Hop Stoopid - Lagunitas Brewing Company

HOPOLOGIST

California

1.53/5  rDev -63.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1

A-Poured a reddish-orange hue and the head vanished instantly.

S-After reading the bottle I expected to pick up only the horrible hop extract smell but i got some pine and citrus scents surprisingly. There was a little too much of that sweet smell that I did however expect. Im not sure if that was from the malt or the extract. Probably a little of both.

T-Horrific. I should have known due to the hop extract but with all the great reviews on beer advocate I had to give it a shot. Horribly disappointing considering the hops I sniffed earlier. I was blasted with a rancid sweet sharp cheddar flavor that never left my tongue. The sweetness covered up any piney citrus flavors that could have been there.The closest citrus I was able to pick up was a little sour and rotten grapefruit. I was hoping for some crisp clean pine but didn't get it.

M- Thin.

D-I did not enjoy drinking this beer. The bad flavors were so overpowering I had to pour it out. it is at the bottom of my list out of all of the Imperial IPAs I have had so far. It actually reminds me of some of the flavors I picked up in pruno. I got a fresh bottle that was delivered to the store the same day. Therefore I know it is the beer and not a bad bottle.

Sharp
Sour
Rotten
No citrus
No pine

Serving type: bottle

06-30-2009 18:22:11 | More by HOPOLOGIST

brewnickbrew

Ohio

1.95/5  rDev -53.7%
look: 2 | smell: 4 | taste: 1 | feel: 4 | overall: 1

This beer left me thinking: "What am I missing here"
Everyone seems to like this beer. What I got out of it was
A leafy, pungent smelliness. Couldn't figure out if it was malt based, or Hop based. Then I read that they use hop extract. Could this be the nastiness I experienced?
I dumped mine out after 4-5 sips trying to figure this beer out.
I love IPA's and IIPA's. This just seemed really funky to me.
I'm going to go back and buy another so that I can try and enjoy this beer.

Serving type: bottle

10-14-2010 14:13:27 | More by brewnickbrew

hopfacebrew

Colorado

1.95/5  rDev -53.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

This is my 2nd pass at Hop Stoopid. I tried it about a year ago based on recommendations of trust worthy beer friends and really didn't care for it. Perhaps I got a bad bottle or something last time. Figured it was time to give it another shot!

Poured from 22oz brown bomber to pint glass.

A - The beer pours an orange/amber color. Clear with a 1 finger creamy head. Not much retention and decent lacing.

S - A strong tarty grapefruit nose. Very strong hop character and not much else.

T - The hops again dominate the palette. The tart grapefruit meets onion flavors with the powerful hop character. Absolutely no malt character detected. It tastes like sucking on a onion that's been soaking in grapefruit juice.

M - Full bodied mouthfeel though underwhelming for the style.

D - Not really at all.

Overall, this is two passes through the same beer with the same reaction a year apart. I understand people like this beer but I certainly don't. I will not buy it again. I like the price but there are way too many other much better DIPA options out there to waste any more time with this.

Note: This review was a re-post from my former account, jmkratt, which was hacked and I lost all my reviews...sorry for the redundancy.

Serving type: bottle

Reviewed on: 02-17-2011 16:59:01

Serving type: bottle

01-27-2012 14:57:33 | More by hopfacebrew

silentjay

Massachusetts

2.38/5  rDev -43.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

have had this before, didnt really like it too much, but figured id give it another shot.

22oz. bomber from the legendary julios.

pours light copper, average head with plenty of lacing left of the glass. poured into a sam adams perfect pint glass which produces a very,very small stream of bubbles. not too impressive.

smells of hops, yah, but artificial... if that makes sense. maybe its extract or syrup or something like that (i really dont know how to describe it). smells like hops, but not quite. bit of citrus, bit of herbs, but more medicinal and artificial than anything.

tastes like syrup. hop syrup. like someone went into a lab and tried to chemically reproduce the hop flavor but was just a bit off. has an almost herbal aftertaste that is most unpleasant.

carbonation is fine, feels ok on the tongue. not impressed nor disappointed by the mouthfeel.

drinkability is in question. the syrup-y, artificial flavor does not do justice to the wonders of the hop. there are redeeming qualities to the beer, but they stay too far in the background for me to look foward to the 10oz i have left of the bomber. the alcohol is hidden enough, but the extract/artificial flavor really hinders the drinkability for me.

i have given this brew a few chances, and i hate to say i probably wont visit this brew again. lagunitas has impressed me with quite a few of their beers and im sure id rather their maximus ipa to this. not for me. though i wish it was.

Serving type: bottle

09-15-2009 04:14:44 | More by silentjay

donkeyrunner

Massachusetts

2.4/5  rDev -43%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

My Dad's pick in the father vs. son beer battle.

Solid gold like touched by Goldmember. Very clear. Good retention and lace from an initially thin head.

Mainly malt aroma. Some minty passion fruit in there but not enough to float my boat.

Taste is similarly lacking in hop flavor. Lots of malt and plenty swampy, pine syrup bitter but no really flavor. I DIPA with this little hop flavor and aroma is in fact hop stupid IMO. Cloying sweetness and unappealing bitter.

I hate the spelling of stupid with two os. This applies to both Lagunitas Hop Stoopid and the Southern California band Slightly Stoopid. I do like the band Slightly Stoopid though. I don't like Hop Stoopid. I declare myself battle winner.

Serving type: bottle

09-16-2012 23:21:59 | More by donkeyrunner

PacNWDad

Washington

2.48/5  rDev -41.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

I love hops and understand the appeal of a beer with a ridiculous amount of hops. Love the 120 Minute offering for example. But this is just over the top. It has so much hops that it actually gets kinda skunky. Some people may like hops so much that this is tolerable, but not me.

Serving type: bottle

01-09-2012 02:15:15 | More by PacNWDad

fastsrt

New York

2.55/5  rDev -39.4%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

poured 22 ounce bottle in a wine glass

A: clear; loose white head of foam thats laces the glass on the way down

S: sweetness, pine hops

T: tastes like dirt, piny earthy hops take over,I don't know the age of this beer the code on the neck is 2684311

M: standard

D: Passed this beer up many of times I have had quite a few of lagunitas beers and have not been impressed by many. this is no exception.

Serving type: bottle

03-01-2011 05:55:19 | More by fastsrt

adamette

Ohio

2.58/5  rDev -38.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Live review. Poured from a 22 oz. bomber into my Cooperstown Beverage Trail pint glass. Purchased for $5.99 at Beverage Warehouse on Mayfield Road in Cleveland last Tuesday. No observed freshness date.

A Kinda basic orange/light brown translucent body under a nice creamy head that has the consistency of meringue. Lacing is moderate on the side of the glass.

S Well, hops. Grapefruit tartness to the nose without much balance. It certainly delivers on the hops, wonder if the taste will offer any balance.

T Surprisingly basic DIPA taste of unbalanced hops. Overripe grapefruit predominate and stay with me for more than 3 minutes after I sip. There is very little balance here.

M Big feel to this beer with the huge hops and elevated ABV. The feel is average for the style, though.

D Not good. I will finish the bomber (in the interest of scientific process and investigation) but I would have preferred to share this bomber with another Beer Advocate. That being said, I think that the drinkability is about average for the style.

Serving type: bottle

08-03-2009 03:23:50 | More by adamette

mdaschaf

Washington

2.58/5  rDev -38.7%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Thanks to forgetfu! Beer was bottled on June 15th..hopefully 2010.

A: Pours a light gold with orange/amber highlights. Nice thick one finger head dissipates slowly to some foam on top. Very nice lacing left on the glass.

S: Don't get much in the way of hops, a little bit of citrus. I do get a buttery aroma and a little but of grainy malt.

T: A little more citrus here with some lemon. A little bit of grainy malts at the end.

M/D: On the thinner side. Its obvious the bottle is past its prime. Don't know the date, but wouldn't be surprised if it was 2009. Very sad, hopefully I can find a fresher bottle since this looks like a beer that is right up my alley.

Serving type: bottle

02-11-2011 01:26:09 | More by mdaschaf

DangQuesadilla

Illinois

2.58/5  rDev -38.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

I was amazed to find this at my local liqueur store. I paid $6 for a bomber. As I typically like Lagunitas I gave this a try. I won't be trying it anymore.

A- appeared crisp, nothing fancy
S- Smelled of lots of hops... but I wouldn't say overly hoppy
T- It tasted like my mouth was full of copper pennies. I couldn't finish this bottle
M- Horrible. I regretted every sip.

Overall, not very good. I will stick with the other Lagunitas.

Serving type: bottle

06-07-2011 00:00:42 | More by DangQuesadilla

JohnNickel

District of Columbia

2.6/5  rDev -38.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Let's get to it. I didn't like this much; at least in comparison to the classic IPAs from Stone and Bells. I didn't get big citrus and pine. SOME sour grapefruit, but more sharp cheddar and sourness. Over the top hops with little malt--which is fine with me....when the hop taste is yummy. This was sharp, sour, but also bland. I have had a lot of citrus/piney IPAs and I don't get that from this brew like other reviewers did. I won't be revisiting this.

Serving type: bottle

02-25-2009 02:03:31 | More by JohnNickel

yeahnatenelson

Illinois

2.68/5  rDev -36.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

Appearance -- Bright amber with a finger of creamy white head.

Smell -- Grapefruit, cannabis, basement, caramel malt. Overall, citrusy and dank.

Taste -- Grapefruit, pine, lots of green onion and garlic. Baseline of hop bitterness throughout - hop extract? Caramel malt backbone trying to keep things together.

Mouthfeel -- Medium-full in body with ample carbonation.

Drinkability -- How is this so highly rated? Malting is adequate, but the hop profile is really far off. LOTS of onion and garlic; I left half of the glass at the bar. Funny how I remember this being so much better the times I've had it in the bottle...

Serving type: on-tap

11-06-2010 03:48:13 | More by yeahnatenelson

ithacabaron

California

2.8/5  rDev -33.5%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Displays a brillant sunset of color on the pour; everything from pale lemon to burnished, ripe peach is represented. Head is big, foamy, clumsy. Charming.

Aroma is thick and sweet, gobs of Golden Syrup and honey, tinned mandarin orange (including the can), stewed papaya, and fresh fig. No raw hop smell here -- this has been cooked and mingled, like a marmalade. Wish it didn't have that metallic note.

Taste is loaded up with booze and more cooked fruit. The papaya is outfront. No grass or green flavors whatsoever; it tastes almost rehydrated. Somewhere in there is a whisper of basil. Big cracking ribbons of tin can come flailing back on the swallow. After tasting it, I notice the label says this is made entirely with hop extracts. Maybe that's the culprit?

Mouthfeel is there, but pretty low. If you're going to make a beer this jammy, it's going to need more carbonation.

Overall, this is a largely unpleasant beer; the whole point of IPAs is to embrace the glory of the hop, the fleeting freshness that each batch provides. As, say, a California Old Ale, this would be passable. If you socked away a bottle or two of this for five years and forgot about it, I'd be fascinated to see what would happen; would the flavors round out? Would the booziness fade? Would that danged metallic flavor ever leave? I'm not going to test this hypothesis, mind you, but if anyone out there feels like doing so, knock yourself out.

The worst Double/Imperial IPA I've ever had? No. Not even close. But not pleasant, either.

Serving type: bottle

07-24-2011 02:43:19 | More by ithacabaron

beveritt

Ohio

2.88/5  rDev -31.6%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

P: Poured from a bomber into a standard pint glass. Label depicts a somewhat derelict looking barn with the phrase 104 IBU 4 U written above. No freshness date.

A: Pours with 2 1/2 fingers of very light tan head. this settles slowly to a rocky coating of foam, leaving behind substantial lacing. The beer itself is amber and perfectly clear, somewhat unusual for a 102 IBU beer. No sediment in the bottle.

Smell: Strong aroma of citrus and a bubblegum like sweetness.

Taste: Hop spiciness is not as forward in the taste as in the smell, somewhat subdued actually. Oily/greasy off flavors, reminds me of onion rings. Vegetable bitterness is noticeable, with a medium hop bitterness in the finish.

Mouthfeel: Average carbonation level. Body is okay.

Drinkability: Looks and smells great, but some strange off flavors. My wife likened them to old hops wrapped in wet newspaper. Would have been a drain pour for me, but I just gave my pint glass to her. Probably my first and only try sampling of this one.

Serving type: bottle

05-23-2009 18:41:59 | More by beveritt

scootpolute

Washington

2.88/5  rDev -31.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

A: A bit foamy at first, then a nice lacing...
S: Kind of average for a hoppy-type beer.
T: OK, for an Imperial IPA, kinda weak...and got more maltier, rather than hopier (which one hopes for in a double IPA)
M: Good and typical of the LaGunitas collection.
O: I had higher hopes being a LaGunitas beer. Being a 'fan,' was a little let down 'they' didn't throw down the 'goods' being as it's a double IPA. Bottom line, I'm glad I got a 22.oz instead of a 6 pk.

Serving type: bottle

06-05-2011 00:59:47 | More by scootpolute

sbxx

Illinois

2.9/5  rDev -31.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.25

Appearance - Clear golden honey. Very inviting. 1 finger of head settled very quickly.

Smell - Floral & citrus.

Taste - Blown away by the bitterness! As expected, at 102 IBU, they aren't kidding around with this one. Although that's nice, underlying flavors are few and far between. Some grapefruit-like flavor comes through, but that's about it. Sadly, this looks to be a one-trick pony (on the bright side, it is a cool trick).

Mouthfeel - Light carbonation. Thin but not weak. Finishes very clean & very dry. I like it.

Overall - I'd drink it again, but I won't be rushing out to buy it. Lagunitas makes other brews that I love, and I will stick with those.

Serving type: bottle

02-13-2013 06:44:57 | More by sbxx

garymuchow

Minnesota

2.93/5  rDev -30.4%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

Bottle given to me by my son for Christmas. Thanks big guy.
Fresh hop aroma with sweet grass and sweet citrus (especially a sweet grapefruit). Smells like sunshine :) One the sweeter aromas I've experiences. Minimal malt background.
Big full head. Very clear. Golden and reddish hue. Nice looking. Rocky head.
Full bitterness, but good malt sweetness and some fo the that sweet grapefruit character. There is a slight funky, cheesy swish in the taste (too bad). I know from experience that older hops can have this quality or if dry hopped too long. Extended finish.
Great mouth feel. Soft enough.
Limited drinkability due to the funky flavor issue noted. Too bad as all the other aspects of this beer were enjoyable to me. This could have been a tremendous beer.
I'll give it a go when next years batch comes around. Maybe the piece I don't like won't be there.

Serving type: bottle

01-10-2010 04:10:04 | More by garymuchow

ebin6

California

2.93/5  rDev -30.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

A - Pours with a light, fluffy head which did not stay throughout. Golden coloring, very transparent

S - An almost metallic smell which interfered with the hop smell

T - Decent, smooth hop taste, but nothing special. Just when it feels like the beer is about to take off, it falls flat

M - Solid; sticks around, settling on the back of the roof of my mouth, but again, the beer fizzles at the deciding moment when I expect it to really do something

D - Very drinkable, although for the price I feel there are better options

Serving type: bottle

04-05-2010 02:29:05 | More by ebin6

kcr357

Florida

2.93/5  rDev -30.4%
look: 4 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Not what I was expecting, poured a very nice golden copper with a coarse head.
Smelled fantastic, takes citrusy to a new level.
Hops come through in the taste, bitterness is on par, but there is both an oily and some kind of tar type undertone(fishy?)(undertone may be an understatement) that starts at the tongue and oozes down the palate. The more I try it the more I notice and dislike it. Had high hopes for this beer.
Mouthfeel is typical for a strong IPA, bitey and well carbonated.
Taste buds have evolved in order to help people identify what is/isn't ok to consume by analyzing the tastes present in food/drink. There is something in this beer setting off a "do not consume" signal going to my brain.
Not drinkable at all.

Serving type: bottle

04-29-2010 17:10:58 | More by kcr357

bifrostguard

California

2.95/5  rDev -29.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A-Poured a thin, reddish-orange body with a quickly dissipating off white head.

S-This was perhaps the best part of the beer with pine and citrus scents on the nose and some sweet smelling malt coming through on the second whiff.

T-Terribly disappointing after smelling all those aromatic hops. I love hops but this one failed to come through. The malt is really too much for me and leaves a rancid, sweet taste behind that overshadows the citrus and pine bitterness.

M-Just as it looks...a little thin.

D-I honestly didn't enjoy this beer, but would still gladly drink it over many others on the market.

Considering all the high marks this beer has received, I am wondering if this was a bad bottle. However, there are so many brilliant IPAs on the west coast that it is likely I will not give this a second try if there is something else available.

Serving type: bottle

09-07-2008 09:06:23 | More by bifrostguard

DrinkSlurm

Connecticut

2.95/5  rDev -29.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Poured from 22oz into tulip taster.
Pours copper color with good lacing.
Smells of hops.
Taste of big hop...slight malty but rrally big skunky funk.
I hate to say it, but I'm not a fan of this brew. Its got a very bitter aaftertaste and its somewhat hard to drink. It tastes like a batch gone bad. I really don't like this brew at all. Its to bitter...its too hoppy, and not balanced at all.
Gross brew from a great brewery.

Serving type: bottle

01-08-2012 04:15:05 | More by DrinkSlurm

spunionring

2.95/5  rDev -29.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

This is a pretty good IPA. A pretty decent hoppiness to it. The hops really hit strong up front on the sip, but less so in the aftertaste of the swallow than some beers. In particular, I found this to be a bit too carbonated for my taste. The tanginess of the citrus/grapefruit flavors also stand out a bit much, threatening to overwhelm the bitterness of the hops. A pretty tasty IPA, that isn't bad if you are looking for hop heavy beer, but not the full fledged hop heaviness you might expect from the name.

Serving type: bottle

03-31-2012 21:23:29 | More by spunionring

9InchNails

New Jersey

2.98/5  rDev -29.2%
look: 3 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

One pint six FL. OZ. Poured into a big beer mug.

White puffy head dissipates somewhat quickly. Yellow gold color a little bubbly. Thin lacing on the glass.

They ain't kidding with the hops. Spicy and citrus hops tickle the nose. A very distinct piney and grape smell.

Wow, bitterness bites the whole mouth immediately; a warning sensation goes down, even though the beer is quite cool in temperature. Light in body and bubbly in the mouth.

There is over the top bitter hoppiness. A metalic taste upfront that isn't too appealing. A taste of sour dry fruits like tangerines and grapes. It comes and goes with a metalic taste. It's certainly not the worse beer I've had and its a little less than decent.

Drink Ability is real low. I took a few sips had to back away for a little bit. The taste is too overpowering. This is a one beer and you're done situation.

I would like to try this on tap. I've found that beers that I didn't approve much of in a bottle actually was more pleasing on draft.

Serving type: bottle

11-30-2010 00:21:18 | More by 9InchNails

Hoptometrist

Oregon

3.03/5  rDev -28%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Served on tap into a Lagunita's mason jar at the Lagunita's Tasting Room

A- Poured a clear amber orange color with a one finger creamy head

S- Piney hops, grape/rasin, and citrus

T- Very highly hopped and very strong grape taste, not grapefruit or orange citrus, but grape. Very sweet and bitter, pretty extreme tasting.

M- Pretty smooth with pretty high carbonation

Overall this beer reminds of an extreme Great Laker Burning River. I get this strange grape flavor from them which I don't care for in an IPA. Pretty disappointed with this beer considering I really like their Maximus DIPA.

Serving type: on-tap

05-19-2011 02:14:27 | More by Hoptometrist

guyforget

Colorado

3.05/5  rDev -27.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I am not positive that I got a good one, however I have not ever tried this beer before to be able to compare. There is no "drink by" date on the bottle, and I bought it at a liquor store w/ very high turnover, even on their craft brews. But comparing my experience to others who I know that enjoy the style and love this beer makes me think that maybe mine is not so fresh.

Appearance is a nice clear coppery orange. Minimal head that dissipates quickly and leaves no lacing down my glass at all.

Smell is bland, relatively sweet, not hoppy. (First sign that this might not be fresh enough)

Taste is sweet, with a good dose of malt. Oddly tastes like honey. Hops are not up front and there is very little of the telltale citrus or pine notes. For a bottle that boasts 102 IBU, Im left wondering where the bitterness is. (Another sign that mine was not fresh enough)

Mouthfeel is good. Not overly carbonated, nicely smooth, but the sweetness is a little cloying for me. Maybe only because its so unexpected for the style.

Drinkability is not so high because when I buy an IIPA I expect certain characteristics that Im not finding in this bottle.

Having never had this specific beer before, but knowing that I love the style, I will need to try this again to determine if I got a not-so-fresh bottle, or if I just dont care for the beer as much as I expected that I would. I have read reviews of other BA's that I know have similar taste as I who reviewed this beer with high marks and comments that dont necessarily agree with my experience, so I will need to find one that is guaranteed fresh and compare my experiences.

Serving type: bottle

01-04-2010 07:30:38 | More by guyforget