It's great. Not too heavy but still 9.5%. It's a tribute beer to the
late great Hunter Thompson. It comes in 4 packs - get it while you can.
I still think Bear Republic is the best stout you can get in CO but I
don't know if Bear Republic is going to sink or swim. Remember Pyramid
started out in bombers too and then they went mainstream 6 packs. Hope
Bear will too. In the meantime check out Hunter's stout.

grifty > wrote:
>I still think Bear Republic is the best stout you can get in CO but I
>don't know if Bear Republic is going to sink or swim. Remember Pyramid
>started out in bombers too and then they went mainstream 6 packs. Hope
>Bear will too.

Bear Republic is by no means a new brewery. They've
been "swimming" for nearly ten years now.
--
Joel Plutchak "Never argue with a fool; people watching might not
plutchak at [...] be able to tell the difference." (author unknown)

"grifty" > sings of arms, the man, and Usenet
ups.com:

> It's great. Not too heavy but still 9.5%. It's a tribute beer to the
> late great Hunter Thompson. It comes in 4 packs - get it while you can.
> I still think Bear Republic is the best stout you can get in CO but I
> don't know if Bear Republic is going to sink or swim. Remember Pyramid
> started out in bombers too and then they went mainstream 6 packs. Hope
> Bear will too. In the meantime check out Hunter's stout.

I've heard decent things about the new Flying Dog (I believe it's
actually a big porter), but I object to it on philosophical grounds.
Flying Dog has been sticking half-ass beers inside cool-labeled bottles
for years, and most beer geeks I know consider them to be one of the
crappiest widely-distributed micros around. Then they decide to make
some imperial thing and suddenly people sit up and notice. It's almost
like all you have to do is dump a shitload of malt and/or hops into the
brew kettle and you suddenly transform from an at best marginal brewer
into a genius.
--
************************************************** ***************
Dan Iwerks is mighty in the ways of cheese.
The fundamental problem with Solipsism is it makes me
responsible for the fact that you're a complete idiot.
************************************************** ***************

>>Flying Dog has been sticking half-ass beers inside cool-labeled bottles
>>for years, and most beer geeks I know consider them to be one of the
>>crappiest widely-distributed micros around.

Yeah it's the "Gonzo Imperial Porter", and while it is pretty decent,
it is just silly. Isn't stout a strong porter? Okay, maybe not, maybe
stouts lack the winey-ness that mark some great European porters but
American porter and stout don't have very definite lines of demarcation
at times.

I agree that Flying Dog used to be mediocre to crappy at best and I
always wondered how they survived. I tried most of their range years
ago when they first appeared in Dallas and was underwhelmed to say the
least. I avoided them for the next 6 or so years and the other day I
found myself in a small restaurant in Woodland park Colorado and all
they had on tap were a couple from Flying Dog. I tried each (the amber
lager and pale ale) and noticed VAST improvement. The lager was malty
and not just a bunch of crystal thrown in there, it seemed to have a
subtle actual complexity and plan. The pale ale was citrusy and crisp,
not the flaccid uninspired concoction that I remembered.

So I dunno, maybe ol' Ralph decided that if his art was going to be on
beer they had better get their act together!

_Randal

Randal wrote:
>>>Flying Dog has been sticking half-ass beers inside cool-labeled bottles
>>>for years, and most beer geeks I know consider them to be one of the
>>>crappiest widely-distributed micros around.
>
>
> Yeah it's the "Gonzo Imperial Porter", and while it is pretty decent,
> it is just silly. Isn't stout a strong porter? Okay, maybe not, maybe
> stouts lack the winey-ness that mark some great European porters but
> American porter and stout don't have very definite lines of demarcation
> at times.

One should be made from malt and one from grain, for starters. I'll try
to find a proper description, but the story in 'Yankee Brew News'
indicated that there was a tax on malt, so brewers toasted the grain
directly.
>
> I agree that Flying Dog used to be mediocre to crappy at best and I
> always wondered how they survived. I tried most of their range years
> ago when they first appeared in Dallas and was underwhelmed to say the
> least. I avoided them for the next 6 or so years and the other day I
> found myself in a small restaurant in Woodland park Colorado and all
> they had on tap were a couple from Flying Dog. I tried each (the amber
> lager and pale ale) and noticed VAST improvement. The lager was malty
> and not just a bunch of crystal thrown in there, it seemed to have a
> subtle actual complexity and plan. The pale ale was citrusy and crisp,
> not the flaccid uninspired concoction that I remembered.

Could be better brewing, could be better distribution. Poor handling may
be cheap, but it doesn't help the flavor ;-) Buy one bottle, put it on
the wall for art's sake.
>
> So I dunno, maybe ol' Ralph decided that if his art was going to be on
> beer they had better get their act together!

--
-bill davidsen )
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
last possible moment - but no longer" -me

> Randal wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Yeah it's the "Gonzo Imperial Porter", and while it is pretty decent,
>> it is just silly.

The term "Imperial Porter" has already been used, by Heavyweight's
"Pekuno's Hammer". I don't see it as particularly "silly", since a lot
of porters are bottom fermented these days (older US brands & Baltic
styles) and many picky people WOULD probably object to a bottom
fermented stout. (Altho' I don't know if this applies to FG's Gonzo...).

I think there actually might be MORE confusion with just calling
something "Stout"- is it a sweet stout, dry stout, imperial stout?



Isn't stout a strong porter? Okay, maybe not, maybe
>> stouts lack the winey-ness that mark some great European porters but
>> American porter and stout don't have very definite lines of demarcation
>> at times.

You know, I don't have a problem with not having *definite* lines of
demarcation between some beer styles- I think it's sort of natural that
there's an overlap between certain styles (Pale Ale > IPA > AIPA), etc.


Bill Davidsen wrote:

> One should be made from malt and one from grain, for starters.

Say, aren't you the guy who also thought US Budweiser was brewed with
rice only, instead of "select grains"?

Bill Davidsen wrote:

>
> I thought Bud brewed with rice. ??

http://tinyurl.com/b8aot

post #8



While some dry stouts DO use roasted unmalted barley, it's by no means
the defining characteristic of all stouts.

Seems to me your a homebrewer? Ever brew (or hear about) a stout using
100% unmalted grain?

And "malt" IS "grain", just as "rice" is for that matter...

>>One should be made from malt and one from grain, for starters. I'll try
>>to find a proper description, but the story in 'Yankee Brew News'
>>indicated that there was a tax on malt, so brewers toasted the grain
>>directly.

Huh? Malt == grain. Although stouts contain a *portion* of flaked
barley and roasted barley and porters rely more on chocolate malt the
base has to be malted grain, usually some kind of pale malt. The point
I was making in that other than the lack of roasted flavor in most
porters some european porters have an additional winey note that I am
supposing is derived from the yeast to further distinguish themselves
from stouts. Most American porters I have tried lack this distinction.

_Randal

If you don't know the difference between Porter and Stout try Sierra
Nevada's Porter and Stout. There's a big difference. The Stout let's
you know you're really drinking beer. Although it's a little like
taking medicine. I take it during the winter months mostly.
Porter IMO is not worth getting to excited about.

"grifty" > wrote in message
oups.com...

> If you don't know the difference between Porter and Stout try Sierra
> Nevada's Porter and Stout.

That'll only tell you the difference between SN's porter and stout. I cannot
think of two more imprecise terms in the entire beer lexicon, and that
includes the bitter/pale ale/IPA/IIPA continuum.

> There's a big difference.

Only between those two beers. Porter and stout are handy terms for having a
good guess as to the character of two beers from the same brewery. They're
worthless terms for determining the character of beers with those names from
different breweries. Some breweries' porters smack around another brewery's
stout, but within a brewery, it can generally be assumed that the stout is a
stronger, bolder beer than the porter (although I'm sure there are
exceptiones, even though I can't think of any nor have I personally
experienced any).

> The Stout let's
> you know you're really drinking beer.

But the porter leaves you feeling like you're drinking soda?

> Although it's a little like
> taking medicine. I take it during the winter months mostly.
> Porter IMO is not worth getting to excited about.

I'm content with either one. Although neither is a style I drink often, and
there are other porters and stouts I prefer over SN's.

-Steve

"grifty" > wrote in message
ups.com...

> I still think Bear Republic is the best stout you can get in CO but I
> don't know if Bear Republic is going to sink or swim.

Eh? Bear Republic's been around a long time, and I don't think they're going
anywhere for a while.

> Remember Pyramid
> started out in bombers too and then they went mainstream 6 packs. Hope
> Bear will too.

IMO, Pyramid is not a brewery to hold up as an example for anything
positive.

Bottle size has zero correlation to business success. Rogue seems to be
getting on just fine selling nothing but bombers. Stone sells primarily
bombers too. Same with AleSmith, and IIRC Heavyweight. Yeah, I'd like to
cart home a six-pack of Racer 5 only to make it easier to carry, but I don't
seem to have that much difficulty handling and buying my share of 22s.

-Steve

Steve Jackson wrote:
> Bottle size has zero correlation to business success. Rogue seems to be
> getting on just fine selling nothing but bombers. Stone sells primarily
> bombers too. Same with AleSmith, and IIRC Heavyweight. Yeah, I'd like to
> cart home a six-pack of Racer 5 only to make it easier to carry, but I don't
> seem to have that much difficulty handling and buying my share of 22s.

Plenty of 12oz Heavyweights here in PA.

Bill

On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 13:55:20 -0000, Dan Iwerks
> wrote:

>Flying Dog has been sticking half-ass beers inside cool-labeled bottles
>for years, and most beer geeks I know consider them to be one of the
>crappiest widely-distributed micros around.

I agree, I got bought one six of the IPA after looking at the bottle.
It was totally flavorless.

Bill Bradley > wrote:
>Steve Jackson wrote:
>> Bottle size has zero correlation to business success. Rogue seems to be
>> getting on just fine selling nothing but bombers. Stone sells primarily
>> bombers too. Same with AleSmith, and IIRC Heavyweight. Yeah, I'd like to
>> cart home a six-pack of Racer 5 only to make it easier to carry, but I don't
>> seem to have that much difficulty handling and buying my share of 22s.
>
> Plenty of 12oz Heavyweights here in PA.

Rogue also bottles in 12-ouncers now. But yeah, for a
long time bottled Rogue beers were only available in 22's
or those goofy (7-ounce?) nips.
--
Joel Plutchak "Never argue with a fool; people watching might not
plutchak at [...] be able to tell the difference." (author unknown)

>>You know, I don't have a problem with not having *definite* lines of
>>demarcation between some beer styles- I think it's sort of natural that
>>there's an overlap between certain styles (Pale Ale > IPA > AIPA), etc.

Yeah I don't mind either, and it is natural. I just think that if you
slip styles based largely on "strength" (define that how you will) and
if the more-or-less given progression is porter -> stout -> imperial
stout then where is the imperial porter? Wouldn't it just be another
name for stout? That's why I thought it was silly, sort of like Stone
with their Imperial Mild or whatever it was they had a while back. And
didn't Avery make an Imperial Marzen or some such? Bah! I think I'll go
petition Adam Avery for an Imperial Small Beer!

_Randal

"Randal" > sings of arms, the man, and Usenet
oups.com:

>>>You know, I don't have a problem with not having *definite* lines of
>>>demarcation between some beer styles- I think it's sort of natural
>>>that there's an overlap between certain styles (Pale Ale > IPA >
>>>AIPA), etc.
>
> Yeah I don't mind either, and it is natural. I just think that if you
> slip styles based largely on "strength" (define that how you will) and
> if the more-or-less given progression is porter -> stout -> imperial
> stout then where is the imperial porter? Wouldn't it just be another
> name for stout? That's why I thought it was silly, sort of like Stone
> with their Imperial Mild or whatever it was they had a while back. And
> didn't Avery make an Imperial Marzen or some such? Bah! I think I'll
> go petition Adam Avery for an Imperial Small Beer!

Yeah, Avery did The Kaiser, an Imperial Oktoberfest. Tasted a lot like
a regular Oktoberfest. With a shot of wood grain alcohol dropped into
it.

Stone already did an Imperial Mild for their 7th or 8th Anniversary brew
(can't remember which). I've had lots of Imperial Milds. I just tend
to call them "Brown Ale". --
************************************************** ***************
Dan Iwerks is mighty in the ways of cheese.
The fundamental problem with Solipsism is it makes me
responsible for the fact that you're a complete idiot.
************************************************** ***************

"Randal" > wrote in message
>>>You know, I don't have a problem with not having *definite* lines of
>>>demarcation between some beer styles- I think it's sort of natural that
>>>there's an overlap between certain styles (Pale Ale > IPA > AIPA), etc.
>
> Yeah I don't mind either, and it is natural. I just think that if you
> slip styles based largely on "strength" (define that how you will) and
> if the more-or-less given progression is porter -> stout -> imperial
> stout then where is the imperial porter? Wouldn't it just be another
> name for stout?

Well, first off, "imperial stout" was originally called "imperial porter."
Truth, you can look at pictures of the old labels, and even if you don't
read Cyrillic it obviousy says "PORTER." So isn't stout just another name
for porter? And as far as the "more-or-less given progression," do us all a
favor now, and just toss that out the window while we're taking a turn on a
mountain road. It's not that easy. Because then you have the lager-brewed
"Baltic" porters, that range anywhere from 5.5% to 9.5%, and taste like a
trainwreck between a doublebock and an imperial stout. That, I think, is
more where this one fits, although it's apparently ale-brewed (as are a few
examples of Baltic porters, actually).
In short, there are more beers in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in
your philosophy...and the whole porter/stout thing is only a beginning. I've
got a piece on the porter/stout divide coming out next month at
www.beveragebusiness.com, give it a look.
--
Lew Bryson

"GOOD or SHITE?" -- Michael Jackson, "Thriller", 1982
www.lewbryson.com

: Yeah, Avery did The Kaiser, an Imperial Oktoberfest. Tasted a lot like
: a regular Oktoberfest. With a shot of wood grain alcohol dropped into
: it.



"wood grain alcohol"? What the heck is that? Wood alcohol is methyl
alcohol, grain alcohol is ethyl alcohol. There's no such thing as "wood
grain alcohol".

In article .com>,
says...

[...]

> I agree that Flying Dog used to be mediocre to crappy at best and I
> always wondered how they survived. I tried most of their range years
> ago when they first appeared in Dallas and was underwhelmed to say the
> least.

Flying Dog only just recently appeared in my market (Victoria BC) - I
bought a six pack of the pale ale and thought it was quite good.

[...]

> The pale ale was citrusy and crisp, not the flaccid uninspired
> concoction that I remembered.

That was my impression - nicely hopped, crisp balanced American pale
ale. Sure there are several locally made ales that I prefer, but based
on what I tasted I'd have no hesitation buying this again.

Glad I didn't have to try it when it was a 'flaccid uninspired
concoction' - I've had way too many of those already!

--
Bill

In article .com>,
says...

> Yeah I don't mind either, and it is natural. I just think that if you
> slip styles based largely on "strength" (define that how you will) and
> if the more-or-less given progression is porter -> stout -> imperial
> stout then where is the imperial porter? Wouldn't it just be another
> name for stout?

Usually I tend to think of Stouts as using roast barley and porters
using black malt for their colour/roastiness, but I realize that's a
huge simplification and there are commercial beers that don't follow
that. Still, it's *usually* a decent rule of thumb. Likewise, while your
ordering of strength is probably generally pretty good, there are lots
of exceptions.

> That's why I thought it was silly, sort of like Stone
> with their Imperial Mild or whatever it was they had a while back.

Imperial mild does sound pretty silly, and to tell the truth I'm getting
a tad tired of the "Imperial" trend - though, there are (and have been)
some British milds that are fairly strong.

It seems to me that generally (at least in the UK) milds are ales that
emphasize malt, but they don't actually have to be "mild". Just like
Bitter isn't necessarily very bitter; it's just that hops usually are
the dominant character.

--
Bill

"Lew Bryson" > wrote:
> then you have the lager-brewed "Baltic" porters, that range anywhere
> from 5.5% to 9.5%, and taste like a trainwreck between a doublebock
> and an imperial stout.

That sounds too negative to describe the taste of a fine Baltic
porter. I'd like to think of it more as two trains making sweet,
beautiful love...

PS -- anyone brewed an "Imperial Light Ice NA" yet?
--
//*================================================= ===============++
|| Russ Perry Jr 2175 S Tonne Dr #114 Arlington Hts IL 60005 ||
|| 847-952-9729 [NEW!] VIDEOGAME COLLECTOR! ||
++================================================ ================*//

>>In short, there are more beers in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in
>>your philosophy...and the whole porter/stout thing is only a beginning. I've
>>got a piece on the porter/stout divide coming out next month at
>>www.beveragebusiness.com, give it a look.

Heh, will do. Sounds interesting - I've never had a Baltic porter and I
hope Okocim makes it to Co. (or I make it somehwere where it is).

_Randal

Steve Jackson wrote:
> "grifty" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>
>
>>I still think Bear Republic is the best stout you can get in CO but I
>>don't know if Bear Republic is going to sink or swim.
>
>
> Eh? Bear Republic's been around a long time, and I don't think they're going
> anywhere for a while.
>
>
>>Remember Pyramid
>>started out in bombers too and then they went mainstream 6 packs. Hope
>>Bear will too.
>
>
> IMO, Pyramid is not a brewery to hold up as an example for anything
> positive.
>
> Bottle size has zero correlation to business success. Rogue seems to be
> getting on just fine selling nothing but bombers. Stone sells primarily
> bombers too. Same with AleSmith, and IIRC Heavyweight. Yeah, I'd like to
> cart home a six-pack of Racer 5 only to make it easier to carry, but I don't
> seem to have that much difficulty handling and buying my share of 22s.

I rather like the 22, if you're thirsty it fully satisfies, and if
you're driving it's a better place to stop than 2x16. Far better if
you're drinking a robust brew.

--
-bill davidsen )
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
last possible moment - but no longer" -me

I thought similarly of Flying Dog until I tasted their Wild Dog Double IPA.
That excellent beer changed my mediocre opinion of the brewery. I also
tried the Gonzo recently. i wasn't overly impressed, but then again i'm not
a huge fan of imperial porters.

In my mind, when it comes to craft brewers it's the consumer's own loss if
they're not willing to give a brewery another shot. If they're putting the
effort to improve their recipes and brew new and interesting style-beers and
you're going to hold a grudge against them on "philosophical grounds"
because you weren't impressed with their previous offerings, then too bad
you lose. more good beer for the rest of us. sounds like you were taken by
a classic case of don't judge a book by its cover. just because a bottle
has a cool label doesn't mean you'll like the beer inside.
"Dan Iwerks" > wrote in message
...
> "grifty" > sings of arms, the man, and Usenet
> ups.com:
>
>> It's great. Not too heavy but still 9.5%. It's a tribute beer to the
>> late great Hunter Thompson. It comes in 4 packs - get it while you can.
>> I still think Bear Republic is the best stout you can get in CO but I
>> don't know if Bear Republic is going to sink or swim. Remember Pyramid
>> started out in bombers too and then they went mainstream 6 packs. Hope
>> Bear will too. In the meantime check out Hunter's stout.
>
> I've heard decent things about the new Flying Dog (I believe it's
> actually a big porter), but I object to it on philosophical grounds.
> Flying Dog has been sticking half-ass beers inside cool-labeled bottles
> for years, and most beer geeks I know consider them to be one of the
> crappiest widely-distributed micros around. Then they decide to make
> some imperial thing and suddenly people sit up and notice. It's almost
> like all you have to do is dump a shitload of malt and/or hops into the
> brew kettle and you suddenly transform from an at best marginal brewer
> into a genius.
> --
> ************************************************** ***************
> Dan Iwerks is mighty in the ways of cheese.
> The fundamental problem with Solipsism is it makes me
> responsible for the fact that you're a complete idiot.
> ************************************************** ***************

"Russ Perry Jr" > wrote in message
...
> "Lew Bryson" > wrote:
>> then you have the lager-brewed "Baltic" porters, that range anywhere
>> from 5.5% to 9.5%, and taste like a trainwreck between a doublebock
>> and an imperial stout.
>
> That sounds too negative to describe the taste of a fine Baltic
> porter. I'd like to think of it more as two trains making sweet,
> beautiful love...

Steamfreak...

--
Lew Bryson

"As for talking shit in this NG, Lew, you're the undisputed king, and
that's no SHITE." -- Bob Skilnik, 1/31/02

www.lewbryson.com

"Randal" > wrote in message
oups.com...

> Heh, will do. Sounds interesting - I've never had a Baltic porter and I
> hope Okocim makes it to Co. (or I make it somehwere where it is).

A better hope would be for Okocim to start selling their porter again. It's
not sold in the States anymore, and I'm pretty certain (but not 100 percent
positive) they don't even make it anymore. Which is sad. It was a truly
great beer.

-Steve

Steve Jackson wrote:

>
> A better hope would be for Okocim to start selling their porter again.

http://www.stawskidistributing.com/news.html

"jesskidden" > wrote in message
...
> Steve Jackson wrote:
>
>>
>> A better hope would be for Okocim to start selling their porter again.
>
> http://www.stawskidistributing.com/news.html

Well, that's good news indeed.

Although, it's now well past May 2005.

-Steve

"Steve Jackson" > wrote in message
news:jdgLe.1817$Rp5.1348@trnddc03...
> "jesskidden" > wrote in message
>> Steve Jackson wrote:
>>> A better hope would be for Okocim to start selling their porter again.
>> http://www.stawskidistributing.com/news.html
>
> Well, that's good news indeed.
>
> Although, it's now well past May 2005.

It's out, had some last month. Wow. Like coming home. More milk chocolate
character than I remember, but WHAM-damn, that stuff's good.

--
Lew Bryson

"As for talking shit in this NG, Lew, you're the undisputed king, and
that's no SHITE." -- Bob Skilnik, 1/31/02

www.lewbryson.com

"Lew Bryson" > wrote in message
...

> It's out, had some last month. Wow. Like coming home. More milk chocolate
> character than I remember, but WHAM-damn, that stuff's good.

Damn. No sightings of it yet out here in LA.

I'm now missing the crappy little liquor store under the Addison Red Line
stop near my old place in Chicago that had an abundant selection of cases of
the usual Bud/Miller/Coors suspects and, oh yeah, plenty of Okocim and
Sinebrychoff.

-Steve

Steve Jackson wrote:

> Rogue seems to be
> getting on just fine selling nothing but bombers.

They've been packaging some of their beers in 12 oz bottles for at
least seven or eight years.

"Kenji" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Steve Jackson wrote:
>
>> Rogue seems to be
>> getting on just fine selling nothing but bombers.
>
> They've been packaging some of their beers in 12 oz bottles for at
> least seven or eight years.

I remember 7 oz nips for quite a while, but the 12 ouncers have been recent,
in least in terms of what I've seen.

Of course, when I first posted that, I'd forgotten about the 12s, and I'd
forgotten that I've seen them for at least a couple years. And there are
also plenty of things that seem like they happened recently that turned out
have happened something like five years ago. So you may be right. Just
because it seems recent to me doesn't mean much, apparently.

However, I'm pretty certain the Bear Republic I'm drinking right now comes
only in bombers or kegs, and they seem to be getting by just fine. Which is
good. I think I'd actually cry if Racer 5 vanished from the face of the
earth.

-Steve

Steve Jackson wrote:
> "Kenji" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > Steve Jackson wrote:
> >
> >> Rogue seems to be
> >> getting on just fine selling nothing but bombers.
> >
> > They've been packaging some of their beers in 12 oz bottles for at
> > least seven or eight years.
>
> I remember 7 oz nips for quite a while, but the 12 ouncers have been recent,
> in least in terms of what I've seen.

Rogue's imperial stout and a few others have fairly recently (in the
past few years) begun to appear in 12 ounce bottles. But I used to see
several of their beers -- Younger's Bitter, American Amber, Honey Cream
Ale, etc. -- in 12 ounce bottles as long ago as 1994 or 1995.

> Of course, when I first posted that, I'd forgotten about the 12s, and I'd
> forgotten that I've seen them for at least a couple years. And there are
> also plenty of things that seem like they happened recently that turned out
> have happened something like five years ago. So you may be right. Just
> because it seems recent to me doesn't mean much, apparently.
>
> However, I'm pretty certain the Bear Republic I'm drinking right now comes
> only in bombers or kegs, and they seem to be getting by just fine. Which is
> good. I think I'd actually cry if Racer 5 vanished from the face of the
> earth.

Yeah, I have only seen the Bear Republic beers bottled in bombers. I
like their Hop Rod Rye.