Anyone else disappointed by this year's backwoods bastard?

Anyone else want to blast Founders these days? This is getting ridiculous! I'm thinking, as BA's, we have tries SO many "World Class" beers. When these highly sought after beers come out, we expect them to blow us away just as they did the first time we had it. It isn't gonna happen... Quit rippin on em and enjoy beer!

This isn't my first time around the block buddy.

Oh that's right! It's your second.

/thread

I am very disappointed in this year's batch of Backwoods Bastard because I haven't found any yet.

I won't rip Founders' beers. Top to bottom the best brewery in the state, if not everywhere east of Munster.
However, can I blast them for a poor showing at a recent BEER festival?

I didnt taste a difference. Lots of wood and earthy malty bourbon.

Who here do you think puts any weight into your opinion? Seriously.

You may ask yourself, am I right, am I wrong?
You may say to yourself, my god, what have I done?

Um, I do. Jegross is a good guy, solid reviewer, and a good BA member. Despite me being a sarcastic asshole earlier in the thread, I respect what his opinion on beer is, and I enjoy when people start forums based off of what they've noticed about different beers in order to help foster a discussion among the community so we can inform others, or have our own opinion challenged. It's part of a healthy discussion about what we all love.

Aww thanks

I did a 3 year vertical last weekend with a few friends, and the older the beer, the thicker the body was. Does this make sense? Can a beer end up with a thicker body with age? The 2012 was much thinner in body than the 2010 and 2011, but from memory, it tasted the same as it always has.

I'm not trying to be stupid or naive here; it's a legitimate question. I haven't done a ton of multi-year verticals, and I've just never experienced that before, is all.

Depends on the beer, the "activity" of residual yeast, year to year batch variation etc

So, you're saying it's possible. Interesting, and good to know. Thanks.

FWIW, I liked the flavors in the 2010 the best.

Rule of thumb: most beers aren't intended to age for lengthy periods. Few bigger beers can withstand 4-5 yrs. sours tend to fair well because they are more "active" in the bottle. Just keep that in mind with verticals. Always fun to experiment, but when you love a beer fresh...well, that's why I have few beers older than 2010 in My cellar

alright thanks man yeah I was confused. and Yeah If you feel it is different I respect your opinion. Props for trying to keep brewers to the same quality standards.

FWIW founded is still a top 3-5 brewery for me. Never said I hated these beers. Just a noticed variation

I had it for the first time this year(got jipped last year) .....I also was not impressed.

Taste like other oak aged ales.
Nothing out of the ordinary.

I love Founders still though...
There was a case yesterday at my local spot of Breakfast Stout sitting on the shelf and a case of Backwoods Bastard...I grabbed the FBS and havent looked back.

Ummm read the post that's exactly my point!!!

g

Highly agree. +2 to that

Just disappointing when it isn't what you expect it to be. I've been drinking it for 5 years. This one was the worst IMO....everyone is entitled to their opinoin... isn't that what a review is too?

I agree 100%. I am Not liking the change I have noticed in the Breakfast Stout ( thin ...almost watered down) and Backwoods Bastard just is not what it was last year....just did a side by side with a group 2010,2011 and 2012 and all agreed....we check our reviews and it was just off this year... Its not bad its just different and because of that I have traded mine away so others who do not see the difference can enjoy it. Cheers! Fitz

lol of course. I was just kidding around! There seem to be at least a few BA's who feel this way so there is for sure validity.

Had one a few nights back and felt it was thinner as well. Still enjoyable.

Just did a four-year vertical of Backwoods Bastard and this year held up just fine. Incidentally, the consensus was that one-year-old was the best, with fresh close behind. The difference was so small that it's probably not worth aging, but there are no worries about keeping some in the cellar for year-round enjoyment. Taste of the older two was fine, but they had issues with lost carbonation.

Actually the opposite. 2010 and 2011 BB didn't do much for me. Even aging a few. I bought a four pack of 2012 this year for the hell of it. Drank two. Drove all around the next day and landed 4 four packs. Sooooo good!

Breaking news: People all have a different opinion on beer!

Totally agree that this year is every bit as good if not better. Regardless of which is better, I do think there is some variation between this year and last year.

I also did a side by side of 2011 and 2012 BB and found the 2011 to be harsher and more uh...acidic? tannic? something. The 2012 was beautifully balanced. I recall last year's batch being a bigger bourbon bomb. Loved 2011 fresh, loved 2012 fresh. Was disappointed with 2011 aged 7 months (really missed the bourbon) and really disappointed with it aged 1 yr (wondering if this bottle was a fluke because it definitely was not just a more mellow version).

Looking forward to doing this side by side a bunch more times. If anyone is in the Athens, OH area and wants to give it a try, let me know, I have plenty to share.

Ok, I wanted to give this a 2nd chance. I Just got back from Founders and went with a few BAs last night. We each had a snifter of Backwoods Bastard on tap at the tasting room.........
Sorry, just not as good as last years(more of a scotchy taste) and definitely thinner.
They have it for sale to go in the gift shop in case anybody had not been able to find any. Cheers!

Maybe your palate has gotten more sophisticated in the past 12 months.

I'm disappointed I couldn't find more than 3 single bottles this year, that's for sure. Last year I coulda bought a case's worth right off the shelf from one store alone.

Had it yesterday on tap there and it's pretty sublime. Not sure if it's quite as oak forward or as hot as previous years, but it might be, might be, just as good as a special release beer.

Oh, okay, it is.

Count me in the camp that thinks Backwoods is better this year. So smooth and seems to have less heat than I recall from fresh batches. I had a 2009 the same night and while still very good, had taken on more of a pasty mouthfeel.

First year having Backwoods Bastard, so I have nothing to compare it to, but I love it. I have to wonder about all these "this years ________ beer isn't as good as last years" threads. How would you know it isn't the same? You can't compare it to last years since it would have age on it...so do you just go by memory? Maybe tasting notes? How accurate would that be? Isn't more likely that things have changed with you and/or your palate rather than the beer?

Just honestly curious here, not trying to offend anyone.

I found the Backwoods '12 to be much better fresh than the 2011. However, the 2011 with a year on it is drinking incredible.

I found the first batch of Breakfast Stout to be a bit thin. I much preferred the 2011 in a blind test. That said, the last few batches and drafts I've had have been much better.

Can't wait until we start bashing this year's Imperial Stout.

Last years bashing was way better than this years.

First off, I'm one of the first to roll my eyes at most of the "Last year's was better..." threads.

The only time I can honestly taste any difference between batches year-over-year is if I've had a ton of it...& I've had a ton of Backwoods each of the past few years. There are probably only a dozen or so seasonals that I could honestly say from memory that they're different because those are the few beers I drink a lot of, & I rarely notice much in the way of variation.

But Backwoods is one. And it tastes thinner to me this year. For most beers being very good would be a compliment, it's just that Backwoods has been consistently amazing.

I liked Beer Advocate a lot better last year than I do this year.

When you age a beer (let's say a coffee stout) for a year, what would you expect to happen in that year? Most people say the coffee fades, hops might fade etc. If I blind tasted the one year old vs the new and the aged one had more coffee flavor, I could reasonable assume it had even more fresh.

I'll turn it around. How do the skeptics know that the brewer didn't change malts, hops, coffee? Perhaps there was a drought in the region where one of the ingredients come from and they had to purchase from somewhere else. I'm not buying or selling with regard to BW Bastard as I don't remember a difference to last year, nor do I have an '11 to compare with but I do think it is arrogant (not you) to dismiss someones opinion without any evidence of their own.