Using the Style Guidelines

When we created previous versions of the style guidelines, we had no idea how prevalent and pervasive they would become. We believed we were creating a standardized set of style descriptions for use in homebrew competitions, but then found they were widely adopted worldwide to describe beer in general. Many countries with emerging craft beer markets were using them as handbooks for what to brew. Consumers and trade groups began using the styles to describe their products. And, unfortunately, many made astounding leaps of logic well beyond what was our original intent, and subsequently used the guidelines as a sort of universal Rosetta Stone for beer.

While we understand that the guidelines may have been misused in contexts beyond our original intent, we’ve also observed them being misused in competitions and for other BJCP purposes such as exam preparation and grading. Some people develop their own misinterpretations of the guidelines, and then often unknowingly instruct others in their misuse. Our hope is that the information in this section will help prevent many cases of misinterpretation and misuse in the future. If anyone encounters someone using the guidelines incorrectly, please refer them to this section.

The following maxims express our original intent, and are designed to limit misuse not prevent the guidelines from being adopted for new uses:

  1. The BJCP Style Guidelines are guidelines not specifications. Take those words at face value, or their plain meaning. Guidelines are meant to describe general characteristics of the most common examples, and serve as an aid for judging; they are not meant to be rigorously-applied specifications that are used to punish slightly unusual examples. They are suggestions, not hard limits. Allow for some flexibility in judging so that well-crafted examples can be rewarded. The guidelines are written in detail to facilitate the process of the structured evaluation of beer as practiced in homebrewing competitions; don’t take each individual statement in a style description as a reason to disqualify a beer.

  2. The Style Guidelines were written primarily for homebrew competitions. Individual style descriptions are written primarily as an aid for judging, and we have in some cases sought to define clear lines between styles to better allow for non-overlapping judging categories. We understand that some styles may overlap in the market, and some commercial examples may straddle boundaries. We have organized style categories for the purpose of organizing homebrew competitions, not for describing and communicating the styles of the world to a different audience.

  3. We know lots of people use our guidelines. We understand that many other organizations or groups are using our guidelines for purposes beyond our original intent. To the extent that those groups find value in our work, we are happy to have our guidelines used. We freely allow our naming and numbering system to be used by others. However, don’t make rash assumptions about the nature of beer and beer styles based on applications of the guidelines beyond their original intent. We also know some craft brewers are using our guidelines to rediscover historical styles, or to brew styles not native to their country - we are thrilled to be able to help advance craft beer in this way. Just remember that it’s not our original mission to do this; just a happy side-effect.

  4. Styles change over time. Beer styles change over the years, and some styles are open to interpretation and debate. Simply because a style name hasn’t changed over the years, doesn’t mean that the beers themselves haven't changed either. Commercial brewers are subject to market forces and government regulation; their products definitely change over time. Because we have a beer known as porter now doesn’t mean that it has always been made that way throughout its history. Beer styles described in the guidelines are generally meant to describe modern beers currently available, unless otherwise specified (e.g., in the Historical Beer category).

  5. Not every commercial beer fits our styles. Don’t assume that every beer fits neatly into one of our categories. Some breweries revel in creating examples that don’t match our (or anyone else’s) guidelines. Some create beers called a style name that deliberately don’t match our guidelines. It’s perfectly fine for a commercial beer to not match one of our styles; we have not attempted to categorize every commercial beer - that is not our intent or our mission.

  6. We have not defined every possible beer style. Of course we know of beer styles that aren’t defined in our guidelines. Perhaps it is because the style is obscure or unpopular, that homebrewers aren’t making the style, that insufficient examples or research material exists to adequately define it to our standards, or that it is from a part of the world we haven’t extensively visited. Perhaps it was a historical style no longer made. Or perhaps it is something we believe is a passing fad. Regardless of reason, don’t believe that our guidelines represent the complete categorization of every beer style ever made - they aren’t. They do, however, describe the beers most commonly made today by homebrewers and many craft breweries.

  7. Commercial examples change over time. Just as beer styles change, individual examples change as well. Just because a beer was once a great example of a style does not mean that it will always be a great example of the style. Sometimes the beer changes (with ownership change, perhaps) or sometimes the style trend changes but the beer doesn’t. Anchor Liberty helped define the American IPA style when it was created, but it seems much more like typical American Pale Ales today.

  8. Ingredients change over time. Hops are the best example today; there are constantly new varieties coming to market with unique characteristics. Brewers looking for a differentiator may be rapidly adopting (and abandoning) ingredients. It is difficult to say that the character of a beer style is set in stone when the ingredients typically used in it are changing constantly. Allow for these changes when judging beer; not all American or New World hops will be citrusy or piney. Don’t be rigid about judging based on what was available or commonly used at the time of this writing; understand the ingredients typically used, and adapt judging to match the changing ingredients.

  9. Most styles are fairly broad. Some believe that our styles inhibit brewer creativity by rigidly prescribing boundaries. That is not our intent; we think creativity can drive innovation, and that brewer interpretation should be allowed. However, not every innovation is a good idea, or results in a beer that is recognizable in the same grouping of others with the same name. So styles should be interpreted as having some flexibility, but within reason.

  10. The Style Guidelines are not the Ten Commandments. The words in this document are not due to divine inspiration; they were written by people making a good faith effort to describe beer as it is perceived. Don’t treat them as some kind of Holy Scripture. Don’t get so lost in parsing the individual words that you lose sight of the overall intent. The most important part of any style is the overall balance and impression; that is, that the beer reminds you of the style, and is a nicely drinkable product. To get lost in the individual descriptions loses the essence of the style. The mere fact that style descriptions can change from one edition of the guidelines to the next should be the clearest illustration that the words themselves are not sacred.

Last updated