![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
As part of my beer buying binge two weeks ago I bought a six-pack of Alaskan Amber Ale. It's been almost a year since I last had that beer. As an amber ale it's in what's probably my main go-to category and it's a pretty good example of the set. A year ago in this now long-running beer tasting project it got edged out, though, in a surprise upset by Fat Tire Ale. Well, now it's time for a rematch.
Why a rematch? Fat Tire recently changed its recipe. I do like the new Fat Tire better than the old but sometimes these changes aren't strictly linear. Though I liked the old Fat Tire better than Alaskan, and the new Fat Tire better than the old, would I like the new Fat Tire better than Alaskan?
BTW, if this sounds like a logic brain teaser it's because you're accustomed to something called the commutative property in math and logic. If A > B and B > C, then A > C. But taste is subjective and nonlinear, so such logic may not hold there!
Okay, so how do they compare now?
Alaskan pours much darker than Fat Tire, as you can see in the photo above. For amber ales that darker color is generally a positive sign. Indeed Alaskan's taste fulfills what its color implies: it's a rich tasting beer completely typical of the amber ale category. It's a great example of why amber ale is one of my favorite categories, if not my overall favorite.
As much as Alaskan has going for it, Fat Tire beats it again. Despite its paler color, Fat Tire has an even richer flavor. It also has a stronger note of hops that shines through the sweetness and richness, giving the beer extra backbone. That makes it both more interesting to sip on its own and a better accompaniment to rich or spicy food.
The difference between new and old Fat Tire shows well in this rematch. Recall from the first match-up how I thought Fat Tire's slightly sour hops finish might be a minus. It turned out to be a palate-cleanser for drinking the beer with rich food. The new Fat Tire no longer has that slightly sour finish. Instead the hops flavor is better integrated into the beer so it's no longer a slight aftertaste. Yes, New Belgium Brewing made the beer better by changing it; no "New Coke" travesty here!
Why a rematch? Fat Tire recently changed its recipe. I do like the new Fat Tire better than the old but sometimes these changes aren't strictly linear. Though I liked the old Fat Tire better than Alaskan, and the new Fat Tire better than the old, would I like the new Fat Tire better than Alaskan?
BTW, if this sounds like a logic brain teaser it's because you're accustomed to something called the commutative property in math and logic. If A > B and B > C, then A > C. But taste is subjective and nonlinear, so such logic may not hold there!
Okay, so how do they compare now?
Alaskan pours much darker than Fat Tire, as you can see in the photo above. For amber ales that darker color is generally a positive sign. Indeed Alaskan's taste fulfills what its color implies: it's a rich tasting beer completely typical of the amber ale category. It's a great example of why amber ale is one of my favorite categories, if not my overall favorite.
As much as Alaskan has going for it, Fat Tire beats it again. Despite its paler color, Fat Tire has an even richer flavor. It also has a stronger note of hops that shines through the sweetness and richness, giving the beer extra backbone. That makes it both more interesting to sip on its own and a better accompaniment to rich or spicy food.
The difference between new and old Fat Tire shows well in this rematch. Recall from the first match-up how I thought Fat Tire's slightly sour hops finish might be a minus. It turned out to be a palate-cleanser for drinking the beer with rich food. The new Fat Tire no longer has that slightly sour finish. Instead the hops flavor is better integrated into the beer so it's no longer a slight aftertaste. Yes, New Belgium Brewing made the beer better by changing it; no "New Coke" travesty here!
