Thursday, 9 October 2014

Final results by brewery

I think we're finally there. The very last post in this series. I think.

We'll be looking at the results for each of the beers from every brewery. It's quite depressing in some cases to see just how shit the quality of beer in their pubs was. There really are some breweries whose houses should be avoided.

I suppose I'll just dive straight in with the first brewery alphabetically, which just happens to be Barclay Perkins.

Brewery style FG OG ABV App. Atten-uation score rank % bright
Barclay Perkins Burton 1010.8 1052.4 5.42 79.41% -0.18 13 27.27%
Barclay Perkins Pale Ale 1008.7 1045.6 4.81 80.88% 0.25 8 50.00%
Barclay Perkins Porter 1011.6 1037.5 3.35 68.98% -0.63 8
Barclay Perkins Stout 1014.6 1055.4 5.31 73.72% -1.21 12
Barclay Perkins X 1041.8 1010.7 4.01 74.38% -0.64 12 7.14%
average -0.48 10.6 28.14%

Shit. That's the only way to describe their beer. Only their Pale Ale claws its way up to a small positive score. the Stout - with an average score of -1.21 is just awful. And you'd want to steer well clear of the Porter and Mild Ale, too. The overall average of -0.48 is very poor. Cloudy shit, too. Only just more than a quarter of the samples were bright.

Next it's Cannon.

Brewery style FG OG ABV App. Atten-uation score rank % bright
Cannon Burton 1013.3 1052.8 5.13 74.77% -0.73 14 45.45%
Cannon Pale Ale 1009.0 1045.2 4.72 80.06% -0.09 14 54.55%
Cannon Porter 1009.6 1034.6 3.25 72.38% -2.56 11
Cannon Stout 1014.9 1049.5 4.49 70.05% 0 9
Cannon X 1035.1 1008.1 3.53 77.11% 0.54 4 64.29%
average -0.57 10.4 54.76%


That's not really any better. Still only one positive score. And the truly appalling score for their Porter leaves the average even worse than Barclay Perkins at -0.57. Surprisingly, the one half-decent beer is a fairly weak Mild. At least their beer wasn't as murky as Barclay Perkins, with around half the samples bright.

Charrington was very much a brewery on the up between the wars.

Brewery style FG OG ABV App. Atten-uation score rank % bright
Charrington Burton 1014.6 1054.48 5.19 73.28% 1.00 6 66.67%
Charrington Pale Ale 1008.7 1048.2 5.14 81.91% -0.09 15 27.27%
Charrington Stout 1012.9 1049.7 4.78 73.73% -1.09 11
Charrington X 1040.8 1008.7 4.17 78.63% -0.70 13 30.00%
Charrington 9d only Stout 1013.3 1052.5 5.10 74.70% -1.00 10
average -0.38 11 41.31%

Which is why it's such a surprise how poor their beer is. Again there's a single average positive score, this time for Burton. But the overall average is negative once more, -0.38. Clarity isn't great, either. The vast majority of Pale Ale and Mild Ale samples were cloudy.

So far so bad. Will City of London show any improvement?

Brewery style FG OG ABV App. Atten-uation score rank % bright
City of London Burton 1010.2 1051.33 5.36 80.03% 0.09 12 27.27%
City of London Pale Ale 1008.7 1045.5 4.79 80.82% 1.00 5 38.46%
City of London Porter 1008.9 1036.1 3.54 75.56% -2 10
City of London X 1033.7 1006.4 3.55 81.04% -1.25 14 33.33%
average -0.54 10.25 33.02%

A bit. OK, the overall average is still a poor -0.54. But at least two beers have a positive average, Pale Ale and Burton. Even if the Pale ale score is only just positive. Clarity, on the other hand, is dreadful.

Not sure I can face all of this today. Maybe I'll stop after the next brewery, Courage.

Brewery style FG OG ABV App. Atten-uation score rank % bright
Courage Burton 1012.1 1052.45 5.25 76.95% 1.25 2 50.00%
Courage Pale Ale 1012.0 1053.8 5.46 77.93% 1.25 4 50.00%
Courage Porter 1010.9 1037.5 3.45 70.88% 0.22 5
Courage Stout 1011.6 1046.3 4.51 74.98% -1.67 13
Courage X 1034.5 1007.3 3.53 78.76% 0.38 7 93.75%
average 0.29 6.2 64.58%

That's better. Take out the rubbish Stout and it would look pretty good. Even with that, there overall average is still positive at 0.29.  Without it, the average would be 0.79. Odd that their Porter did better than their Stout. Clarity is excellent for their Mild, not so good for their Burton and Pale Ale.

Fifteen breweries in total, five done today. I make that two more parts to go. Then we really will be done.

No comments: