We’ve published our Code. May I offer an amendment?
If a beer is less hoppy than an IPA and under 8% ABV, it is dead to me.
Also, the Commandress notes that we routinely violate #12 of the Aleheads Code, i.e., “If the name of the beer explains what kind of beer it is, you can’t drink it.” I propose that we modify #12 of our 101 Theses by making an exception for beer names with the word “hops” in them.
And yes, I tried to explain to her that we violate all of them, but she was being unreasonable, and I gave up.
13 thoughts on “GENTLEMEN, AN AMENDMENT”
I’m pretty sure I’m not going to stop drinking Lagunitas IPA anytime soon. Nor, for that matter, Green Flash STOUT (double stout).
Also, your new rule is dumb. You can live by it if you like, but it does not belong in the code. Hell, Orval is only like 6.2% ABV.
Tally my vote in the nay column.
I’ll admit that there are some beers that are exceptions to the rule. We could formalize some, like “Belgians.” I’ll also readily agree the rule isn’t for everyone.
That said, the two beers you selected as examples fit within the rule, unless Lagunitas IPA is less hoppy than an IPA, or the Green Flash Stout’s 8.8% ABV is less than 8%. (The Stout is also 45 IBU’s, which isn’t “less hoppy than an IPA.” So this one doesn’t meet EITHER criterion.)
I’ll cop to having been drinking when I wrote the rule, and I’m pleased to see you were also drinking when you tried to interpret it.
Or did you bring up those beers in response to my proposed exception to current Code #12, i.e., “If the name of the beer explains what kind of beer it is, you can’t drink it”? In that case I agree with you — the rule is more flawed than just beers containing the word “hops.” That said, under the Bro Code, in an argument between me and the Commandress, I wish you wouldn’t announce that she is right. Seriously!
There are some great porters that probably wouldn’t fit the definition either. Deschutes Black Butte Porter is 30 IBUs and 5.2%. But it’s fantastic.
Essentially your new rule is just a compound version of Rules #1 and #3…ergo, it’s perfectly acceptable. The key issue that Beerford seems to have misinterpreted is that you need to cap and bold the word “and” so that it’s not read as an either/or thing. As long as it’s understood that the beer in question is both low in hops AND less than 8% ABV, the rule is just fine. As you pointed out, Lagunitas IPA and the Green Flash Double Stout both meet the requirements. And while Orval may be under the 8% ABV threshold, it has an IBU somewhere between 30-40 which would make it as hoppy as many mild IPAs.
Of course, the REAL problem here is anyone taking the Code seriously. It’s meant to be a tongue-in-cheek manifesto from an unrepentant beer geek. Essentially, we were trying to capture in writing the way non-Aleheads view us. The joke behind Rule #12 (the “name of the beer” rule) was to point out that many craft beers have ridiculously convoluted names that have no bearing on what’s inside the bottle. For example, I crushed a four-pack of the delicious Tallgrass Buffalo Sweat yesterday (a beer which, I should point out, completely violates the Commanders amendment since it’s a 5% ABV milk stout with no bitterness at all).
Oh, absolutely agreed it’s not meant to be taken seriously. But fine–I will disclose my heretofore hidden agenda.
I DON’T LIKE ORDINARY PALE ALES. I’m sorry. I don’t know why I’m sorry, but I am. I don’t like any of them. Not Victory Headwaters, not Founders Pale Ale, not Phin & Matt’s, not Liberty Ale from Anchor. (I’m not including Dale’s Pale Ale, which is hoppier than many IPA’s.)
I also don’t love Porters, but I’m leaving myself room to grow in that direction.
I guess I just like big beers–almost to the exclusion of anything else. And that’s why I proposed adding this personal preference to the Aleheads Code. Because you f—ers do too.
This amendment has been tabled until the next Aleheads legislative session, currently scheduled for February, 2014.
Thanks for your submission!
For the record, I like “ordinary” pale ales.
I know you do. And you fool me every time. I need Aleheads to protect me from being taken in again by your adoration for bland beer.
Don’t worry- it’s just your unrefined palate. You’ll be able to appreciate them in time.
I’m actually somewhat in your camp, Commander. It’s not that I don’t like Pale Ales, but I rarely if ever order one in a bar or buy a sixer. I think you would legitimately like Three Floyds Alpha King, Commander. And you should definitely hold off on your verdict until you sample Kid Carboy’s favorite, the Daisy Cutter from Half Acre. But overall, I’m kind of with you. If I’m in the mood for a Pale Ale, I’m even MORE in the mood for an IPA or a DIPA. And if I just want something low-ABV and low-IBU, I’d probably prefer a Brown Ale, Porter, Stout, Sour, or even a few basic Red/Ambers.
You are correct that my two examples were in reference to (and objection to) current rule #12, though I grant that my response was incredibly ambiguous.
I stand by my statement that your new rule is dumb.
Also, chug for doubting the code.
I would always rather have an IPA than a pale ale…the jackass who does the ordering at my favorite local watering hole (ie the cheapest) has been a Northwest Pale Ales kick instead of IPAs lately. I like a Pale once in a while, but only once awhile.
That’s it… you APA haters can’t come to my cookout.