Bad Beer Reviews- Ithaca Cascazilla

One of my favorite beers that I discovered when we went to Ithaca, was Ithaca Brewing Cascazilla.  Sure, everyone knows Flower Power, and rightfully so, it is delicious, but Cascazilla became a quick go to beer for me there.  It was on tap at most places and was absolutely delicious.

Today, I got to thinking about it, so I decided to see what the fine people on BA and RB had to say about it.  I have no problem with people not liking beer that I like. It is just when you see somethings in a review that don't add up:

1) Purchased as variety pack from Westy's in Mechanicsburg, PA.
A- a dirt red cloudy appearance.
S- N/A
T- very dry and bad aftertaste
M-It felt like i was eating powder
D-i put it down but i wont have another.
I am just not a very big fan of Red Ales and that might be the case of the poor review but i really did not enjoy this beer and will not be having it again.
I feel that it is probably a good chance that this review states why it might be a "poor review".  They knew what they were getting into, and choose to give it bad marks because they don't like red ales.

2)Bottle acquired through trade with jchow79 and poured into standard curved shaker pint glass.
A: Pours a very deep orange, almost *brown*... very dark for an IPA. Frothy off-white head, about 1 finger in size, sits on top.
S: Very malty-sweet and earthy, with a mild scent of pine hops.
T: Earthy flavors and the taste of sweet-and-sour sugars that I find to be so prevalent in East Coast IPAs. Some pine bitterness on the back end. For me, the sugars are just overpowering. What I want out my IPA is lots of hops. Bitter hops, oily grapefruit presence, citrus hops, ect. This beer just doesn't have much of any of that.
M: Reasonably good carbonation and lots of tongue coating with the sugars and hops.
D: This isn't my kind of IPA. Just not enough bitterness or grapefruit hops in them for my liking.
This beer reminds me a lot of a Dogfish IPA, particularly 90 Minute. A lot of my friends love Dogfish 90. I'd recommend this beer to any of them. But much like Dogfish 90 (and most East Coast IPAs, for that matter), this one just isn't for me.
This person chose to rate and review this red ale as an IPA. I would have given it an F as an IPA too. On the label it says "Red Ale". Sure it has a lot of hops in it for a red ale, but that doesn't make it an IPA.

3)Excited I finally found single of this.
Appearance - Heavier on the brown side than I expected. No real hints of red at all. Just sort of a dirty sour looking caramel. Chunks of yeast floating around everywhere.
Smell - Smells like your standard red ale. Slightly sour with hints of caramel. Just sort of plain, honestly.
Taste - Slightly sour with hints of light fruits. A zesty citrus that seems slightly skunked. very musty tasting.
Mouthfeel /Drinkability - As stated, quite musty. Drinkability is high. But there were actually solid chunks of yeast that got stuck in my teeth. It just sort of tastes like a musty, slight sour and mellowed red ale. On my list of red ales, this is very low.
Sure, I am weird and a beer nerd, but I would have not reviewed a non-bottle conditioned beer if there were solid chunks of yeast in it.  I would have probably sent Ithaca an email with the bottle number/lot number whatever I could find to let them know.  Skunk, Must and Floaties are all bad signs that do not normally happen from a respected brewery.

These are the types of reviews that kill trustworthy reviewers.  As I have said in the past, I think we should just post the reviews and not worry about a rating system.  There was one other review that was under a C, but his was straight forward, with a good review.

I urge people to keep reviewing beers, that is helpful when searching for something new, but think about what you typed before you click post.

I don't know why some people post ratings

Another Gem from Beer Advocate.

Backstory: I asked All-Star Czech Beer man- Alistair Reece- what are his favorite Czech lagers found in the US. He replied with a couple beers I have had, Budvar and Zatec, and with a couple I have not heard of, Primator and Czech Rebel.  Czech Rebel sounded intreging, so I decided to look it up.  See what others had to say.

Now, I do not expect everyone to like every beer style. But I take Fuggled's taste to be pretty accurate of the Czech stuff.  This reviewer states that they do not have a liking for pilsners.  But then to review it poorly, simply because it isn't your cup o' tea, is even worse:

look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Loved the name if the beer. It made me wanna try it which is good for the brewery. But as I sat down to enjoy this brew I realized that I really can't get into pilasters too much. So I sat there trying to toss back a rather large bottle of beer for myself. Clear yellow and grassy and a fluffy head on this one.

 Just to think about the "Look" score.  He states that it is "Clear yellow and grassy and a fluffy head", what more could you ask for? If that is true, shouldn't it be given a "5"?

I have no problem with people who rate to taste, instead of staying strictly on style- for beers that are brewed away from style.  But this seems like a classic example of a pilsner, which is it how he should have rated it. Don't expect an hazy, amber beer with no head.  This has me riled.

As I have stated before, I hate the review sites- for their rating systems.  I like to see what people like about beers, hate about beers and whatnot.  But to me there is no reason this beer should have been given a D- by this guy, simply based on his description of what it looks like.

(I could go on and on, but it is time for me to end my rant.)