I did this with some other London beers - mostly Porters and Stouts - a few years ago. I worked out a method of scoring the beers, based on the description of the flavour in the Whitbread Gravity Book. It goes like this, from -3 to +3:
+3 v good
+2 v fine, v fair, good
+1 fine, fair
0 moderate, only fair
-2 v poor, going off, thin
-3 nasty, sour, foul, gone off, mouldy
This brilliant. I'll be able to spin loads of posts out it. And then produce a league table for London Milds in the 1920's. Why didn't I think of this before?*
I think I may have to rethink my plans to hang around in Barclay Perkins pubs when I move back to the 1920's.
|Barclay Perkins Mild Ale quality 1922 - 1925|
|1922||X||1010||1039||3.76||74.36%||fairly bright||gone off||-3|
|1923||X||1013||1044.7||4.08||70.47%||not quite bright||good||2|
|1923||X||1011||1041.1||3.96||74.21%||v hazy||poor mouldy||-3|
|1925||X||1011||1044||4.23||74.09%||not bright||Poor & thin||-2|
|Whitbread Gravity book held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number LMA/4453/D/02/001|
That's pretty piss-poor, isn't it? Not a single one totally bright. Only 4 out of 14 with a positive score for the flavour and three that sound undrinkable. None of the beers is without a fault.
I wonder if they fined their beers. I suppose nowadays the landlord would just have to scribble "unfined" on the pump clip and suddenly those faults would all disappear.
* I did, but got distracted by something else.