I find your website well produced and your video is crystal clear.

I have a question. When rating the beers how to do you keep from comparing the beers too much? For instance, the video before this you were rating the breakfast stout. With that beer there is an explosion of sweetness and malt. Now you are rating a beer not as sweet or potent and more alcoholic because it is a different style. But if I were rating this beer I couldn’t help but be expecting the explosion that I got from the breakfast stout and that could possibly disappoint me.

So do you have a trick so that when you rate the beers they stand on their own in stead of being contrasted with a style they were never meant to be contrasted with? I know I have had some porters that I was very disappointed with because they seemed watery and too mellow. But I think it was because I had been drinking some strong coffee stouts and was expecting something similar from the coffee porters. I have had the same experience with some schwarzbiers because of their darkness making me to expect more complexity. I am a mere amateur at this and so I’m wondering how to enjoy each style for what it is instead of trying to make everything taste like a nice rich stout or some style it is not supposed to be. Thanks.

I enjoyed the Palo Santo Marron very much, though once I’d likened the taste to cherry cola it was pretty hard to get my palate to pick out anything else. That said, if it tastes like cherry cola then that’s some classy cola.

I’d love to know what you think of Dogfish Head’s Midas Touch. I had one tonight and thought it was a very interesting drink. Ultimately though, I think that’s the most that can be said about it, “It’s interesting.” There was something in it that reminded me of Glengoyne, the very fine unpeated whiskey. Possibly I need to try the Touch again without the novelty of the ale’s history taking center place. Damn fine brewery though.

Keep up the good work – it’s appreciated.

Regards from the UK,

Leo