Pulling the Curtain Back on Spirit Competitions

Spirits judge, Derek Brown, reveals the secret to medaling at spirit competitions for both alcohol and non-alcoholic spirits alike.

Photo by Dylan de Jonge on Unsplash

Have you ever shopped for spirits and seen those little gold, silver, and bronze insignias on shelf talkers in liquor stores? Of course, you probably looked closer and saw the competition name and date, carefully considering by what criteria and on whose authority the medals were awarded. Right?

Or did you just say, “Cool medal, dude, must be good?”

Either way, those shiny medals should prompt more than a few questions, including what is a shelf talker. (For the record, a shelf talker is one of those folded brochures hanging from the liquor store shelf with the medal and point score.)

Questions arise such as, who is this shadowy cabal issuing medals in the first place, and by what cryptic science do they judge said spirits, labeling them worthy and unworthy?

Well, I’m happy to answer your questions. And I’ll let you in on a little-known secret, it’s really just one very simple criterion we judge spirits by.

This past weekend I was a judge at the San Francisco World Spirits Competition (SFWS). In San Francisco, of course. No vestments, chants, or secret handshakes. Just 60 of the top spirit tasters in the world led by head judge and bartender extraordinaire, Jeffrey Morgenthaler, including spirit producers, distillers, beverage buyers, drinks writers, and bartenders.

There are plenty of other spirit competitions, but SFWS has consistently been the largest in the world with over 100 categories of spirits, 6,000 products, and a panel of 60 judges, myself included. If you consider SFWS has been in existence for over twenty years, that’s tens of thousands of spirits judged. SFWS’s executive director, Anthony Dias Blue, passed away in December of last year and the Tasing Alliance and competition is now led by his daughter, Amanda Blue, showing no signs of abatement.

Recently, like many other competitions, they’ve started judging non-alcoholic spirits.

I’ve been a spirits judge with SFWS for the better part of a decade, since 2011. And I’ve tasted and judged just about every category from Bourbon to Biajiu. I’ve also judged for the L.A. Spirit Awards. However, my principle role now at SFWS is as a non-alcoholic spirits (and NA ready-to-drink cocktails) judge. In fact, that’s all I tasted this past weekend.

sfwspiritscomp

A post shared by @sfwspiritscomp

There’s a pretty straight forward process to tasting, but it’s also very thoughtfully constructed. We blind taste the spirits over the course of three days in groups of three to five people with at least one well-seasoned judge, but all the judges are spirits experts.

The spirits and RTD cocktails are brought out in flights organized by category. For instance, vodkas are paired in one flight. Aged rums in another. Each glass is labeled with a letter and served in special tasting glasses. We only know the category, any relevant flavors, alcohol content, and age. Everything else we must discern on our own.

I’ll admit that certain biases creep in. We get hungry, we get tired, we like what we like, and sometimes we reject something we don't understand, but there are several layers designed to protect against that.

All spirits are blind tasted in special glassware, identified by a letter within a numbered flight.

We take our time tasting, taking breaks when needed. We're well-fed and are paired with a range of category experts. For instance, all non-alcoholic spirits judges are familiar with non-alcoholic spirits as well as alcohol spirit categories (👋🏻 Lauren O'Brien & Lynnette Marrero).

Friendly arguments ensue and there’s often a difference of opinion, but there’s also a built in mechanism of negotiation. We label spirits Gold, Silver, Bronze or No Medal, but we may also add a plus or minus depending on our willingness to evaluate it further. If something hangs in the balance, let’s say an even split of Gold, Silver, and Bronze, we look to see if there are any pluses or minuses and then ask the judge if they’re willing to re-evaulate. Sometime they are, sometimes they aren’t. In which case, we work on averages.

Some flights are tasted by two groups where there’s deep division and some are re-reviewed either by the same group or a different group when there appears to be a discrepancy (products that had previously shown very well). All best-in-show spirits are sent to “sweepstakes,” which is where all 60 judges vote on the winners by a show of hands after re-tasting the spirits.

From left to right, the D.C. contingent: Clyde Davis, Jr., Molly Horn, L.P. O’Brien, and myself.

Before we get to what criterion I judge by, let me state a few rules. To be considered for a medal, the spirit or RTD cocktail ought to:

• Exhibit legal and normative standards for the product's respective category.

  • What this means is that certain spirits have legal requirements that govern their production. We’re not there to enforce it, but those requirements can be discerned within the spirit and help determine its quality to some extent. For example, Bourbon has to be at least 51% corn in the mash bill (aka the recipe). The remainder is barley and usually one of two other grains, rye or wheat. As professional tasters, we should be able to tell the general make-up of mash bill.

  • But there are also normative standards, aka common practices, that we use to identify the product. For instance, most people think Bourbon needs to be aged in charred new oak barrels but the law actually reads “containers.” So, there are other options, but every producer I know uses more or less the same barrels only varying the level of char. That’s something you can observe, smell, and taste because barrels impart a unique group of flavors based on their size, shape, and even where they’re made.

• Exhibit conformity to what the package or labeling implies.

  • This is of the same ilk. If the product is labeled raspberry vodka, it really should taste like raspberry. You’d be surprised how often this test is failed or fuddled.

  • For instance, we tasted a cocktail we all knew to be yellow in color but it poured out pink. As judges, we’re left trying to understand why the producer made that choice. This matters because consumers have expectations and we can’t give a gold medal to a raspberry vodka that taste likes oranges or a cosmo that’s murky brown.

Those are the general rules, but what is the criterion I use to judge the spirits and RTD cocktails?

This is my own opinion, and the other 60 judges may differ, but here it is:

Make the liquid delicious.

That’s it. There’s no other trick to winning over the judges than this. If it's delicious, it will medal.

Feel free to send a consulting fee to my home office.

But the catch is that delicious may not necessarily be my individual palate. That’s why we taste in groups between three and five people. It's not about what we like to drink, per se. And for it to taste delicious it also has to be well-made and an outstanding example within its category.

What that means to me is that it has to:

• Exhibit complexity within the parameters of its category.

  • Does the product have a range of interesting and sometimes even surprising flavor compounds that still allow the product to be identified as Bourbon, vodka, etc.? For instance, gin has to have juniper by law, but there are a range of other botanicals that can help distinguish a gin such as a heavier citrus profile (looking at you Double Gold-winning Tanqueray 10 Gin).

• The spirit is well made and not otherwise obviously flawed.

  • There are objective standards of distilling that produce consistent results with products that are not overly harsh, as in abrasive to the palate (relative to the alcohol by volume). They shouldn’t have discoloration, cloudiness, off-putting smells, or rancid or putrid flavors, unless, of course, they’re supposed to have discoloration, cloudiness, off-putting smells, or rancid or putrid flavors. An example is non-chill filtered whiskies that can be absolutely excellent but come out a little cloudy.

• Be pleasing to observe, smell, taste, and contemplate.

  • This is the most subjective part but still has important markers. It’s also more about the totality of the spirit than its constituents parts––color, aroma, taste, etc. We may pick spirits apart to try and discern what they are, but this is where we put them back together and ask a very pertinent question: Would someone enjoy drinking this?

  • You might not regard tasting within the context of contemplation, and believe it to be solely a sensory experience, but all taste is evaluated within our brains as an integration of sense information, memories, cultural knowledge, biological drives, and interoception (aka are you hot, thirsty, nauseated, etc).

Photo by Brock DuPont on Unsplash

Delicious may not be a perfect criterion, but it's worked for me to verify the very best. Have people disliked things I picked? Certainly, but I know they’re wrong. Frankly speaking, the public’s taste is just not reliable.

Sorry, but it’s true.

Consumers are an important feedback loop and the very people who will ultimately vote with their dollars. However, their concerns are somewhat different than ours. They see the price and package and have less experience with what something should look, smell, and taste like. They’re more easily susceptible to bias, have trouble articulating what they like, and can be just damn finicky. Spend one hour as a bartender and you’ll believe me.

It's important to balance the public taste with seasoned beverage professionals who have tasted hundreds of spirits and stood in front of consumers again and again, having deep conversations about what they like and don't like. Studies indicate that professional tasters, most notably sommeliers, process tasting differently. Specifically, we have tasting super powers, or “superior flavor recognition abilities.”

But it’s not fail proof. We’re still human.

I once fell in love with a bottle of banana pudding liqueur. It was in the cream liqueur category. I tasted it and was blown away. In retrospect, it was really simple, sweet and rich, playing on those aspects of taste that also love greasy burgers and potato chips. Also, I’m a sucker for banana-flavored spirits. While it warranted recognition, it didn’t warrant the case I bought afterwards. Or the sugar and alcohol-induced hangover resulting from enjoying a bottle or two.

There you have it, the curtain pulled back and the people behind the curtain revealed. We’re a generous bunch and want the producers to win. No one revels in issuing a no medal, but we also have a responsibility to that ever-so-finicky-public. If we say it’s good, it better damn well be good.

Otherwise, I’m grateful for the SFWS for having me back as a judge, Maddee McDowell for all the logistical support, the staff and volunteers, and to all the judges who risked dry mouths and swollen tongues for a cause like no other: in the service of good taste.

---

I’m excited to announce this two-part No & Low summit series in my continuing partnership with Distill Ventures. You’re invited to join us for these free seminars:

4/23 The Tier-less System: Navigating Distribution for No & Low Brands
https://lnkd.in/eZFHxyNn

6/18 Beyond Dry January: Compelling Marketing for No & Low All Year Round
https://lnkd.in/eJ9q4M8m

—

Lastly, there’s an entirely non-alcoholic spirit awards in England––the World Alcohol Free Awards. Intrepid NA spirits expert, Laura Silverman, gives her play-by-play in this post:

#BTS at World Alcohol Free Awards 🏆

---

Derek Brown is an author, award-winning bartender, NASM-certified wellness coach, and founder of Positive Damage, Inc.

This newsletter is free and public. Share with anyone you think will enjoy it.