreweries have been able to afford television advertising and even then it’s been limited and on cable networks. Regional and smaller breweries have only been able to afford the occasional print ad or radio spot, relying instead on guerrilla marketing, word-of-mouth and local community involvement. It will be very hard for them to compete with the big brewers’ ad budgets if they adopt a similar strategy.

 

Men’s Journal Picks Their Favorite Beers Again

By

Last year, the magazine Men’s Journal published in their October issue a list they called the “25 Best Beers in America.” This year marks the fourth annual list but this time it’s a departure from their standard list. Instead they chose their five favorites in five broad style categories and a further list of their choice of a beer for a specific occasion. As usual, there are some good beers on the list but probably just as many or more great beers that didn’t grace the list. This year the list also includes beers imported from Europe.

Last year I wrote the following about the list, and it seems just as true today.

It’s great news, of course, for the beers on the list. Hopefully they’ll get more attention and even possibly more sales generated from the article. But it doesn’t mean the beers not on the list aren’t in many cases every bit as good as those who made the cut this year. For those of us who judge beer regularly there are so many factors that come into play that a list like this one can never be truly taken serious for a variety of reasons. But the novelty of it appeals to all of us, myself included, and I imagine I scanned the list with as much interest as the average reader. Anything that shows craft beer in a positive light can’t be all bad, and this annual list is certainly another good way to spread the message of how many good beers are being made all over the country. Now if we can just get more people to start drinking them, that would be really something.

Here’s this year’s introduction from Men’s Journal:

THE DRINKING MAN’S GUIDE TO THE WORLD’S BEST BEERS

Provided it’s not the shakes that makes you reach for that cold one, there’s never been a better time to be a beer drinker. Delicious craft beer – roughly and imperfectly defined as high-quality brew made in smallish batches from the best possible ingredients, instead of corn syrup and generic grain – is everywhere. The average American now lives within 15 miles of a brewery making a fresh, local product. Imports from such beer-mad nations as Belgium and Norway previously unseen here are making their way into stores across the country. Even Anheuser-Busch wants in on the action; why else would the mega-brewer have released more than 85 experimental beers in the past two years? Which raises a fine question: What should you drink next? We canvassed brewers, importers, tavern-keepers, and chefs to find the best of the best.

However, how they really “did it” is explained later as follows. “We surveyed a Rolodex full of prominent beer industry players, asking them to name their favorite beers in several major categories, and tallied the results.” Well how scientific. Now I know these things are largely popularity contests already, but that strikes me as a pretty poor way to go about choosing what is presented as the “world’s best beer.” World’s “favorite” beers, possibly, but even that would be incorrect since they’re only the favorite beers of whoever was in their address book. Yes, I’m a curmudgeon to the end, but for these kinds of lists to be in any way meaningful there should be some kind of standards to get on the list in the first place. Otherwise, it’s just a beauty contest. But playing devil’s advocate, at least there are some very fine beers on the list and that’s a good thing for them, at least. There’s very few here that shouldn’t be enjoyed or sampled if they’re unfamiliar.

So with a few comments (in italics) that I couldn’t resist making, here is the Men’s Journal list for 2007:

 

The Best Pale Ales

  1. Firestone Walker Pale Ale
  2. Sierra Nevada Pale Ale
  3. Deschutes Mirror Pond
  4. Dogfish Head 60 Minute IPA (I guess this means by pale ale they mean any beer that’s pale in color, not the style?)
  5. Ridgeway Bitter (Ditto.)

The Best Stouts & Porters

  1. Deschutes The Abyss
  2. Guinness (Which one?)
  3. Stone Smoked Porter
  4. Bell’s Kalamazoo Stout
  5. Brooklyn Black Chocolate Stout

The Best Belgians (Presumably they mean Belgian-style?)

  1. Saison Dupont
  2. Rochefort 10
  3. Ommegang Three Philosophers
  4. Russian River Damnation
  5. St. Bernardus Triple

The Best Wheat Beers

  1. Aventinus Doppel Weizen-Bock
  2. Ayinger Brau-Weiss
  3. Allagash White
  4. Penn Weizen
  5. Widmer Hefeweizen

The Best Lagers & Pilsners

  1. Lagunitas Pils
  2. Victory Prima Pils
  3. Stoudt’s Pils
  4. Trumer Pils
  5. New Belgium Blue Paddle

 

BEST BEERS FOR EVERY OCCASION

“Best Beer” rankings rarely answer the most important question: What’s the best beer for right now? Here’s what to sneak into the ballpark, tow behind your canoe, drink in the morning, give to the babysitter (kidding!), and more.
 

  • In Case of Natural Disaster: Ommegang Hennepin
  • For Ballpark Hecklers: Miller High Life (Maybe to use as projectile, certainly not for drinking.)
  • Global-Warming Summer Beer: Thiriez Extra
  • Airport Layover Beer: Samuel Adams Boston Lager (Is that because it’s the only one at every airport?)
  • Marijuana Substitute: Deschutes Hop Trip
  • Liquid Courage: Stone Double Bastard
  • Mass Market “Microbrew”: Blue Moon
  • For an All-Nighter: North Coast Red Seal Ale (I’d think a lower alcohol true Session beer would be a better choice.)
  • For a One-Nighter: Celebrator Doppelbock
  • Oktoberfest Beer: Great Lakes Oktoberfest (Nothing against this fine beer, but why wouldn’t a German example be here?)
  • For the Scotch Lover: Lost Abbey Angel’s Share
  • Best with a Shot of Whiskey in It: Harp Irish Lager
  • Best “Light” Beer: Mahr’s Leicht (As light beers go, maybe, but why even bother? It’s like choosing the best way to be executed.)
  • Best Before Noon: North Coast Scrimshaw Pilsner
  • With a Good Cigar: Goose Island Bourbon County Stout
  • River Trip Beer: Dale’s Pale Ale
  • For the Goldman Sachs Broker: Samuel Adams Utopia
  • Hair-of-the-Dog Beer: Southampton Double White
  • Barbecue Beer: Aecht Schlenkerla Helles
  • To Impress a Beer Geek: Cantillon Lou Pepe
  • For Ice Fishing: Brooklyn Black Chocolate Stout
  • For the Earth-Firster: Butte Creek Organic Pilsner
  • Only Decent Mexican Beer: Negra Modelo (There are plenty of awful Mexican beers — with Corona probably the worst — but they’re not all bad.)
  • Ski Town Beer: Avery 14er ESB
  • To Buy with Spare Change: Pabst Blue Ribbon (Why?)

 

On Drinking Well

By

I got this press release from Diageo and Zagat last week and was only able to glance at it because of some article deadlines, and I also saw that Stan Hieronymus wrote about this over at Appellation Beer. The two companies have launched a new website, Drinkwell, that uses the Zagat survey format but for restaurants serving drinks.

From the press release:

In an innovative industry collaboration, Diageo, the world’s leading premium drinks business with hallmark brands including Smirnoff, Guinness, Johnnie Walker, Baileys, J&B, Cuervo, Captain Morgan and Tanqueray, announced today that it has joined with Zagat Survey, the world’s leading provider of consumer survey-based content, to launch drinkwell(TM) (www.idrinkwell.com), the first online resource guide to restaurants that are dedicated to serving the highest quality drinks and drink service.

“When people go out they often start the evening with cocktails, and that experience — good or bad — can set the mood for the entire night,” said Steve Wallet, vice president of Channel Marketing for Diageo. “At Diageo our leadership and knowledge in the area of spirits, beer and wine is second to none. drinkwell(TM) combines Diageo’s expertise with Zagat’s, and the industry’s foremost mixologists, to create a one-of-a-kind online resource for consumers seeking a complete quality dining and drinks experience.”

Visitors to www.idrinkwell.com will have free access to the ratings that Zagat surveyors have given to the hundreds of drinkwell(TM) establishments across the country, based on the quality of drinks, service, atmosphere and cost.

“Eating is only one part of the consumer experience when visiting a restaurant,” said Tim Zagat, Co-chair and CEO of Zagat Survey. “The creation of drinkwell(TM) gives consumers a new way to make informed decisions about where to find the best drinks and service.”

drinkwell(TM) has partnered with several world-renowned beverage experts including Dale DeGroff, Steve Olson, Paul Pacult, Dave Wondrich and Doug Frost, to develop the drinkwell(TM) Academy Staff Training Program for participating establishments. drinkwell(TM) — accredited establishments are identified by a special black and brushed metal plaque, in the same way the burgundy Zagat Survey decal denotes a Zagat-rated restaurant.

That’s all well and good, but apparently by “world-renowned beverage experts” they mean people who know wine and spirits but precious little about beer. You’d think that would not be the case given that Diageo also owns the Guinness brand, but since acquiring it they’ve essentially squandered away all its respectability. I’ve never been entirely sure why Diageo bought Guinness, because they seem to have little feeling for the original Irish Stout, its history or even its customers. They’ve insulted consumers everywhere with such abominations as the widget-bottle, Red Guinness and Extra Cold Guinness.

Stan knows a lot of the initial fifteen cities that Drinkwell launched with better than I do and he notes that the Chicago listings are missing some of the Windy City’s best beer destinations. His nutshell take on Drinkwell?

The good news is it free. The bad news is there’s dang little beer.

Their listings for my local area include not just San Francisco but the entire Bay Area. Only 61 places are listed — I know they’re just getting started but that still feels like an infinitesimally small number — not one has much of a beer selection, though the cynic in me is willing to bet they all carry Guinness. In California, there are two main types of restaurant alcohol licenses, a Type 41 allows a restaurant to carry just beer and wine and a Type 47 allows beer, wine and spirits. There are others, of course, but for discussion purposes that’s the main difference: just beer and wine or both with spirits, too. All 61 of the Drinkwell’s Bay Area listings are “full bar” places, meaning they sell all three kinds of alcohol.

It would take forever to list what’s missing here but what’s wrong will take considerably less time. It’s not a bad idea to rate drinks selection, service, and the like but “drinks” should really mean all of the drinks, not just cocktail-friendly places. There’s more than a whiff of this being a self-serving promotion by Diageo to sell more of its spirits portfolio, which ends up cheapening Zagat, in my opinion.

Zagat bills itself as “the world’s leading provider of consumer survey based content about where to eat, drink, stay and play. With more than 300,000 surveyors worldwide, Zagat Survey rates and reviews restaurants, hotels, nightlife, movies, music, golf, shopping and a range of other entertainment categories and is lauded as the “most up-to-date,” “comprehensive” and “reliable” guide ever published.” Maybe, but I can’t help but thinking pairing with Diageo makes them much less independent. This “partnership” probably means Zagat is trading on their unbiased reputation for a large fee from Diageo to increase their business. That may be untraditional or even cutting-edge but it still smacks of old-fashioned crass advertising and marketing. Plus, there’s no reason I can think of why Zagat couldn’t include drinks information as a part of its regular survey information without Diageo’s biased assistance. If, as Tim Zagat says in the press release, “[e]ating is only one part of the consumer experience when visiting a restaurant,” why didn’t he conclude they should have added that to their current survey model? Why would they need to “partner” with a company that has such an obvious agenda?

But the real tragedy is beer is once again ignored as a part of a fine dining experience. It may be that many or even most of the 300,000 Zagat restaurant reviewers are biased with regard to their perceptions of beer, wine and spirits and it seems Diageo’s rationale for doing this is perfectly transparent: it’s to increase their business. Zagat had an opportunity to make their ratings more complete and with a broader appeal, including people looking for good beer in a restaurant setting along with wine and spirits. Instead it appears they decided to take the money and run. Maybe I’m overreacting as I’m so often accused and things will improve with time, but with Diageo driving the bus, so to speak, I can’t see how they’ll ever include good beer destinations as one of their stops. And that makes Zagat ultimately less useful to me, and perhaps many other lovers of great beer. In the end, the experience of eating and “drinking well” should be about all of the available choices to enhance that culinary adventure.

 

Let’s Go, Cicerone

By

cicerone-logo “It is a great thing to know our vices.”
 
     — Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BCE)

Nobody I’ve discussed the issue of the title “beer sommelier” with thinks that the term is an appropriate one, because wine is intrinsically embedded into the definition. Over a hearty brew or two, many of us who think about words far too much have been trying to come up with a new word that’s the equivalent of sommelier but for the world of beer. Don Russell in his Joe Sixpack column suggested “Cellarman” Others have tossed out “Beermaster,” “Zymurgier” and even “Ale Consumption Engineer” for discussion. For me, none quite hit the right note.

Ray Daniels has dug deep and found a word that’s fallen out of use: Cicerone, which is pronounced “sis-uh-rohn.” He’s setting up a program where people can be certified in one of three levels of expertise by studying and taking exams based on syllabuses being created as we speak. So far, a draft of the novice syllabus is ready, which is to attain the first level, called a “Certified Beer Server,” along with the master syllabus for both “Certified Cicerone” and “Master Cicerone.”

From the website:

The word Cicerone (pronounced sis-uh-rohn) has been chosen to designate those with proven expertise in selecting, acquiring and serving today’s wide range of beers. The titles “Certified Cicerone” and “Master Cicerone” are protected certification trademarks. Only those who have passed the requisite test of knowledge and tasting skill can call themselves a Cicerone.

I confess that my initial reaction to the word wasn’t entirely positive, probably just because it is an unfamiliar word with no intuitive meaning. But by letting it marinate for a few days, it is beginning to grow on me. I certainly love the idea of having our own word. By using a word currently unknown to all but the most accomplished crossword puzzler, we can take it and make it our own. There are already rumblings and grumblings by people who don’t like the word because it isn’t beer-y enough or wasn’t decided upon by a committee of industry leaders. I say let’s just move past that and work on the more important task of creating a world where every fine restaurant has its own sommelier and cicerone. We could spend months and years debating the right word to use, and I for one probably have, but I’d rather keep my eye on the prize. I say kudos to Ray for hanging it out there and just going for it. The real trick for him is gaining acceptance on the front lines, at bars, brewpubs and restaurants. It’s in the beer industry’s best interests for an idea like this to take root, so I believe we should all support this idea and stop quibbling over the name. I, for one, am relieved to set aside that question. The sooner we’re united as an industry in using “cicerone,” the sooner it will gain broader acceptance, not only at eating and drinking establishments, but also with the general public, the civilian population. And when that happens we’ll have accomplished a grand leap forward toward our collective goal of getting beer the respect we all believe it deserves.

For my fellow word nerds, here’s some more information about the word “cicerone.” The website explains the origin of the word thusly:

Cicerone is an English word referring to “one who conducts visitors and sightseers to museums and explains matters of archaeological, antiquarian, historic or artistic interest.” For beer, a Cicerone will possess the knowledge and skills to guide those interested in beer culture, including its historic and artistic aspects. “Cicerone” now designates a person with demonstrated expertise in beer who can guide consumers to enjoyable and high-quality experiences with great beer.

According to my O.E.D., the word is taken from the name of the Roman orator and statesman, Marcus Tullius Cicero, and is “supposed [to be] referring to his learning or eloquence,” similar to the word mentor, which seems to fit. The OED definition is:

A guide who shows and explains the antiquities and curiosities of a place to strangers.

It was first used in print in 1726 and by the end of that century began to be used more in the general sense of a guide, before falling out of general usage in the mid-1800s. The OED suggests Ciceronage, Ciceroneship and Ciceronism to denote “the function or action of a Cicerone.” Also, according to the OED, it’s actual historical origin remains unknown and curiously was used in English before it ever shows up in Italian dictionaries.

Personally, I can’t wait to have my first restaurant experience where after the waiter hands me my menu, a man or woman standing behind the server walks up to the table, saying. “Good evening, I’ll be your Cicerone tonight.” That will be a wonderful day.

cicerone-banner-460