For competitions I don’t know how you’d improve on the GABF/WBC format, with the possible exception of giving judges larger portions, fewer beers to judge and more time. Things that just aren’t practical.

There’s value in identifying the attention-getters (and I’m not saying those are the only ones that win in competititons – look at Firestone Walker).

And there’s value in finding critics – like Lynch on wines, if you like his taste (remembering he is first a merchant) – who help you find those “other” beers.

As you say, and as I will be the last one to refute, blind table judging has a lot of inherent faults. Agreed.

But the question that remains unanswered, is this: then how will we better it? Because, the “environment” that Mr. Lynch describes, is one which is impossible to judge in.

Wine (beer) A might be perfectly comparable to wine (beer) B, but will go completely in the mist combined with food X. Whilst A might stand out with food Y, and B might not.

Personally, I’ve never been very hot towards the food-beer pairing that seems to become a must with today’s beerwriters. I pair food with beer – nearly unthinking. It has to go naturally, IMO.

Anyway, good notes.

Joris