Today I conducted a beer comparison that I want to share with the reader. It is a comparison that was rigged right from the start, not because I wanted it that way but because it was the way it worked out, given the talent available in my area. And it was a comparison I just had to make, for a number of reasons, some of which may become apparent below. Think about a soccer match at the Olympics and follow the score: At kickoff, let's examine the formations of the teams: Heineken is in a tall bottle of 650 ml, while the Pabst Blue Ribbon comes in a 355ml can. The former has a strong lineup, coming not only in a bottle rather than a can, but also in a decent size, above the diminutive stature of Midget Extinguisher, where we find the Pabst. Opening up play and bottle, Pabst Blue Ribbon's nose is a faint and sweet grain smell, while Heineken's is slightly skunky. Neither side is living up to what a truly snobbish fan would expect. As play unfolds, I pour both beers and manage to build a nice cap on the Heineken, while the head of the Pabst tends to fizzle very quickly. The packaging and appearance of the beers, which are otherwise quite similar, means a score from a set play for Heineken. It appears that both teams are now ready for a break, and PBR is down at half-time. After a short break, the whistle blows to start the second half. While PBR shows itself technically competent it has not enough style to turn things around. Heineken has a richer mouth-feel and more elaborate bready malt taste, compared to PBR's watery palate and its sweetness that starts and then lingers on the palate. There are no hops attacks in sight from PBR. Heineken manages to score on a late counter attack and clears the palate for a clean sheet. Even in time added on, we see Heineken control the play with a clearly superior lacing. But what is that? The officials are annulling the game and claim to have disqualified Heineken from the competition because it is sold in a green bottle. The snobbish fan is crushed as he listens to Frank articulate the political reasons behind the disqualification.
A nice bubble attests to malt quality.
The lacing, with the glasses in reverse position due to the tasting process and concurrently exuberant inattention.
I assume this was inspired by Dennis Hopper and Kyle MacLachlan's discussion in Blue Velvet?
ReplyDelete