Writing useful feedback on a beer scoresheet
A brewer pays an entry fee, ships bottles and waits weeks for a scoresheet. Too often it says little more than a number. Here is how to write comments that describe what you tasted, explain the likely cause and suggest a fix.
The scoresheet is a letter to the brewer
The BJCP scoresheet splits 50 points across five sections: aroma 12, appearance 3, flavour 20, mouthfeel 5 and overall impression 10. The number tells the brewer where the beer landed. The comments tell them what to do next. Most entrants read the comments first and keep them for years.
That changes how you should write. A judge has perhaps eight to ten minutes per beer in a flight, so the sheet has to be efficient. But every line should pass one test: could the brewer change something on brew day because of it? If not, cut it or sharpen it. Our guide to the BJCP scoresheet walks through each box.
Describe, then diagnose, then prescribe
Good feedback follows three steps in order:
- Describe what you perceive, with intensity. 'Moderate buttery aroma, slick mouthfeel' is better than 'diacetyl'.
- Diagnose the likely cause, tentatively. 'This may be diacetyl from a short fermentation or a lager not given a diacetyl rest.'
- Prescribe a fix the brewer can try. 'Hold at 18 to 20 °C for two days at the end of fermentation, then check before crashing.'
Describing first keeps you honest. If you jump straight to a fault name, you may be wrong. Worse, the brewer cannot tell what you actually tasted. Describing in plain words also helps a brewer who does not know the jargon.
Use intensity words and be specific
A sheet full of yes or no observations is hard to use. Add intensity: none, low, moderate, high. Add the type: is the hop aroma citrus, pine, floral or earthy? Is the malt bready, toasty, caramel or roasty?
Compare these two aroma notes for the same English bitter:
- 'Malty, some hops. OK.'
- 'Moderate biscuity malt, low earthy hops, light fruity esters. Clean, no diacetyl. Hops could be a touch higher for the style.'
The second takes twenty seconds longer and gives the brewer a real picture. It also shows you checked for the common fault and found nothing, which is useful news in itself.
Tie every comment back to the style
Competitions judge to style. A comment that does not mention the style leaves the brewer guessing whether you disliked the beer or whether it missed the target. 'Roast is too sharp' means something different in an American stout than in a sweet stout.
Keep the guidelines open, quote the relevant expectation and say where the beer sits against it: 'Bitterness is higher than expected for a Munich helles, which should be gently bitter with malt in front.' If the beer is a lovely example of a different style, say that too. It may simply have been entered in the wrong category.
Name the good things
Brewers need to know what to keep as well as what to change. If the head retention is excellent, write it. If fermentation is impeccably clean, say so. Positive notes tell the brewer which parts of the process are working, so they do not change the wrong thing.
Tone matters too. Write as you would speak to a brewer standing at the table. Avoid sarcasm, jokes at the beer's expense and vague insults such as 'undrinkable'. Even a badly infected beer deserves a calm description and a hint about sanitation.
Make the score and the comments agree
The most common complaint from entrants is a sheet where the comments sound positive but the score is 24, or the comments list faults but the score is 38. Read your sheet back before handing it in.
As a rough guide on the BJCP scale: 45 to 50 is outstanding, 38 to 44 excellent, 30 to 37 very good, 21 to 29 good, 14 to 20 fair and 0 to 13 problematic. If you write 'excellent example, minor hop fade', a score in the low 20s will confuse the brewer. Our guide to how beer judges score covers the bands.
Prescriptions need process knowledge
Describing a fault is a palate skill. Prescribing a fix is a brewing skill. You need to know that acetaldehyde often points to beer pulled off yeast too early, that DMS links to a weak or covered boil and that a cardboard note means oxygen pick-up after fermentation.
Many new judges stop at description because they are not sure of the cause. That is honest. It is also better than guessing wildly. But the sheets brewers treasure come from judges who can taste a fault and connect it to the brewhouse. That link, from the glass back to the process, is exactly what structured sensory training builds.
Your first step: take your last three scoresheets, or three beers you taste this week. Rewrite one comment on each in describe, diagnose, prescribe order.
Common questions
How many points are on a BJCP scoresheet?
Fifty: aroma 12, appearance 3, flavour 20, mouthfeel 5 and overall impression 10.
What makes scoresheet feedback useful?
Specific descriptions with intensity, a likely cause and a practical fix the brewer can try, all related to the style being judged.
Should judges mention positives?
Yes. Brewers need to know which parts of their process are working so they do not change them by mistake.
What if I am not sure what caused a fault?
Describe what you taste clearly and say the cause is uncertain. An honest description is more useful than a confident wrong diagnosis.
