4th Anniversary Double IPA - Port Brewing Company / Pizza Port

ktrillionaire

Florida

1.9/5  rDev -47.4%
look: 1 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Thanks for the hook-up, jerz. It isn't your fault that this beer sucks.

Let me preface: I am shocked!, shocked!, to discover a carbonation issue in a Port/LA brew. As shocked as Claude Rains was when he discovered gambling at Bogart's club in the film Casablanca.

A - Pours a hazy orange hue, and despite being bottled just over two weeks ago, it is totally flat. Totally flat. There are like three soapy bubbles hanging out. As to lace, it goes without saying.

S - The smell is quite alcoholic and also strongly of fake peach flavoring, like that peach gummi candy they sell at the Dollar Store. Not good.

T - The taste is no better than the smell. Hot, gross, messy, saccharine sweet, and artificial tasting.

M - Cask in a bottle? What a novel idea. Blehhh.

D - I shared this debacle of a beer with others, and inexplicably, some people liked it. They must've been totally wasted!

Serving type: bottle

06-16-2010 03:44:18 | More by ktrillionaire

Radiodred

California

2.35/5  rDev -34.9%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 1 | overall: 2

What can I say but FLAT...Again. THis is starting to get annoying. Flat Abbey and Port make some of the best beers. But when I buy a & dollar beer in a bottle, it better be drinkable. The sad thing is that I loved the beer on tap. Couldn't wai to go get one to take home. But once agian...

Fix your bottleing line and your straight. I had a santas lil helper the other day and had to drain poor the damn thing. Guess I will stick to growlers and taps.

Serving type: bottle

06-25-2010 05:43:59 | More by Radiodred

Allpe45

Arizona

2.5/5  rDev -30.7%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

on tap at The Hungry Monk
Appears bright orange and slightly hazy, respectable but small head (I blame the pour), but little lacing after the head disperses.

Somewhat muted nose, tropical hops and solvent alcohol.

A wide range of hops in the taste, some tropical/critrusy hop flavors up front, oily/resinous hops in the middle, and plenty of medicinal hops and solvent alcohol burn. The finish resembles some kind of industrial strength cleaning product. This would be an amazing beer if not for the finish. It is definitely a hop bomb, but in an unpleasant way (i never thought it was possible).

Medium bodied with light yet prickly carbonation. The prickliness of the carbonation really pronounces the hop bite.

Despite the huge variety of hoppy flavors, I did not find this beer to be enjoyable. This is one that I would warn my friends to avoid unless a dare is involved. Luckily it is limited enough that they probably won't encounter it anyway.

Serving type: on-tap

04-30-2011 00:42:55 | More by Allpe45

4000qtrap

Missouri

2.68/5  rDev -25.8%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Source/Serving: 22oz bottle

S: Woody orange/lemon citrus oil. Mint. Weed. Light alcohol with enough of a peppery edge to impart a slight spice to the overall nose.

T: An oily citrus hop bomb with intense, but semi-smooth bitterness. Really huge all over but little depth or quality. Fairly heavy, full bodied and oily. Malt character is barely present and has a faint grainy quality. Alcohol is readily apparent but peppery and not too hot, qualifying it as one of the better qualities of this brew. Finishes heavy too…. Not very dry but not at all sweet due to advanced bitterness levels. Lingers a bit rough with a weedy, alcohol citrus oil blend. Drinkability, without regard to the 10% ABV, is very low.

Notes: Nose is nice and I like the woody, minty character that doesn't often make it into a DIPA. However, taste is lackluster and overdone with little dexterity. Far too heavy for me.

Serving type: bottle

06-29-2011 01:13:41 | More by 4000qtrap

Halcyondays

California

2.83/5  rDev -21.6%
look: 1.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 1 | overall: 3

22 oz. bomber,

A: Pours orange with a very limited head. Wisp of carbonation, but mostly just gloopy bubbles.

S: Nice notes of grapefruit, bitter melon.

T: White grapefruit pith, very bitter, light malt, overly bitter without the carbonation.

M: Flat, resiny, medium-bodied, needs carbonation for sure.

D: I bought this before I knew about the carbonation problems. This is unacceptable, a wasted $6.50, the 2nd was great, get the carbonation problems under control. I've never had an undercarbonated Port beer before, I've heard about it, I guess this was my first.

Serving type: bottle

05-30-2010 02:00:59 | More by Halcyondays

cjoc83

Pennsylvania

2.83/5  rDev -21.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Pours a hazy golden amber color, massive 3 finger head that dissipates after a while but leaves excellent lacing.

Wow...big grapefruit in the nose, pineapple, pine, floral hops...basically just a hops explosion. A little booziness.

Taste follows suit closely. Huge grapefruit rind and pineapple, very sweet in the beginning, but that quickly gives way to a bold and unforgiving bitterness that will undoubtedly polarize many an IPA fan. I myself find it to be a bit much. The tropical fruit flavors that I love are there, but it's clouded in a brew that is somehow cloyingly sweet, too bitter, and too hot. A lot of alcohol in the finish on this one.

Creamy mouthfeel with low carbonation, very hot finish, lots of alcohol. Seems very heavy, sits heavy in the stomach. This is kind of hard to drink.

Hmm. Part of me really wants to love this beer. A big, super hoppy DIPA. But it's all just a bit too much. Too much alcohol hotness, too much sweet malt in the start, way to bitter in the finish. It ends up tasting like solvent. It's taking me over 45 minutes just to finish about 12oz. It's drinkable, but not easy or even very enjoyable.

Serving type: bottle

09-06-2011 21:23:03 | More by cjoc83

pastradul

California

2.9/5  rDev -19.7%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 3

Went to a get together with some friends and they had bought this bottle. I already new about the carb problems but figured I would give it a shot. I have had thi out of a taster at Port and thought it was great, so lets see how this is...

Poured into a wide tulip glass.

zero head, minimal bubbles of any sort.

aroma, almost none existent with out the carb to help deliver the smell.

The mouthfeel is totally syrupy.

that taste isn't to bad. the huge amount of hops makes some flavor come through. but with out the carb this beer is very disapointing.

fished about 5oz of it and was glad others were splitting the beer as well.

Serving type: bottle

07-02-2010 20:09:43 | More by pastradul

mikey711

New Jersey

2.95/5  rDev -18.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

A: Pours a cloudy amber with loads of carbonation and a decent size head that retains well. it looks like it may be unfiltered because there is some sediment and it is very cloudy

S: Citrus fruit up front, some mango, pineapple and tangerine. also a bit of floralness. Some vanilla notes and a bit of caramel

T: For what this smelled like it tastes completely different. It is exceedingly boozy and sweet with a slightly astringent hop bitterness in the end

M: As stated, excessively boozy

D: Really disappointed with how this one ended up tasting. Not a drain pour but not satisfying at all.

Serving type: bottle

06-21-2010 22:55:43 | More by mikey711

Gobzilla

California

3/5  rDev -16.9%
look: 4 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 4

A: poured a murky orange with yellow hues with no head and no lacing. Already off to a bad start.

S: citrus piney hop aromas up front with no malt presence and orange juice like notes popping in the nose as well.

T: grapefruit hop bitternees with not much malt balance hints of celery,booze, and orange zest.

M: medium body with absolutely no carbonation and has a mild bitter finish.

D: not very enjoyable cause it was flat as shit due to lack of carbonation. The cap didn't even make noise when I opened it. I really liike port beers but this one fell short.

Serving type: bottle

05-27-2010 06:57:45 | More by Gobzilla

Seanibus

California

3/5  rDev -16.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours hazy dunny golden with vigorous carbonation and a small fluffy head. Aroma is sweet and candy-like with huge citrusy hops. Flavor disappoints, though. It is bitter and hoppy but with no malt backbone - like sucking on a big hop plug. The bitterness is out of balance. The mouthfeel is rather thin but prickly.

Serving type: on-tap

07-31-2010 14:59:37 | More by Seanibus

BarrytheBear

Wisconsin

3/5  rDev -16.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Bomber meet snifter, snifter meet bomber. Once pleasantries are exchanged, they co-mingle.

Soapy medium orange with what looks like frothy white caps that stand proudly above the beer. A variety of different sized bubbles line the surface. Lacing is patchy.

The cantaloupe hop, whichever it may be, is featured prominently on the nose. I remember it well from such beers and reviews as Double Daddy. Shudder...shudder. There's also some muddled melon...Honeydew, Alex? Damnit..the answer he was looking for was WHAT IS honeydew. Pompous prick! Now I'll have to go big in final Jeopardy where a most certainly vague and useless category will emerge.

Lots o' hots here kids. I understand ten percent isn't supposed to drink especially kindly, but this shows big. Pepper and, of course, boozy cantaloupe. I need to figure out this varietal, because it is gross. A further amalgamation of
of melonesque hops get the full frontal smack down by the wave of heat that unrelentingly pounds the experience from beginning to end. Touch of onion at the finish rounds her out.

Thick and syrupy and hoppy and abrasive. Typically these descriptors are viewed positively in this guy's book. Tonight, not as much.

I had purchased this bomber prior to having the opportunity to try it on tap. After sampling a small sample pour at the bar, I chose not to order this: a personal red flag. I had hoped that my palate was off that day as I was opening this tonight. If nothing else, I am, for the most part, very consistent on how I taste beer. This was no exception. A kitchen sink of hops seem to have been thrown here without much cohesion and with far too much heat to make this really nice. Happy Anniversary Port...here's hoping for a better 5th.

Serving type: bottle

07-12-2011 02:01:03 | More by BarrytheBear

womencantsail

California

3.03/5  rDev -16.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

A: The pour is essentially flat with a few bubbles popping up due to the vigorous pour.

S: The nose is quite resinous and piney with a bit of bitter grapefruit. There is quite a bit of sweetness as well in the form of caramel and tropical fruits.

T: The flavor is good, but very much impacted by the flatness of the beer. Again, quite bitter with a definite pine and resin character. The fruits are generally sweet and tropical, but overall this is quite syrupy.

M: Flat, syrupy, and thick. Generally not the way I want to enjoy my double IPAs.

D: This could probably be a good beer if it was carbonated in any way. I would definitely steer clear of the bottles of this one and stick to draft servings.

Serving type: bottle

06-24-2010 21:43:45 | More by womencantsail

pigdog

California

3.08/5  rDev -14.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured into a Stone IPA glass.

a-cloudy orange body, very little to near non-existant head

s-fairly strong aroma, sweet with a slight citrus and some tropical melon in there somewhere

t-sharp and sweet, piney, maybe too much malt for what I was expecting. My taste buds were wanting more hops and all I got was sweet.

m-dry and kinda thick on the tongue

d-feels kinda flat in the carbonation department and with the ABV and sweetness I doubt I would have more than one.

overall-decent beer but if I'm seeking out a DIPA I'll be looking elsewhere. I've tried this one both on tap and bottled and there's something missing here for me in the bottle, but all in all a worthy effort.

Serving type: bottle

08-11-2010 02:48:33 | More by pigdog

Zorro

California

3.13/5  rDev -13.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 2

Noticed a low level of carbonation in this one.

No real head formation. This is a chill hazed burnt orange colored ale.

Smells hoppy with a strong smell of ginger, pine and wood. Some caramel malt detected. Not that much scent here, the low carbonation dulls it.

Starts out strongly bitter with a high malt content. Malt is a very big flavor in this beer unlike most DIPAs. Pine and word dominate the hop character of this beer. Caramel candy and butterscotch pretty well nails the flavor of this beer.

Mouthfeel is thick.

Drinkability is only so-so. The low level of carbonation in this beer is a distinct fault I have a hard time getting over, there is almost none. Might give it a second chance but I think this is how it is supposed to be.

Serving type: bottle

07-20-2010 02:51:22 | More by Zorro

yourefragile

District of Columbia

3.13/5  rDev -13.3%
look: 3 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

22 oz bottle, poured into a nonic.

Not much to say about this beer that hasn't already been said. An extremely vigorous pour produces porous, bubbly eggshell hell that doesn't have much retention or lacing on top of translucent honey amber colored body. Aroma is very potent blend of resiny piney hops, sweet citrus and grapefruit and a warm booziness. First, the mouthfeel; the sad sad body of this beer is lacking any carbonation whatsoever. This produces a very thick, smooth syrupy body and hot alcoholic burn in the finish. The flavor has all the makings of a great DIPA, with abundant pine and citrus hops and a strong caramel malt body, but the lack of carbonation makes this a super sweet, boozy syrupy mess. Just a little carbonation would have gone a long way in this beer, but as it stands this is nearly undrinkable for me.

Serving type: bottle

08-08-2010 02:15:00 | More by yourefragile

mgoblue5743

New Jersey

3.15/5  rDev -12.7%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

This beer is extremely hoppy, It wasn't remarkable to the point that I would get it again. I drove down to Philly and saw this and it looked interesting. It was Eh. Not terrible, but not worthy of a $10 bomber.

Comes with a very bitter aftertaste, I wouldn't call it "refreshing" at all; but if you like hoppy beer, you may enjoy this.

Serving type: bottle

10-12-2010 20:15:30 | More by mgoblue5743

jwinship83

Illinois

3.18/5  rDev -11.9%
look: 2 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

22oz bottle drank out of my sierra nevada hop tulip glass.

A- the bottle opens rather silently. the beer comes out of the bottle a glowing golden orange colored body with a sickly looking off white head made up of a few large bubbles. the head vanishes almost immediately and leaves behind little to no lacing.

S- very hoppy. lots of grapefruit is the first thing i notice. the caramel malt is barely detectable. a little bit of resiny pine in here too. some alcohol comes through in the nose.

T- once again, faint caramel malts with a massive blast of hops behind them. lots of pine and grapefruit. the alcohol makes a strong showing in the taste.

M- this beer was basically flat. and full bodied. palate coating.

D- wont buy this again. theres no reason an IPA shouldnt be carbonated.

Serving type: bottle

06-18-2010 15:12:57 | More by jwinship83

ChuckS

North Carolina

3.18/5  rDev -11.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 3.5

A - pale yellow-orange and cloudy with a tall, thick pale yellow head that rapidly dissipates leaving a laced glass.

S- sweet with strong resin and citrus hops.

T- a hop explosion with grapefruit citrus and pine resin against a sweet background. Sweetness disappears with a warmth of alcohol and a lingering bitterness (almost like rubber).

M- smooth and creamy with a nice balance of carbonation. Coats the oropharynx with a layer of aromatic hops.

O- even for a hop-lover this may be too much. Strong and pungent. Lacks the balance and complexity of top scored DIPA. Careful or you may not remember the evening after a couple of bombers of this brew.

Serving type: bottle

01-12-2012 01:22:00 | More by ChuckS

srandycarter

California

3.2/5  rDev -11.4%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I am not going to break this one down by component. I am going to rant, yet again, on how much carbonation really matters in some styles. My goodness, how many LA/Port beers have I bought, how many hundreds of dollars, to find them flat. The best they can offer is a trade for another flat beer or 'we meant to do that'. Very irritating. I have 7 beers I am brewing right now, and low and behold, three of the higher ABV might turn out flat. Pisses me off. However, I am not selling them for 8-19 a bottle. This would have been a fine beer if it had some friggin bubbles.

##Update##

1.8.11 Bought this again by accident. Tried it again. Small carb there. Not enough to be great, but much better. If I were to score now, it would be:

A 3.0
S 4.0
T 3.5
M 3.5
D 3.0

Overall 3.45 = B-

Tomme, you have heard from more than just me. Carbonation is critical!

Serving type: bottle

06-09-2010 03:22:37 | More by srandycarter

Xul

California

3.23/5  rDev -10.5%
look: 2 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

A: Pours a mostly clear golden with some amber highlights. A vigorous pour produced a head with the approximate thickness of a fingernail. Retention is obviously non-existent as a scant ring of bubbles lines the top of the glass.

S: Hops are predominantly floral and citrus with some piney notes in the background. Sweet caramel base is rather strong as well.

T: Hops are stronger than in the aroma, which is nice. Starts out with a bigger piney/floral character and transitions into citrus with orange and grapefruits. Caramel base comes up strong and leads into a fairly sweet finish with just a bit of residual bitterness.

M: Thick, chewy, lightly carbonated - these are not adjectives I like to use in describing a double IPA. It's not quite as bad as it could've been, but it's definitely not what it should be.

D: It tastes pretty good and if it had the body to match, it would be one that I'd have a couple pints of...in its current state, I'm not sure I'll bother to finish the bottle.

I'm not even going to bother to rant about the carbonation issues...all I can say is I'm glad this was a $9 screwup rather than a $30 one.

Serving type: bottle

06-12-2010 00:45:08 | More by Xul

SirSketch

Massachusetts

3.23/5  rDev -10.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A - Cloudy orange color and a bright white, clumpy head.

S - Freshly squeezed orange, peaches and a grape-like hop aroma. Pretty boozy, too.

T - Very bitter, without the malt sweetness to back it up. The hop profile is nice with a hint of pineapple.

M/D - A little thin for a beer of this magnitude. They need to rethink this one for next year.

Serving type: bottle

09-13-2010 00:47:14 | More by SirSketch

Beerandraiderfan

Nevada

3.25/5  rDev -10%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Filling in the old vintages seemed fair before writing the review on the new one. Orange pour, nice small thin ring of white head on it. Depending on which bottle we're talking about (fresh v. 2/4 months on it) the aroma can be vastly different. Its merely nice when fresh, after 60 days its way downhill and in 4 months it was deeply disappointing, for such a big beer, the hops are really lacking a strong constitution.

Taste, massively bitter at all stages, regardless of freshness. Ultimate feeling was that this beer lacked the beautiful touches in most Port hoppy beers. This one just is a tongue blast of bitterness for the most part, everything else, malt, sweetness remains in the background. Pretty hot too for Pizza Port. I buy less and less of this beer every year.

Serving type: bottle

05-31-2012 22:41:05 | More by Beerandraiderfan

popery

California

3.28/5  rDev -9.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

I'll certainly try to find this beer on tap, but I'm not getting burned on another bottle. Reports at my friendly local beer store put these bottles at 50% chance of carbonation, in their experience, and my bottle is from the unfortunate half. I'd curse Tomme Arthur, but it's actually not that bad, which is quite the credit to his abilities. I imagine this is a fairly fantastic beer when properly carbed, but, obviously, it's hard to recommend buying a bottle and I believe in reviewing the beer in front of you. On to the action...

The beer pours a dark, hazy amber, rather orange in the light. A few bubbles sit atop the liquid. They look lonely and sad, weighed down by lost potential and squandered opportunities. The aroma is thick with hops, an intense burst of wildflowers and grapefruit rind. There's a backbone of caramel malt, perhaps a bit more than I remember from previous versions of the Anniversary Ale. The flavor starts almost oversweet with sugary malt but is quickly reigned in by brashly bitter hop notes. The mouthfeel? Well, sir, the mouthfeel is poor. And clearly unintentional. This beer has all the feel of a sample pulled directly from the fermenter, rather than a beer that lost carbonation from a bad cap or something. It's unfortunate because I could see raising scores across the board with good carbonation. I'm a big fan of Port/TLA, but they need to sit down and figure out their bottle-conditioning issues before bottling any more beer.

Serving type: bottle

05-29-2010 06:33:16 | More by popery

CHILLINDYLAN

Washington

3.33/5  rDev -7.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Consumed June 2, 2010

Poured aggressively. Clear copper with tangerine highlights. Small forced white bubbly head. A little bit of foam sticks to the sides.

Grapefruit, floral, herbal, slight pine, orange/tangerine. Sweet biscuit.

Hop resiny, Grapefruit, pine, floral, and herbal. Slightly toasty biscuit, some caramel. vanilla and a touch of booze. Resinous bitterness. pine and bitter citrus aftertaste.

Sticky and drying, but completely flat.

Very tasty, but so flat that it hurts the beer tremendously across the board. Could have been an awesome beer.

Serving type: bottle

10-19-2010 01:08:31 | More by CHILLINDYLAN

brentk56

North Carolina

3.35/5  rDev -7.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Appearance: Despite a hard pour, the beer pours a cloudy apricot color with a very modest head that still leaves some dots and dashes behind

Smell: A pine forest on the nose; underneath, there is a slightly bready base

Taste: After a slightly bready start, the piney hops take over, with an excessively bitter character developing by mid-palate; after the swallow, the resinous hop bitterness overwhelms the palate, with a bit of sticky sweetness bringing up the finish

Mouthfeel: Medium body with a fairly low level of carbonation

Drinkability: Needs more carbonation and a bit more balance; not as bad to my palate as others have suggested, but still not something that would rank in the top echelon for me

Serving type: bottle

09-22-2010 06:20:44 | More by brentk56