Doggie Style Classic Pale Ale - Flying Dog Brewery

SetarconeX

Florida

1.45/5  rDev -60.1%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 1 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

I really don't understand the reviews this beer has been getting. Despite an amusing winged dog on the label, I found the beer to be absolutely disgusting. In addition to the foul taste, this is one of those rare beers that really, truly, smells bad. Not to be drank under any circumstances.

Serving type: bottle

08-03-2003 02:57:22 | More by SetarconeX

mentor

Colorado

1.45/5  rDev -60.1%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 1 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

Stamp on the bottle reads 355A06. Pours a one finger copper tan head over a nearly clear dull copper liquid. Smells potently of cardboard. Woody and oranges from hops. Musty. Like this beer was infected during fermentation.

Tastes cardboard and fouled malt. Like an IPA I once made that got something awful growing in it. That flavor is awful, beer will be dumped when I get the mouthfeel. Md-thick which is unpleasant because it keeps the flavor around. Blech!

Serving type: bottle

01-18-2007 04:15:52 | More by mentor

ViveLaChouffe

Georgia

1.7/5  rDev -53.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1

Pours a clear copper with a rocky ivory head. No lace. Grassy and fruity nose with some hints of citrusy hops.

Eeesh. This is one haphazard beer. Lightly fruity and really bitter and not in a good way. The flavors do not mesh well. Not tasty at all. I honestly had to plow my way through this one. A dry mouth.

I thought is was really hard to screw up a pale ale. most are at least average tasting. I've tried this beer twice now with the same result. A sub-par beer, not alot to say about it.

Serving type: bottle

05-20-2005 02:41:14 | More by ViveLaChouffe

Overlord

California

1.73/5  rDev -52.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

This is a pretty awful pale ale.

Pours a not-very-pale orangeish yellow. Big white head. Smells like ... not much of anything. Maybe a whiff of grapefruit.

Given the nonexistent smell, I as surprised at how strongly it tasted. Grapefruit rind comes to mind. A stale, acridly bitter, awful grapefruit rind. I don't know what hops/malt profile they were going for, but this is truly terrible.

A bit thin.

Serving type: bottle

11-23-2008 05:22:26 | More by Overlord

demuzik

Oregon

1.83/5  rDev -49.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 1.5

Perhaps I got a bad bottle, but this got dumped out half way... not worth using up 'beer time' on this guy IMHO.
This doesn't fill the craving for the genre; no hop flavor or aroma to write home about, no caramel sweetness to balance it out; simply blunt, harsh tones with a drab twang/bitterness.

Serving type: bottle

10-29-2010 01:41:13 | More by demuzik

Kooz

New York

2.08/5  rDev -42.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Genric beer-buying rule number one--don't buy a beer that's got a gimmicky name.

The beer didn't look like much. Decent orange color, if a little pale. (Just as an aside--does Flying Dog make the noisiest, most distracting labels ever?)

Smelled okay. Not too rich, maybe a little citrus hint.

Taste was a let down. Too hoppy then too malty--too much and all at the wrong times.

But easily the worst thing about this beer is the mouthfeel. The word I wrote down when taking notes to write this review was "chalky." That's just gross.

This wasn't the worst beer I've ever had, but isn't something I'd like to try again.

Serving type: bottle

10-05-2009 01:35:42 | More by Kooz

Dalem

Michigan

2.13/5  rDev -41.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Not much of a smell to this one overall but I'm thinking I detect a bit of pine in what scent I find. A light amber color that's nice but nothing special. A bit watery in the mouth. More yeasty than hops in the flavor which is a let down because, after all it claims to be a pale ale...A "classic" one at that. I like my pale's to have the hops get my attention. It's the first thing I look for in them. Kind of a coffee bean, grapefruit and that pine thing I already mentioned is what popped up on the tongue but it's an odd balance that doesn't work for me. I'm all for the grapefruit thing when it comes to dry hopped ales (which is what this claims to be) and come to expect it but it's the coffee bean thing mostly that turns me off here. It's just tastes weird here and hangs too long in the aftertaste. Not much to get excited about really. If I'm over at a friend's house and I'm offered one of these down the road I won't turn it down but I don't see me picking up another six for myself again.

Serving type: bottle

07-20-2007 03:14:51 | More by Dalem

ColoradoBobs

Colorado

2.15/5  rDev -40.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

A: Moderately vigorous pour produced a firm, tight 2" head over an amber body with plenty of streams of tiny bubbles. Plenty of lacing, and the head lasted to the bottom of the glass.

S: Biscuity malt with some hoppiness. Metallic note, with some grass. More balanced than I was anticipating.

T: Oh gosh, too much hops for me. The malt must all disappear when you smell it. Bitterness from the cascade dry-hopping and some notes of bitter black tea are all I can taste. GIMME SOME MALT, PLEASE!

M: Decent enough, but who wants this in their mouth? I know there are people out there who love hops, but I'm not one of them.

D: See previous statement.

I bought this to try it. Now I've tried it. I will not buy it again, and would probably say, "No thanks, I'll just have water!" if someone offered it to me for free. Overall, a fairly pretty, decent smelling beer, but when it comes to the tasting, to me it's not quite a drain pour.

Serving type: bottle

12-08-2005 04:51:39 | More by ColoradoBobs

nickhiller

Texas

2.25/5  rDev -38%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

A: a hazy, golden brown with a half inch head that settles to a respectable quarter inch lacy bubbles and a good deal of carbonation.

S: a sour metallic--iron--with a slight hop undertone is all I get from the nose.

T: tastes a lot like a homebrew, in fact I've brewed unsuccessful beers that tasted like this. Not enough hops to be aromatic and bitter, but enough to excite my gag reflex. Not enough malt to be sweet, but too much to be dry. just Really boring, but unpleasantly so, I find the smell and taste abrasive.

M: the body and appearance are the only two things that I can say that I liked. Medium bodied and good carb, nothing out of the ordinary.

D: I like most of Flying Dog's other offerings, but I'm afraid they missed their mark with this one. The off smell combined with the lack of flavor (or in this case the flavors most important to beer: barley and hops) leave much to be desired. I'm kind of thinking I got a bad bottle at Central Market, it can't be this bad right?

Serving type: bottle

11-18-2010 23:36:52 | More by nickhiller

claytong

Vermont

2.25/5  rDev -38%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

I am not a pale ale guy and since I am not I was a little giving on my ratings. I have not been impressed with Flying Dog. I hardly can get why they differentiate themselves from crappy beer. Maybe the standard is different in Maryland but I would doubt it since I know there's a lot of good beer drinkers on the east coast.
Anyways, I highly suggest staying away from most of their stuff. In heat wheat isn't bad and I've been told the raging bitch is good, so I will check that out and not buy anything else from them.
ive only had one or two american pale ales that id really ever drink again, compared to germany and austria american pale ales just seem watery and tasteless.

Serving type: bottle

03-13-2011 00:58:16 | More by claytong

TheSarge

Illinois

2.35/5  rDev -35.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

This pale ale has frragrances of sweet malt aromas with a tip of hops. Floral and fruity. Dark amber in color and produces moderate amount of head, and turns into fine lacing. This sample may had possibly suffered a little oxidation. Overall, this feels very watery and almost too flat. Not too bad, but I've had a lot better.

Serving type: bottle

01-27-2007 16:31:41 | More by TheSarge

charlatan

United Kingdom (Scotland)

2.38/5  rDev -34.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

This one was slightly redder than one would expect a pale ale to be and had a significant head.

It smelled of banana and vinegar - not a great start!

This tasted more like a hefeweizen than a pale ale. Hopefully I was unlucky and got an old bottle (the bottle says 235A05 whatever that means), but the flavour here seemed to be dominated by yeast rather than malt or hops. The hops became apparent after a while, but yeast was the overwhelming player.

Serving type: bottle

05-23-2005 05:09:11 | More by charlatan

Brew33

Ohio

2.42/5  rDev -33.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Wow.... I'd love to find something nice to say about this but I just can't. It's watery and lacks any real body, flavor or aroma. It has an odd aftertaste similar to the Golden Ale. I can't put my finger on it but it isn't good. I noticed the same "funk" with Molson beers. Yikes, avoid at all cost.

Serving type: bottle

04-28-2009 14:38:45 | More by Brew33

jmcrofts

2.48/5  rDev -31.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Got this in a custom 6-pack since I've seen it everywhere and finally felt like giving it a shot.

Appearance - Nothing of note, looks like your standard ale with unremarkable head

Smell - Weak. Nothing really interesting here, and smells too 'grainy', almost like a pale lager.

Taste - Starts off well with some decent hop character, but too weak. Very unappealing metallic aftertaste as the hops fade away altogether.

Mouthfeel - Too light and watery. Pretty good carbonation though, which I appreciate.

Overall - Definitely not impressed with this one. Nothing particularly appealing about it, and the taste wasn't very enjoyable. Not terrible, I wouldn't refuse this beer if offered, but for your money there are much better choices out there.

Serving type: bottle

11-05-2012 06:50:30 | More by jmcrofts

dudecandle

New York

2.5/5  rDev -31.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Wow, this was disappointing.

A: Light orange-brown body with small cap on the pour, which disappeared quickly, and therefore could leave no such thing as lacing.

S: Light citrus with underwhelming hop presence.

T: Slightly hoppy with some nutty malt, but overwhelmingly grainy with a slight citrus. The skunk of this beer was shocking. Not that it was overwhelmingly macro-esque, but for a Flying Dog product, it was too much.

M: Mediocre at best.

D: This was the first on-tap beer in a long time that I have not finished. I was shocked, appalled, and most relevantly, disgusted.
I want to blame the bar, but they're normally good with their taps. I'll give it a second chance when possible, but for now, this stands.

Serving type: on-tap

08-31-2009 01:42:45 | More by dudecandle

stcules

Italy

2.53/5  rDev -30.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Cherry color. Light foam. Good perlage.
In the smell american hop, grapefruit, and, overall, piney resin.
At the first sip, it tends to slip away. You can expect some more, considering the intensity of the smell.
Malt, light caramel, a light body, and a strong hoppiness in the aftertaste.
A light balsamic note. Piney resin. A little unbalanced. It is like to walk in a pine wood.
The monotone smell tends to make it a little boring.

Serving type: bottle

04-09-2007 09:39:10 | More by stcules

Erdinger2003

Iowa

2.55/5  rDev -29.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Appearance is pretty good actually. The head is nice, but the lacing doesn't stick. Brown in color.

Smell is hoppy and slightly fruity.

Taste is a little watery and a little skunky.

Mouthfeel is pretty watery, but I guess even water can be good.

Drinkability isn't so great.

Serving type: bottle

04-12-2006 05:33:43 | More by Erdinger2003

RedChrome

Connecticut

2.55/5  rDev -29.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Poured a fantastic blend of ruby and copper. It is almost like looking at a shiny penny in the sunlight. Very little head but what did pour stayed quite nicely. The head had an off-white color very similar to french vanilla ice creamm.

The odor was laced with more of a yeast odor then I expect, but I noted a slight aroma of sour apple. I really had to struggle to note the apple over the yeast.

The first taste hit my palate and struck me as very disappointing. I didn't find much of a taste at all. It was almost like drinking water. On a second sip, I did catch a big taste of the yeast I noted in the aroma. This beer had more aftertaste then actual taste.

While I was seriously let down from apperance and aroma to odor, the beer did have a good feel in my mouth. I was pleased that it wasn't a watery pale ale.

Overall, I can't recommend this beer to anyone who wants to do anything except try it just to see for themselves. I won't go as far as to say I won't drink it ever again, but it would have to be one of a limited selection of big brewery macros, such as Bud Light or Coors, for me to choose it.

Serving type: bottle

05-11-2006 06:33:49 | More by RedChrome

mattcrill

Ohio

2.55/5  rDev -29.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Aroma: Doughy and fresh yeast aromas up front. I don't mind it but the yeast smell is bordering on overpowering and I can get anything other than that. No esters or hop aroma. Odd.

Appearance: Slightly cloudy rich amber pour with sticky off-white head. Head retention is good.

Flavor: Some initial earthy bitterness, some mild pine tar resin, and a touch more doughy bread character. Balance is slightly bitter. Finish is clean and dry.

Mouthfeel: Medium-light body with lively, high carbonation. No warmth, creaminess, or astringency.

Overall impression: Had a hard time getting past the yeasty aroma. May have been an old sample but no way to tell. Won't try again.

Serving type: bottle

10-07-2012 18:57:18 | More by mattcrill

wcintula

New York

2.6/5  rDev -28.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

This beer was poured into a plastic cup before I corrected the bartender, asking her for a glass. The beer was a dark red-orange color with a well-retained finger-depth head. The smell was hoppy and bready, like the taste. This one was more bitter than I like my pale ales, but to each his own. It had a strong carbonation and was not the beer I settled on.

Serving type: on-tap

07-24-2010 16:45:33 | More by wcintula

Raugupatis

California

2.63/5  rDev -27.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

My wife and I went out for dinner last weekend and I decided to give this one a try.

I sent it back.

It was not horrible. it did not melt paint. But my general feeling is that if I am paying six dollars a pint, I want the beer to sit up and then perform for me.

Mouthfeel was thin and there was none of the body I have come to associate with a Pale Ale.

Serving type: on-tap

08-06-2009 05:15:50 | More by Raugupatis

Anthony1

Colorado

2.63/5  rDev -27.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

poured into a perfect pint.

poured a clear, off-orange color with a decent head, kind of like lumpy with small traces of lace.

smells basic, a lightly blended mix of hops and fruits. a bit of grapefuit and orange. flavor was sub par. did not enjoy it. no where near as much hops as they made it out to be, and it just wasn't that good. light body with high amounts of carbonation like most flying dogs seem to be

Serving type: bottle

08-19-2009 15:18:39 | More by Anthony1

whtguitarguy

Virginia

2.63/5  rDev -27.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

I am definitely not a hophead but I am willing to give IPAs and Pale Ales a chance. Aroma is purely of hops with a bit of alcohol. Smells like heather flowers more so. The hops flavor was a bit too much for me, rather strong. Unfortunately this was a drain pour. But it is still decent, and one of the better examples I have had.

Serving type: bottle

12-24-2009 21:12:30 | More by whtguitarguy

Reidrover

Oregon

2.65/5  rDev -27%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Ok bought in the 12 oz brown long neck.I hate the label..I am not a big fan of Ralph Steadman.
as poured into a british style pint mug the beer has a crystal clear brown colour with a off white almost tan head that goes fast but does leave some good lace.
Smell is very nicevery chocolaty and with great hop undertones.
Taste however is a shocking let down.. a micro second of sweet maltiness is followed by a rather acrid bitterness..that annoys my taste buds..not good.
Mouthfeel is pretty average..bit watery.
I did not find this drinkable due to the horrible taste.
Maybe I just picked up a bad bottle or something..but this was not good..Its safe to say I will stick to Full Sail Pale or SNPA when in the mood for a pale.

Serving type: bottle

07-10-2003 19:24:18 | More by Reidrover

bashiba

Iowa

2.65/5  rDev -27%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Pours an amber color with a thin white head and minimal lacing.

Smell is very minimul with just a hint of caramel malt and a slight hop odor.

Taste is very non descript. A very minor maltiness with the absolute smallest amount of hops, nothing special overall.

Mouthfeel is thin and watery.

Drinkability is also very average, no reason to seak out this drab beer.

Serving type: bottle

02-04-2005 04:24:24 | More by bashiba