Tom Wolper > wrote:
> Justin Wilson wrote:

>> How would you categorize this Rogue Dead Guy ale? It's a good beer,
>> although I wish it were a bit more hoppy (but maybe that's because I
>> usually drink IPA).
>> BA puts it in the Maibock category.

> I'd categorize it as an American pale ale. I like the fact that it
> leads with malt rather than hops. I can see putting it into another
> style category so that drinkers will not be surprised that it doesn't
> taste like Sierra Nevada Pale Ale, for example. Assuming Dead Guy is
> top fermented, I think it's wrong to call it a maibock, even if it
> gives the drinker a closer expectation of its taste. I would rather
> see it called an American Blonde Ale.

If California Common can be an ale made with a lager yeast,
why can't lagers use ale yeast?

The problem is that, outside of judging, the guidelines don't
mean much. On the floor to my left are six empty Dead Guys.
They were good, but a Maibock? an American Pale Ale? an
American Blonde Ale? No, No, and No.

It's like Stone's Arrogant ******* Ale. It doesn't matter
that it doesn't fit style guidelines as long as it is great beer.

Us IPA guys should not stray - Make mine a Hercules Double IPA.

Dick