A short flip across the border nabbed me a six of this new New York offered Firestone Walker. There were three others, their DIPA, porter and 15 were there, too at $8.99, $6.99 and a whopping $21.99 respectively. The last one was in a cardboard box. I had no idea a cardboard box added so much cost. I grabbed a couple of the Double Jack DIPAs leaving the stuck up sibling and the under appreciated plain Jane behind.
This six cost me $13.99 which is at or a notch above the cost of a middling Ontario craft beer at the LCBO so this was not a money saver like the excellent Sixpoints but still more than worth a try. Even with the buck a bottle customs duty I got hit with today, it beats the hell out of lining up and forking out to access FW beers otherwise under our system. On the sniff, it is toffee, marmalade and bitter greens. It pours aged, oranged pine with a lace leaving egg white head that’s sustained by a pretty active level of carbonation. Not a heavy beer on a sip and swish but one that goes neatly through a number of phases. Orange rind and pine at the outset standing on the backs of rich toffee malt. Then there is a pause with a moment’s reflection on the watery goodness. This gives way to a bit of an arugula booze burn at the end. I like a beer with a beginning, middle and end. I like.
Even with the new incomprehensible number system, I can tell the BAer have the love in a big way.
[Original comments…]
Craig – February 19, 2012 1:07 AM
http://drinkdrank1.blogspot.com/
I am a big fan of the under appreciated plain Jane. It’s a far better beer than it’s $6.99 price tag lets on.
beersiveknown – February 19, 2012 6:41 AM
Alan, why not use ratebeer if you don’t get BA?
Alan – February 19, 2012 9:18 AM
[“…you don’t get…”? Really???]
It’s habit. Plus, I have no clue what RateBeer’s system of numbering means. BA is just joining them with the pretext of excessive refinement. There is no meaning between 3.75 and 3.85. There is meaning between a “B” and “B+”.
Craig, I am getting spoiled. I look at all the pretty bottles of porters like this one or Stone smokey porter and figure they’ll be there next time. But these stylish fast living hop bombs come and go.
steve – February 19, 2012 3:29 PM
http://beersiveknown.blogspot.com
I find it easy enough! you rate different areas out of 5/10 then you get two percentage scores, one for position compared to all beers in the database and one for the beer within its style. There are various correction factors but they don’t need to be understood to take meaning from the score.
Alan – February 19, 2012 5:51 PM
You know what I like? I like “B” because you assign something “B” and there is no division, corrections or anything else. “B” means “B” and no one confuses it for “C” or “A”.
Steve Lamond – February 20, 2012 4:15 AM
http://beersiveknown.blogspot.com
But beer does not fall into discrete score groupings, its on a continuous scale, how do you know one C+ isn’t better than another for example
Alan – February 20, 2012 9:57 AM
That is the problem. The measuring scale is too fine for the subject matter. There is a desire to objectively measure the unmeasurable, subjective experience. All C+s are simply between B- and C… maybe. The subtleties are describable but at that finer level of granularity it is all about preference. Everything else is a trick of the mind and mass illusion.
Ethan – March 7, 2012 12:19 PM
http://communitybeerworks.com
I gotta tell you, that $21.99 bottle is closer to good value than you think… still overpriced, but far from egregious. $200 for Utopias or Millenium- *that* is egregious.
Alan – March 7, 2012 12:48 PM
I know but it’s well beyond my price point and, as a blend of existing beers, not one that I think is justified by the technical process involved.