What the fuck? Why is there a heart-shaped basketball on the bottle cap? I do not understand! The label is less nonsensical but generic and like everything from Browar Witnica pretty crappy, as if they entrusted the graphic design to someone's 14-year-old cousin who knew how to pirate Photoshop.

In this shitty packaging is a nice Eastern European lager. At 6.5% ABV and 13.1% extract by weight it's as strong as an average Bock. The pidgin English on the back label calls it a "light natural beer" but it's light only in color. Imagine a Bock without the amber color and caramel element in the flavor and there you are. It's really quite tasty and does a good job of hiding the alcohol. I've tried a few stronger beers from this brewery a few months ago and this is better than any of them.

I'm not sure if there's a proper name for this style yet, but I've seen a few beers like this from Eastern European breweries - above 6% ABV, light in color, often unpasteurized, strongly hopped, and a little on the expensive side. The best one of those I tried was called Horse Power, and if my memory doesn't deceive me it was Czech. I should review it if I ever come across it again...

This is one of those very old-school, vaguely medieval German beers, and considerably cheaper than any other Keller I've ever run across. That didn't have me expecting much, but this is a pretty good and interesting brew. It feels pretty thin, as can be expected with the style, and doesn't have a very strong flavor, but the flavor it does have is interesting and pretty complex. It definitely tastes different than a run-of-the-mill lager. There seem to be some spices other than hops used to add bitterness, though I'm not quite sure what they are. The carbonation and head retention are also good by Keller standards.

Yeah, this is a pretty light (4,9% ABV), refreshing beer with a slightly fruity taste, and I like it. Life is not all Baltic porters.

If we know anything about the Scots, it is that they like to drink. While Swedes only have one or two beers while watching football on TV, the Scots bulge down a whole local brewery before the game has even started. Yet, while it would be a big mistake to suggest that the solution to Scotland's alcohol problems lies in the "Swedish model," some insist:

Research has shown that, given the opportunity, both Scots and Swedes binge drink. Yet the average Swede consumes 9 litres of pure alcohol per year, compared with 12 for the average Scot.

"Our own research indicates that the 'Systembolaget' monopoly reduces consumption by 25-30%," he tells me. "As a consequence it also reduces alcohol related problems."

"It takes political skill and motivation to control alcohol problems," Sven Andreasson tells me. "But our policies are based on research which shows the most powerful tools to control alcohol problems in a nation involve price and availability."

The message in the article is surprisingly clear: Sweden's heavy taxation on alcohol really works. But hold your horses, because I'm about to explain why the pro-taxation arguments don't hold, and why Sweden is in worse drunken problems today than it has ever been.

Myth 1: Sweden's government monopoly "Systembolaget" helps to lower alcohol consumption

Then why are Swedes drinking more today than they have been for the last 100 years? Alcohol consumption in Sweden has increased by more than 30 % since the mid-1990s. One reason to this is the heavy taxation; instead of paying more at home, Swedes pay less abroad (mainly Denmark and Germany). Critics say this is because of Sweden's entry into EU and its liberal border laws, but that doesn't explain why alcohol consumption has also increased from Systembolaget. Swedes are simply drinking more, despite the government monopoly.

Myth 2: Tax cuts always lead to increased alcohol consumption

Another interesting example, and close neighbor to Scotland, is Ireland:

Despite having the highest tax regime on alcohol in Europe, our [Ireland's] levels of consumption remains amongst the highest.

With easier movement of people and travel a much more common pursuit, it is increasingly easier to buy alcohol from abroad- something that would only be encouraged by higher taxes at home.

Furthermore recent research carried out in Scandinavia and published in the periodical Addiction showed that consumption of alcohol fell or remained flat following cuts in taxes on alcohol in Sweden and Finland.

Apparently there's not necessarily a casual relationship between price and consumption. Even the liberal government institutions admit this. Take a look at this graph for instance:

Looking at this, it's easy to arrive at the conclusion that there's a relationship of causality going on here, when experts themselves merely hint at a relationship of correlation:

There is a clear association between price, availability and consumption. But there is less sound evidence for the impact of introducing specific policies in a particular social and political context:

• our analysis showed that the drivers of consumption are much more complex than merely price and availability;
• evidence suggested that using price as a key lever risked major unintended side effects;
• the majority of those who drink do so sensibly the majority of the time.
Policies need to be publicly acceptable if they are to succeed; and
• measures to control price and availability are already built into the system.

The influence of price on consumption is complex. For one thing, there
can be cross price effects ie if the price of one alcoholic beverage increases relative
to the others, some consumers may switch to a cheaper alternative. There is also
the question of incomes. The effects of increases in prices may be reduced or
cancelled out by increases in disposable income.

Do we really expect brainless and slow bureaucracies to calculate those complex relationships? Obviously price affects consumption, but does lower prices necessarily mean people booze more? Apparently not. We also know that high prices don't necessarily limit boozing--Ireland and Sweden are two examples of this, so something is wrong with this pro-taxation argument.

Myth 3: Tax cuts is the primary factor in limiting alcohol consumption

Since there's no clear causal relationship between price and consumption, we don't know this, because there are several counterexamples. Other factors that may be equal to or even more important than price:

• Greater wealth: if young people began boozing more in the UK after the 1960s, we might as well point to an increasingly richer middle class, which acquires new needs with more cash in the pocket.
• Cultural attitudes: Danes are famous for their drinking culture, as are Englishmen, Scots and Irishmen. How come? Continental cultures have a different attitude to alcohol than, say, genuinely Nordic countries. Put simply, while the Continentals drink a little now and then, Swedes drink it all during two days a week. Danes often have a drink or two after work, and then they go home. In Sweden this is taboo behavior; people would suspect you're an alcoholic. In Sweden you drink nothing during work days, until Friday and Saturday, when you pour down it all at bars and clubs open to till 4 am the next day. In England whole families meet at the pub to socialize. In Sweden people would think the parents were terrible people who need government support. That these cultural differences aren't mentioned when comparing Swedish and Scottish alcohol consumption is proof of cheap journalism.
• The liberal revolution: "The birth of the Celtic Tiger led to dramatically increased disposable income, a more liberal society where values like obedience and abstinence were no longer prevalent and changes in work and commuting routines which added to changing consumption patterns." Not that hard to understand: it would be deeply scandalous if young people in Sweden began boozing and trashing the city during the 1930s or 40s. After the leftist-liberal revolution in '68, youth culture began and young people started having random sex, drinking, doing drugs and voting for more government policies. This is uncomfortable for North European Nanny States to admit, because their whole voting base is centered around the ideals from this liberal-leftist revolution. That it brought reckless drinking no longer rooted in tradition, no one wants to mention. The lack of traditional drinking (= drinking certain spirits at certain occasions under certain conditions only) has of course made people more prone to drink when they feel like it, which was rarely the case back in history.
• Existential crisis: it's not news that Europe's populations don't feel well. Suicide rates are sky-rocketing among young people. When you feel your life is shit, it's easy to start drinking or doing drugs. But governments don't know how to treat social or cultural problems, so it's much easier to point to bureaucratic figures like prices and spend all energy beating down on that instead.
• Globalization: of course EU and the process of globalization in general has led to increased binge drinking across the chart. But this is the development we're seeing today and suddenly enforcing protectionist policies against alcohol trade over borders don't seem like a realistic solution. In fact, it would go against everything else that Sweden and Scotland supposedly stand for.

I can think of more, and so can you, I'm sure, so let's just agree that price obviously not is a lone factor in this equation, and most likely not the primary one, considering what we already know.

Myth 4: If you don't support the Nanny State, you support the evil alcohol industry

Here we go. This same argument always comes up with the tobacco industry as well. OF COURSE, alcohol industries want to sell their products. Why wouldn't they? Interestingly, so does our governments, because the tax increases help bureaucracies expand their interests and services. So we have two "bad boys" playing against each other, rather than some innocent governmental institution against some evil industry complex against public health. This whole argument is ridiculous for two reasons:

1. Reputation: Why would the alcohol industry really want out-of-control binge drinking? The more problems with alcohol and public health/safety, the more the press will stress the dangers of alcohol and thus hurt profits for the industry. Industries don't like to get bad reputation. This is especially true for local breweries who see their mission more as a cultural one than as an economical one.

2. The industry pours in money to health organizations and frequently warns about health dangers associated with binge drinking.

The alcohol industry wants to make money, but it's hardly evil, and we'd be quite mistaken if we assumed the government is any less irresponsible. In fact, our governments are currently making money off of drunk people doing stupid things, yet this way is somehow supposed to be better than if the money landed in the pockets of industries who at least create job opportunities.

Myth 5: If you believe in individual responsibility, you are a careless person

From New Zealand's Drug Foundation page:

Firstly, alcohol is an addictive substance. Addiction and dependency seriously impair the ability to make rational decisions.

This is not an argument against the belief in individual responsibility. No one claims alcohol isn't addictive or doesn't affect you. On the contrary, if this substance really is so bad, people need to think about how they use it.

Secondly,consumers find themselves in an environment in which several millions of dollars are spent on alcohol marketing.

They do, but do they drink because of the ads themselves, or the culture they're in? Ads might trigger behavior, but that behavior is already there if you look at a specific culture. In other words, we need to look at the cultural environment and not just prices. This is still not an argument against individual responsibility, or the belief that the industry should be able to promote its products.

Another important aspect to keep in mind is that harmful alcohol use is rarely an individual problem. Rather, it impacts on family, friends, neighbours, work colleagues and, ultimately,society as a whole.

Individual responsibility and individual problems are two different things. It's still possible, without any contradictions, to hold the belief that promoting individual responsibility will benefit the social whole. The argument also overlooks pure facts like the increase in Swedish alcohol consumption despite price control.

Contrary to the widely held misperception, alcohol harms are not confined to the heaviest drinkers in a population but are much more widespread. For example, recent research from Finland found that the majority of problems occurred in 90 percent of the population consuming moderately, compared to the 10 percent of the population drinking heavily.

Of course they did--do you really think 10 % of a population can top the riot of 90 %? The majority of a population who drink moderately is naturally expected to cause more general trouble, which may be related to alcohol, but probably involve a range of other factors. For instance, if I had a beer one night at a bar and later got into an argument with my girlfriend and began fighting her, I would be a part of these statistics. Yet few people would suggest the alcohol was to blame at all. It'd be like saying the majority of sane drivers get involved in more car accidents than drunk drivers. So?

Myth: Raising prices has no effect on heavy or binge drinkers. This myth is widely disseminated by certain sectors and frequently cited in media reports. Yet the evidence shows the opposite is true. Price increases and a set minimum price have a much greater effect on heavier than on lighter drinkers, with modest or only small extra financial cost to lighter drinkers.

But if the heavy drinkers cause minimal problems compared to moderate drinkers, why should we care? The conclusion remains: we punish a great majority for a minority's drinking problems. But the minimum prices are so "modest" and only mean a "small extra financial cost" to light drinkers, you say? If they're so small no one should care, why do you claim people do care and actually lower their alcohol consumption? There's clearly both confusion and hypocrisy behind the central pro-taxation arguments.

Myth 6: Legislation is effective in changing cultural behavior

Is it? NZ's Drug Foundation continues while drawing parallels to smoking:

While legislation alone won’t change our drinking culture, its role in shaping behaviour should not be dismissed outof hand. Our view is that legislation has a crucial role to play in influencing the drinking environment, which is currently oriented towards ease of access and excess. We also believe there are important parallels that can be drawn from the success of anti-smoking legislation, where a substantial culture change has occurred following the enactment of smokefree legislation. There has been a significant shift in attitudes towards smoking in public places since the smokefree legislation.

No one is dismissing legislation as unimportant, otherwise we wouldn't object to it, but the fact that people smoke less at public places doesn't really mean people smoke less overall. We want to control the consumption of alcohol, not control where people drink, so this parallel is pretty uninteresting. If people smoke less today (if they do, in NZ or in Sweden) is probably more due to a recent interest in health and environmental trends than the silly warnings on smoke packages that say "Cancer can kill you" or "Smoking poses a dangerous health risk." If we put signs on cannabis packages that said "When you're high, you may lose self-control," would that reduce the smoking of drugs? Yeah, it's that silly.

Myth 7: Alcohol is a "special" commodity

The Drug Foundation adds:

Alcohol is no ordinary commodity. It is an addictive substance that can lead to long-term dependence. It isassociated with a range of acute and chronic health harms and has been classified by WHO as a Class 1 carcinogen, alongside asbestos, formaldehyde, mustard gas and plutonium-239.

Why would this make alcohol a "special" commodity? I know a lot of things that are either inherently dangerous, or can be misused to become dangerous. Should we raise prices on knives because some people use them to kill people instead of food? There's no clear argument why alcohol would be a commodity exempt from basic economic market laws. Creating a monopoly on something like alcohol or drugs feeds illegal markets. This is one simple law that's already come true during every prohibition in history, both in America and Europe. Why do you think teenagers buy dope from gang lords in slums? Because if an industry doesn't sell it, crack heads will.

Myth 8: Without government monopoly, the rich selection of alcohol at a place like Systembolaget wouldn't be possible

The last time I was at a bar, I spoke with the owner while sipping a Czech Staropramen Granat (sweeter than the original, recommended). He told me the local city once had a fine brewery, but it closed down a few years ago. "That's how it goes with Big Capitalism eating everything up," he finished off saying. Maybe he was right: there was no market for that product, so it had to go. As Frank has noticed, tracking down finer European beer in the States isn't as easy as it is for a Swede to walk into any Systembolaget store and buy home a rare Belgian ale no one's ever heard of.

But there are a few problems with this argument. First, do we really want that monopoly control and price fixing that goes along with being served a selection of spirits that a majority of people are unlikely to ever explore to its fullest (hilariously, when you walk into a Systembolaget store, most people cram down mediocre beer brewed by Swedish companies)? Secondly, just because you cannot survive on doing something, it doesn't mean you should have the government to back you up. That line of argumentation, if applied to most or all commodities on the market, would be insane (i.e. Communism).

Third, and most importantly, because this is what I told the bar owner: Yeah, I guess too few people bought from that brewery, but how well did they market themselves? What if they'd both sell to Systembolaget (or any bigger liquor store if we didn't have monopoly) and export to Europe? The rest of Europe is fascinated by Swedish beer. It wouldn't be hard to find customers if the product was good. Just look at Stockholm Beer Festival; local Swedish beer is going stronger than ever. It should also be noted that Swedes have lately changed from a beer-nation to being a wine-nation.

Conclusion: Nanny State control is not effective in limiting alcohol abuse

Looking at the pro-taxation and pro-monopoly arguments, we see that a Nanny State controlling people's urges through price control and market intervention is a pretty ineffective and misdirected policy. So what can we do about the alcohol related problems? As a Conservative, I propose:

• A sound (Continental) pub culture.
• Linking alcohol consumption to special occasions through cultural traditions.
• Creating alcohol societies for the public where taste and quality are central, and notions of getting drunk are discarded as immature and misdirected.
• Stronger parental involvement in what their kids do at night.
• No alcohol monopoly, but start out by keeping Systembolaget as private-run companies offering a wide range of products.
• More public health figures on TV who promote a sound lifestyle and link it to physical and mental well-being and success.
• A better social future for younger generations by embracing private-run organizations where youngsters can perform different activities involving friendship, personal responsibility and independent thinking.

I bet these suggestions combined, which don't really need the help of any government program, would do more good for many cultures than all the price fixing and monopoly creation in the world. Cheers to that mate!

Alex and Martin have abused the alcohol tag for too long with reviews of beer. Today, we're reviewing one of man's finest creations: single malt scotch whisky, specifically one of the Islays - the wonderful Lagavulin 16 year.

I traveled to Scotland last year and tried a whole bunch of different scotch whiskies, single malt only. I can't even remember all the names of different scotches I sampled, but Lagavulin and Laphroaig stuck out as two of the best I tried on my trip. Once I found a couple that I liked, I stuck to them - I realized that as little as I know about the different regions, origins, ingredients, etc. of a fine single malt, I knew that I liked Islays the best out of any others I had tried.

I've found that many compare the Lagavulin to Laphroaig, another Islay. As I am somewhat picky with what I drink, I compared the Lagavulin to Laphroaig 15 year vs. the standard ten year product.

Laphroaig doesn't have quite as rich an amber color to it as Lagavulin, nor does it have the long, sustained drive of smoky expression. Both are great, but Lagavulin seems to add that extra bit of complexity, reflected in its color and scent, and has a deep peaty flavor. Lagavulin stays with you a while and is an acquired taste. Thus, if you're not used to drinking scotch whisky, particularly Islays, stay away and try something a bit lighter, even a blend, and get a good idea of what you like and don't like as you work your way up in terms of strength of flavor and smokiness.

Some prefer scotch on the rocks. Personally, I only drink it neat, and for a scotch as complex as the Lagavulin, I would recommend doing likewise to experience the full flavor. This is one of those scotches that you'll be proud to drink once you've developed the taste; the smoky aftertaste is so strong, it may even keep you warm on a cold winter's night. It's easy to imagine that's what the distillery had in mind when creating this fine spirit.

La Goudale (Bière de Garde, 7.80%)

Appearance: Bière de Gardes La Goudale pours an orange-to-golden colour with a rich, foamy, white head, however looks to be a bit flat because of its low carbonation.

Smell: Sweet and caramelly with hints of yeast and yet fresh.

Taste: Much like the smell La Goudale holds a deep sweetness to it, and at the same time a clearly distinct bitterness reminiscent of bread – greatly poised!

Mouthfeel: Medium full and greatly mellifluous, though it leaves a quite dry sensation afterwards.

Drinkability: Highly recommended, primarily due to the fact that its taste holds a great symbiosis of sweet and bitter.

Additionally, La Goudale actually goes very well along with hors d'oeuvres made of gravlax, (hand) whipped cream (no, not that kind Mr. Bator, think again!) and whitefish roe, or any other Scandinavian fish dish for that matter, seriously, try it!

Ruedrich's Red Seal Ale (American Amber / Red Ale, 5.50%)

Appearance: Pours a dark amber with a diminutive vanilla-coloured crown which leaves a sporadic tracing of residue on the glass.

Smell: Strongly sweet and fresh smell of hops, somewhat similar to Belgian Dark Ales.

Taste: Moderate in strength, but distinctively bitter in collaboration with a gentle, fruity feeling and a somewhat artificial/metallic (in lack of better words) sense to it.

Mouthfeel: A bit "thin", or watery body with sensible carbonation.

Drinkability: Comes off as an ale that can be enjoyed in a numerous amount of occasions, however fails to become a prime choice due to its artificial aftertaste.

Left Hand Milk Stout (Milk/Sweet Stouts, 5.20%)

Appearance: Left Hand Brewing Company's Milk Stout pours a very dark vermillion colour along with a thick and rich light brown-to-wheat crown, which is persistent for several minutes.

Smell: Chocolate caramel milk (obviously) with hints of coffee.

Taste: Corresponding with the smell, this Milk Stout tastes of chocolate milk along with lots and lots of well-roasted coffee (which becomes vividly apparent when served at a higher temperature), other than that, the alcohol isn't noticeable at all.

Mouthfeel: Pleasingly creamy and full (reminiscent of the dairy product in question ...duh!) medium in carbonation.

Drinkability: Highly recommended for any fan of Milk/Sweet Stouts since it delivers all of the styles characteristics to your tongue, palate and throat in a great and prominent manner.

Black Boss Porter (Baltic Porter, 9.40%)

Appearance: Black Boss Porter pours a dark, dark vermillion colour along with a rich light brown head that leaves some lacing.

Smell: First of there is chocolate along with a slight touch of sourness, closely followed by hints of molasses and rounded of with a powerful cup of Colombian dark roast.

Taste: Comes off as somewhat burnt in the beginning, later on you get the smell characteristics of chocolate-to-coffee with a gentle – yet clearly reminiscent – sense of humus (the dark organic material in soils) in a fashion that fits this particular kind of porter perfectly.

Mouthfeel: Somewhat low in carbonation, viscosity is full and smooth.

Drinkability: A Baltic Porter the way it should be; dark, heavy and rough, hence Black Boss is probably not suited for consumption in any larger amount of quantities at once – however still, highly recommended.

Saranac Black Forest (Schwarzbier, 5.50%)

Appearance: Saranac Black Forest pours a dark, dark maroon colour (somewhat similar to the one of a coke, you know it insidiously looks as if to be dark, dark brown but really isn't?) and a relatively high – light brown-to-cream yellow colour – crown which diminishes rather quickly and leaves some lacing.

Smell: Sweet, malty and caramelly, almost with a fruit sensation to it at times. Great!

Taste: Once again, in great correlation with the smell: caramel and malt (not all that bitter though) with a slightly acidic reminiscence to it in the aftertaste.

Mouthfeel: Medium full and creamy with low carbonation, it's smooth, smooooth like Shaft (not "a shaft", ya perv!) to the palate. Can you dig it?

Drinkability: Another? Surely, pleasing to down, rich to the experience, what more can you ask for? – Yarr, tis be a top notch Schwarzbier!

So once again: another? – Why, thank you! Yes, I just think I might! (So he did, and thus lived moderately happy ever after).

Samuel Adams Honey Porter (American Porter, 5.45%)

Appearance: Samuel Adams Honey Porter pours a dark maroon-to-ruby colour along with a high (ca 2,5 inches), light brown-to-orange crown, which diminishes rather slowly and eventually leaves plenty of decrepit letters-looking lacing.

Smell: At first there is a sweetness reminiscent to that of plums and raisins and then there is some dark bread in the background.

Taste: The first thing that strikes me is that for a so-called "honey porter" is that it isn't all that sweet... Nonetheless, Samuel Adams Honey Porter is not a bad beer, far from it! Sure, it has some mild, honey-like characteristics in the beginning but they are almost directly dominated by a acrid sensation which is clearly evident in throughout the entirety of the taste.

Mouthfeel: Medium in carbonation. Body: Full. Round. Smooth. Great!

Drinkability: Surely interesting, however it's ultimately not all that convincing as a "honey porter"... but as a porter? Sure! Give it a go ya ho!

Samuel Adams Winter Lager (Bock, 5.80%)

Appearance: Samuel Adams Winter Lager pours a copper colour along with small amounts of carbonation and a medium-sized yellow-brown crown, which resides rather quickly and leaves barely no lacing.

Smell: First and foremost a caramelly maltiness, and to some extent a citrus fruit/ginger, freshness.

Taste: Sweet and full maltiness, the caramel makes a reappearence – and whadda ya know, it brought some friends! Namely a tad of sourness (the citrus fruit in the smell), the hops in form of a slight, but still fairly distinct, bitterness and they all stay for the palate-party (even though some of them did make a late arrival) with great results!

Mouthfeel: Almost as creamy as they come, full and adequately medium-to-low in carbonation.

Drinkability: Oh how I wish this wasn't my last one (I have been saving it for almost a year now)! And I do wish so primarily due to the fact that it holds a balance between the – almost – equally satisfying smell and taste experiences, which qualifies Sam' Adams Winter Lager as a definite "let's have another one, eh?!"-er!

Coopers Best Extra Stout (Export Stout, 6.30%)

Appearance: Coopers Best Extra Stout pours a thick dark, dark, dark, dark-dark opaque brown along with a small crown which diminishes rather quickly.

Smell: Plenty of chocolate along with some notes of dark ryebread and roasted malts.

Taste: Similar to that of smokeporter actually, I get the sensation of charcoal (don't have any perticular recollection of ever tasting it, but who knows right...), it is, however, most likely the roasted malts making themselves noticed. Then what? Well, there's some hints of caramelized sugar and a mellow tone of bitterness in the aftertaste.

Mouthfeel: So fudgepackingly thick and creamy, oh lawdy lawd and plenty of carbonation too (NOT too much, but plenty)!

Drinkability: Rich to the flavour, decently poised between the taste and smell, great mouthfeel, shure a bit heavy, but me likey likey AND SO DO YOU!

Anchor Liberty Ale (American Pale Ale, 6.00%)

Appearance: Anchor Liberty Ale pours an apricot colour along with a creamy and frothy crown of great persistence, low amounts of carbonation are visible.

Smell: Mainly apricot and peach with notes of yeast and an overall sourness in a great combination!

Taste: A sweetness similar to the above mentioned fruits, only a bit more discrete this time. Dry and distinctively bitter in its aftertaste, at times, almost with an Absinthe-like wormwood-dryness.

Mouthfeel: Medium full and rather creamy, carbonation is subtle but not low or all too distant.

Drinkability: A bit too over-represented in its bitterness. Personally, I would've liked it if the fruitier and sweeter notes were a bit more pronounced, but then again it sort of fades at a higher temperature.

Hibernation Ale (Old Ale, 8.00%)

Vintage 2007

Appearance: Great Divides Hibernation Ale poured into a snifter delivers dark ruby colour along with a pale grey medium dense crown, which resides after a minute and leaves plenty of lacing on the side of the glass.

Smell: Probably the most accentuated and powerful aromas that I've ever come across in a beer! We get bread dough and some diacetyl, (or sweet yeast and syrup in combination with some butter for that matter) dark fruits like plums, raisins and figs along with some caramel lurking in the "background," that is, if there is a background for this beer...

Taste: Primarily an upfront burnt malt sensation (greatly similar to that of the charcoal taste one could get from a "smoked beer") this, however gradually transforms into a more and more bitter – and slightly acidic – character as the temperature increases (and come to think of it: perhaps some liquorice from the coal-like sensation).

Continually, we get a caramel and butter 'n' bread-like sweetness. The figs emerge once again, but in a more gentle fashion this time, the alcohol is not all that prominent in taste but leaves a warming finish.

Mouthfeel: Creamy and full as hell! As stated this is a vintage and therefore it has a lower amount of carbonation but still enough to spice up the smooth character of this beer along with some freshness.

Drinkability: Tried it when I first bought it in 2007, have one left, gonna store it for at least another year, or so, and then compare it to that year's batch. Will be going back to this one as often as possible. It is a rich and rewarding beer in all of the sensory experience compartments, truly worth a try!

Fuller's India Pale Ale (English India Pale Ale, 4.90%)

Appearance: Fuller's India Pale Ale pours a persimmon-to-amber colour along with a fuzzy white crown that gradually disintegrates in a quick pace, cheddar-cheese manner, like an imploding building, leaving a sporadic amount of lacing on the side. Plenty of dormant carbonation on the bottom of the pint glass, looks like a collection of caviare eggs waiting to be devoured by voracious predators...

Smell: Strong and fresh aromas of slightly bitter, yet citric zest, and utterly sweet scents of apricot - and lot's of it! Not completely unlike a smoothie or purée, pretty grand actually. At a closer whiff we get a caramel cream and bread-like maltiness mixing with some burnt or earthy notes hiding in the back with a tad of pineapple.

Taste: The bread-like characteristics are pretty upfront, intense but short in lifespan. A pleasant and lingering bitterness which does not dominate the show, but sticks around until the final like a true champ is what comes next. The sweetness is clearly reduced compared to how it presented itself in the smell and instead replaced with a slightly citric touch, which in combination with the aforementioned bitter hops brings grapefruit to mind! Additionally, the caramel cream sweetness does however reveal itself a bit more as the temperature of the beer gets closer to reaching an equilibrium with the room.

Mouthfeel: Smooth and creamy in texture, somewhat low in carbonation, medium-to-thin in the body and with a dry finish.

Drinkability: Very resonant in taste and smell, even though some of the characteristics switched priorities in the hegemony of sensational order. Milder than I expected it to be, guess I've had me one too many of the Yankee versions... Nonetheless, this is an IPA not to be ignored, it's interesting and has a prominently hoppy tone, winning not by measures of strength but of perseverance.

Well's Banana Bread Beer (Fruit/Vegetable Beer, 5.20%)

Appearance: Well's Banana Bread Beer pours a thick amber colour along with a short crown below a third of an inch, the crown in question disappears quickly and leaves a circle of lacing along the glass, while legions of small bubbles ascend to the surface like The Horned One and his rebel angels reclaiming their lost domain.

Smell: Oh would you guess it – bananas! The fairtraide-bull aside, they come forth in a synthetic way, i.e NOT PLEASING. Additionally, acrid 'n' acid tones hide there in between the shadows of the palm trees.

Taste: Aforementioned fruit (or is it berry, or herb now again?) comes forward like a blooming of a exotic vegetable of not noteworthy character. Sure you can feel the taste of banananananana, but it ain't merely enough, gladly we get a pretty decent maltiness, which saves the day by adding a sense of variation amidst of all this monotonous flavour sensation.

Mouthfeel: Watery as funk, medium-to-low in carbonation, other than that fairly smooth.

Drinkability: Even though I thoroughly detest bananas and their wimp flavours in their original form, I decided to put that aside and review this one from a neutral stand point, thus the disappointment lies not in the choice of flavouring, but in the fact that it is all too weak and bland.

An anonymous commenter wrote something worth looking deeper into:

I think this applies to all of us in the local music scene...I like the attention I get from gentlemen in between sets...usually other musicians...and I make a lot of friends that way...but the big shows with big stages (yes, I play these too)...most of the people are in awe of a woman who is not a "chick singer" and they don't know how to approach me...

It definitely is easier to meet people and make new friends at some types of concerts than at others. For maximizing opportunities for sex with groupies the dynamics are different, but I will uncharacteristically ignore sex while I write this post and just stick to the subject of forming friendships.

Playing music in public is a great way to "be somebody" and make other people interested in you. Some of those people will want to meet you, shake your hand and get to know you. Yet they do this a lot more at some kinds of concerts than others. Anonymous writes that large stages and large venues keep this from happening because they make you seem less approachable. I agree that playing in auditoriums and concert halls will generally make you fewer friends than playing clubs, but I don't think that venue size is the major part of the story. I suspect the venue's design and purpose has more to do with it than size. If it was really just about venue size, artists would make fewer new friends at exhibit openings in large galleries than in small ones. I don't think that's true, though if any artists know how it works from experience please let me know in the comments.

I think it's easier to meet people and socialize in places which are designed primarily for selling alcohol, such as pubs. Notice how it's considered unusual and almost rude for band members to pack up and go home as soon as they finish their last set - the normal expectation is that you'll at least have a drink and spend some time being social with fans and other band members. It's also perfectly normal for audience members to hang out at the venue afterwards, even for many hours if an afterparty develops. There is also plenty of opportunity to talk before the gig and during breaks. The more time everyone spends in the venue the more drinks sold and the happier the owner.

That kind of thing just doesn't happen in auditoriums, theaters and arenas whose lifeblood is ticket sales not alcohol sales. There the audience basically leaves when the show ends as there isn't much else to do. Some will stand around chatting for a little while but not for too long. Also the band will usually disappear somewhere into the back after they tear down which makes them more difficult to locate. You can still make few friends at that kind of gig, but it'll mostly be among the organizers, other bands etc. Even if you're out in the audience during someone else's set the seating arrangements facing the stage don't facilitate socializing and the amplification is more likely to render attempts at conversation pointless.

There are ways to play big stages and make plenty of friends, though. One is to plan an official or semi-official afterparty at a nearby pub. Another is to play various non-music festivals. For example, those tourism-promoting civic fests don't really revolve around alcohol sales or socializing but their purpose is to give people something to do for a few hours or even for the whole day, and that provides plenty of opportunity for people to approach the band they dug.

I guess much of the above probably also applies to making new friends when you're part of the audience, but I attend concerts where I'm not playing so rarely (once every few years) that I wouldn't really know.

NHL enforcer Georges Laraque is in a bit of trouble for violating the collective bargaining agreement between the players and the league by appearing in an alcohol ad. He says he didn't know what the ad was for and has apologized, but that s not the interesting part.

Here's the ad:

And here's the predictable feminist reaction:

33mag.com, the advertising company responsible for the spot, said it was done as a parody of sexist beer ads. Octane 7.0 combines an energy drink with alcohol.

"This is one more example of sexist advertising," said Alexa Conradi, of the Federation des femmes du Quebec, the province's most prominent women's group. "Why is it that when we're trying to market a campaign toward men aged 20 to 35, we always use this kind of ad? What does that say about our concept of masculinity?

"That's a very limited concept of masculinity, to always feature half-naked girls at angles where you don't see their whole body," Conradi said.

I'm not generally too hard on feminists - they never bother unreformable cavemen like me and most of their attacks are really directed against nerds, wimps and losers. In this I can't help laughing, though - it seems that feminists insist on taking parody at face value and can't resist giving this product tons of free publicity. Oh well. I suppose status-conscious people can now add attractive women to the list of things which cannot be enjoyed even ironically, alongside Ed Hardy clothing, "Nazi Uniforms, Ku Klux Klan Robes, and self-tanner".

As for what all this says about our concept of masculinity, I'd say that concept is pretty accurate when it comes to including the idea that young men like looking at attractive young women.

Their strong porter is excellent, so what about their golden-looking ale? The smell reeks of hops when opening the bottle. After sip, a somewhat surprising flavor builds up, combining a richness of hops with what seems to me like honey, but apparently it also contains scents of peaches, which would explain the slightly fruity dimension.

Of course it's heavily bitter. Definitely not sweet. Despite only containing 5,2 % alcohol, you can taste it, and so this ale is probably for the beer fans rather than for everyday drinkers (negative-sounding term, I know). The slightly acidic aftertaste rounds up this experience, which in summary is another solid beer from Oppigård's. Not as complex as it possibly could be, but well within standards of a good, traditional ale with depth.

This black-looking British stout smells overwhelmingly of cacao, and to a lesser degree of coffee. Like the name suggests, Young's Double Chocolate Stout tastes heavily of dark chocolate, and leaves a considerably bitter aftertaste. This beer is altogether very wholesome and rich in taste, making it more a social drink rather than something you enjoy together with food (unless it's chocolate).

Like most British-style stouts it's fermented to a lower alcohol percentage, in this case 5,2 %. That's enough, because a stronger version would probably make it less drinkable and take the edge off its flavor trademark, which is an unusually round but distinct character of cacao and coffee. It's one of the better stouts in its class and I can, without overstating its merits, recommend it to our readers.

What a lovely smell. This brown-black Swedish beauty oozes of dark chocolate and coffee, nicely accentuated by a fruity scent of syrup. First sip confirms the incredible harmony of D. Carnegie & Co's Class III porter. The mellow flavor of coffee and dark chocolate meet a sugary, slightly fruity roundness that few porters can pride themselves with.

The careful carbonation helps to create a creamy impression if letting the beer linger in the mouth. There's a distinct bitterness present, but it quickly fades into a more sweet, coffee-like sensation that absolutely hides the 5,5 % of alcohol. After a bottle of this I am wholly positive: the old Swedish breweries have done it again. This is a porter so harmonic and balanced in flavor, yet full of mellow character, that it's absolutely worth chasing this down.

Chimay Tripel (White) (Tripel, 8.00%)

Appearance: Chimay Tripel pours an opaque apricot orange tone along with a yellow-to-white crown of approximately 1 ½ inches of height that diminishes in a slow pace as small delicate bubbles rise to the surface.

Smell: Sweet scents of exotic fruits, namely, banana with yeasty notes and perhaps a touch of liquorice. Overall the aromas present themselves in a very round and gentle fashion.

Taste: Resonating to the smell we get some fruity and sweet notes of banana, yeast and a bitterness that is short but rather stingy.

Mouthfeel: Creamy, round and medium in body. Carbonation emerges in a satisfactory manner, i.e not blatantly overwhelming but fittingly refreshing and medium in strength.

Drinkability: As always with Chimay a great Trappist. However, I would find it a bit more pleasing if it were merely somewhat increased in viscosity.

Maredsous 6 – Blonde (Belgian Pale Ale, 6.00%)

Appearance: Maredsous 6 pours an amber-to-ochre colour along with a 2 inches tall and frothy, clear white head that diminishes to half its original size in, say 40 sec, and leaves plenty of lacing on the side of the glass.

Smell: A scent of yeast plus a sweet apricot is the dominant tone, perhaps some alcohol can be traced in the back along with some malt tones.

Taste: Modestly acidic at first then the somewhat sugary and fruitier tones start to bloom in the palate, along with the aforementioned yeast. It's finished off with a really dry, lingering aftertaste.

Mouthfeel: The carbonation tickles the tongue, so it is pretty rich, however not in an overwhelmingly strong manner. The viscosity is that of a creamy light-to-medium body.

Drinkability: I've had me a few, and so shall you! This is an OK Belgian Pale Ale, quite interesting primarily due to its aftertaste.

Maredsous 10 – Triple (Tripel, 10.00%)

Appearance: Maredsous 10 pours a darker shade of amber along with an airy crown consisting of huge bubbles which disintegrates rather quickly and leaves a cobweb-like lacing, all this along with plenty of visible carbonation.

Smell: Bubblegum-peach flavour, sweet yet not artificial to a disturbing degree, a sharp yeasty tone as well. Pretty basic 'n' simple yet qualitative.

Taste: A dry sweetness appears quite early and it lingers on and on and on and on throughout the tasting experience. Floral and fresh notes of hop comes through along with a slightly bitter aftertaste, hints of popcorn is traceable as well...

Mouthfeel: Alert carbonation strikes ones tongue and palate, it's definitely noticeable but not in a disturbing or overly dominating fashion. There is a fresh character which seems to substitute a near complete lack of bitterness and instead complements this with aforementioned abilities and a combination of a round and medium full body.

Drinkability: Highly enjoyable, rather complex, but greatly rewarding!

Pauwel Kwak (Beligan Strong Pale Ale, 8.10%)

Appearance: Pauwel Kwak pours a beautiful tone of mahogany along with an airy crown of a tone comparable to that of buffed leather. Alas, the monarchy is not of any longevity since the crown is reduced to the level of commoners in but a matter of seconds. Noble looks aside, plenty of rather big bubbles tend to fizzle like a soda pop on steroids whilst the entropy takes place in aforementioned crown.

Smell: A deep, sweet tone of cognac is the primary sensory input here, just the way I like 'em. Continually, we also get honey interacting with grape juice, some traces of butterscotch and leather may be scented as well.

Taste: First and foremost a cane sugar-like sweetness with burnt undertones comes forth along with a bitterness of distinct, and yet discrete character, giving a perplexing overall impression. Finally, and to a lesser extent, some sarsaparilla – or root beer for that matter – and hints of pear occasionally makes a visit on the palate.

Mouthfeel: A wee bit thin (light-to-medium full), creamy - almost oily in its consistency. The beer in question leaves the mouth with a considerably dry feeling afterwards and despite having a rather high level of alcohol (8,1%) it does a pretty good job keeping itself clandestine and only, once in a while, make itself heard as a warming aftertaste. Additionally, the lively carbonation in appearance faded rather quickly, leaving it, hypothetically, just like a soda pop, or anything for that matter, on steroids: all show, no go...

Drinkability: Sure, nice and complex with a lot of pretty unique traits, but a lot of small factors are missing to those traits, which all together simply end up leaving this one standing at the finish line of the "Superb brew Marathon". To clarify: there is absolutely nothing wrong with this "Belgian strong pale ale", it is in fact pretty good, its just that it exists a whole bunch of better ones out there so why necessarily choose this one?

La Trappe Tripel (Tripel, 8.00%)

Appearance: La Trappe Tripel pours a darker shade of orange-to-golden colour accompanied by a short, cream white crown, which under the duration of two minutes gradually dissolves into a top of sporadic bubbles, whereas plenty of carbonation is visible.

Smell: Fruity, notes of peach and hints of fresh citrus, not all that strong though...

Taste: A mild maltiness, a fresh character of the aforementioned peach comes forth pretty clear, the aftertaste consists of mostly bread-like and acrid notes.

Mouthfeel: Alert carbonation kicks it up a notch and brings a fresh touch. Medium-to-light in body, smooth and creamy.

Drinkability: Nice, however, quite simple and somewhat mellow for a tripel, yet very balanced and thus ever so pleasurable in the experience!

Valeir Extra (Belgian Pale Ale, 6.50%)

Appearance: Valeir Extra pours a gamboge, nectar-like colour along with a cream-toned crown, which spouts a decent posture of roughly 2" height. Plenty of micro-sized bubbles, which ascend like an, seemingly, ever flowing stream (soon to be flat) as the thick crown dissolves and leaves an opulent legacy of lacing.

Smell: Overall this one is quite the fruitcake since we get banana, floral hop notes, citrus, peach nectar, buttery (pie)dough and possibly oats or wheat for that matter.

Taste: Rather mild acridity slightly reminiscent to that of grapefruit (even when decantated completely the bitterness isn't all that noticeable), mellifluous characteristics of dried banana as notes of pineapple display an example of great persistence.

Mouthfeel: Light-to-medium, very smooth, the visibly all so strikingly high amount of carbonation detected is nowhere as evident as one would expect but it's still enough to give the beer a decently fresh result.

Drinkability: For a Belgian Pale Ale, all too anonymous, not bad by any means or measures, but it simply doesn't stand out from the Bishop's gathering...

Ommegang (Abbey Ale) (Dubbel, 8.50%)

Appearance: Ommegang Anno 2007 pours an opaque, grimy browner shade of burgundy (who would've guessed!) along with a frothy, fudge-to-cream white crown of medium height. Said crown accompanies the brew in question for a lengthy period of time (over 1½ minutes) before transgressing into infinite obscurity.

Smell: A deep scent of crème caramel greats the nostrils closely followed by the archetypical characteristic of cognac soaked plums, which is both enthralling with its sweetness as well as its pleasantly sophisticated touch of alcohol. Finally the whole thing is wrapped up in a butterscotch-package.

Taste: Slightly acidic at first, these citric notes however quickly subdues to the aforementioned, rich flavour of caramel. Alongside this malty backdrop we get the return of plums and sweetness finished off with a slightly dry aftertaste which brings to rise the late and – somewhat unexpected but nonetheless – welcome arrival of the mildly mannered Mr. Bitterness.

Mouthfeel: Full and creamy in body, rather timid in carbonation and yet at the same time, still bold enough to make the it an invigoration experience. The finish, corresponding to the bitterness in the aftertaste, is a dry one and due to the alcohol giving itself away, pleasingly warming.

Drinkability: Sadly this was my last last one, I've been saving it for quite some time now, and as you all know: the greater the wait, the greater the reward. Over the years that have passed since I first tried this Ommegang, it's certainly gotten more pronounced in the bitter areas (the same as with humani generis, I guess). Final line is, this beer holds everything you could expect from a genuine Trappist so if you can get a hold of this Yankee Doodle Brewski – go for it!

Sometimes it's good to confirm the really obvious with scientific data, and here is some about drunk women and sex:

Researchers, who surveyed 3000 women aged 18-50, found on average they slept with eight men, but were drunk with at least five, and on two occasions couldn't remember the man's name the next day, the Herald Sun reports.

Four out of 10 had been tipsy when sleeping with a partner for the first time.

The study found 75 per cent of women liked to drink before getting into bed with their husband or boyfriend, and 6 per cent had never had sex sober.

More than half claimed drinking with a prospective partner was "part of the dating process" so were a bit drunk when they had sex.

It also revealed 14 per cent of women in a relationship can't sleep with their partner without a couple of glasses of wine beforehand.

The Herald Sun writer thinks all this means that "women drink alcohol before having sex because they lack confidence in their bodies". I guess that's why the really hot women who have plenty of confidence and massive egos from dozens of men hitting on them every day never drink. If only uglier women had more confidence then they'd also stop drinking, just like the real hotties. Oh, wait... yeah, that's obviously bullshit. Women drink before sex for pretty much the same reason most people drink in all kinds of situations - to lower their inhibitions and enjoy life more. Many women are just plain better in bed when they're slightly drunk, and men might be too. That's probably why many older married guys drink a glass of cognac or wine every evening.

All this reminds me of a hyphothesis I heard somewhere that alcohol helps humans evolve towards more serious and responsible personalities. I don't know who came up with it, it might have been Steve Sailer, but basically the hypothesis goes that alcohol can help uptight people loosen up and be more social in the evenings, therefore allowing them to be serious and productive during the day without being boring nerds with no personality all the time. That gives them a reproductive advantage over both the uptight people who don't drink and those who are always uninhibited even when sober. I have no idea how true this is, but at least it seems plausible.

Whether that hypothesis is true or not what many of these women are doing just plain makes sense and makes their sex lives, and lives in general, better. It's easy to overdo it, though... I know it's tempting.

The downside, though, is definitely unpleasant.

This beer is a German Doppelbock, or "double billygoat" - one of the strongest German lager styles. The flavor is nice with plenty of complex maltiness, just like a Doppelbock should be. The caramel flavor isn't all that prominent, though, which is somewhat unusual for the style. I detect a bit of yeastiness in the flavor, too. There isn't a big head and it vanishes quickly, and in general the beer doesn't seem to be all that strongly carbonated. This makes it feel thinner than it tastes, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The 7,2% ABV is not detectable at all.

I've had a few Doppelbocks which were better - Celebrator and Salvator being the most classic examples of the style, and the 23 Urbock from Eggenberg a great one as well - but this is definitely a good'un with its own distinct character. I'm not quite sure why, but it reminds me of so,me homebrews I've had - maybe it's the combination of not-so-strong carbonation and the yeast notes in the flavor.

As its name implies, this is a bitter ale from a Swedish brewery. Very bitter, one might add, and only minimally sweet. It's considerably round, malty, and tastes of bread; a standard British-style ale.

Its golden amber color is beautiful, and smells kind of fruity too, but even though this beer won the Stockholm Beer Festival's prize for best European beer in '06, I cannot really find any reason to praise it. It's a good beer with a moderate alcohol percentage. Fairly foamy, very bitter, very bready. But nothing really stands out here and maybe this beer has been overcredited. I always enjoy a well-brewed beer with some discernible character, and Bedarö Bitter is just that--but that's also all it is.

So exclaimed a man about to be eaten by a sea monster in the "Devil Fish" episode of MST3K. I'm not dying, but I'm also saying goodbye to beer for a while and switching to red wine. Now, I don't like wine, but I'm going to try this anyway. Why? As Chris Shugart writes, it's got hormonal benefits:

Don't ask me about Testosterone boosters if you drink estrogenic, tittie-growing beer all the time. Real men, hormonally speaking at least, actually drink wine. Put it into a big pewter mug with a Viking goddess engraved on it if that makes you feel more secure in your manliness.

Now, I know drinking beer every day (that's one beer, or two at most) sure doesn't prevent me from growing muscle or losing fat. But maybe I can do better. We'll see. I've switched to wine a few times when in a fat loss phase, and it didn't have any obviously visible effect, but I've never tried it when trying to gain mass. We'll see. I'll give it at least a month or two.

I'll still drink beer on Sundays and religious holidays, of course, because those are days for celebration, not for boring ascetism. But other than that, it's wine. So far I opened a bottle of some Uruguayan something that a vocalist from one of my bands gave me a while ago. I've managed to drink most of it over three days with dinners, and I can say that it, uh, tastes like wine. Ah, the sacrifices we make! But don't worry, there won't be any wine reviews coming from me.

Here's a familiar Belgian Abbey ale with a blonde color and fresh, fruity smell. The flavor can be described as slightly fruity (peachy, to be exact), but very bitter and certainly wholesome. Leave it in your mouth; the beer's foamy character will enhance itself and taste creamy and mellow. It's not just blonde in color, but also in flavor.

Of course, one should not underestimate the fermentation; Maredsous reaches 6 % alcohol, and you can really taste it. Maybe not to the point where it intrudes, but this is a strong Belgian bull to tackle. If you want to drink this to food, prepare something really heavy and traditional so that the alcohol can do its part, otherwise you'll spoil the dish.

This is a fine ale with a distinct character, yet clearly true to its Belgian tradition. It's strong, bold and extremely round in character, yet there's a peachy aspect that makes it more interesting. I'm not sure if the Monks really do brew this stuff anymore, but if that ain't the case, I for one wouldn't be surprised. It'll knock you out softly while you wind down after work--recommended.

I'm not going to occupy too much space this time. California's Red Seal Ale is an amber red beer that, once you open the bottle, unleashes a small cloud of aromatic smell. The flavor well matches the color: acidic, aromatic, slightly fruity. The overall impression is a clear and fresh beer best served cold. Probably something you'd take with you on a summer picnic or a trip out to the ocean.

Despite 5,6 %, the alcohol never intrudes in this ale, which shifts emphasis unto its well-balanced composition of hops and malt. Despite being hardly sweet but very bitter, I would prefer a richer amount of hops and maybe stronger fruity spice. Yet, even though I've tasted for more superior ales in my life, it would be a mistake to pass this one when offered. A pretty solid beer experience.

This is interesting. A local Swedish brewery from Oppigård in ultra-Swedish Dalarna producing a dark, strong porter. I open the bottle and smell a roasty, chocolate-sweet scent. Some light smoke in there too. Oh yes, there's chocolate malt in this beer. You can tell by the brownish-dark color, but even more so on the flavor. Like many fine beers, this one builds up character if you leave it in your mouth for a second or two.

Oppigård's porter carries a strong (5,9 %), bitter taste worth its name "strong porter," but maybe the defining ingredient here is the chocolate malt and coffee. It all comes together in a classic porter experience, yeasted just long enough to build up a fresh, aromatic taste. It's a quite heavy drink experience, yet its distinct persona doesn't in any way stand at odds with its otherwise round character.

Unlike some of its American cousins, this porter is sure to leave a long and pleasant aftertaste that really summarizes the best aspects of this beer. I admit I have never been a coffee drinker, and while this is not coffee, it's pretty damn close in regards to flavor. But its rich character saves it from becoming yet another local porter not really standing out. It's got style, especially being from Sweden, and as it says on the bottle, it's "a start on a new tradition." I'll buy it again in the future.

I peeked at this beer in the stores, probably because of its brown-black color: the glaring sign of a black lager. Brewed by America's Samuel Adams, this beer smells quite heavily of dark chocolate, coffee and hops. However, taste deceives. This is not an impressive beer.

If you're into creamy and foamy lagers, this one is likely to disappoint. The first sip develops some foam, but unless you leave it in your mouth for a while, it'll trickle down like water. The flavor features a heavily roasted character, not so bitter, but rather sweet thanks to burned sugar and chocolate. This is a dark lager alright, but unusually sweet compared to many other lager beers.

So what's the catch? First of all, this beer features a flavor so wholesome and round that it loses character. The complexity you'd expect from the brewing method is simply not here. But I guess the real problem is the almost complete lack of aftertaste. Most people who drink beer always talk about immediate taste, forgetting the aftertaste probably is 60 % or more of experiencing a beer.

Samuel Adam's black lager features very little of this. You drink it, you contemplate the dark and sweet flavor, but then you're left wondering what happened to the rest of the experience. Nothing lingers after a sip. In short, it's too bland. I'm sure this beer would fit perfect to some meat, but as a stand-alone drinking experience, it leaves a lot to be desired in the world of dark lager.

Most people who don't like beer (weird, I know) usually don't appreciate the bitter taste. They should check out Franziskaner's Weissbier, which thanks to its unusually high amount of wheatmalt makes this a very round, wholesome drink experience unlike most other beers around. As a result the flavor is hardly bitter, possibly appealing to non-beer types.

To the beer itself: often poured in high glasses due to its foamy character, this Weissbier certainly stays true to its name by literally tasting heavily of wheat and malt. It's liquid bread with a golden color, very cozy and warm flavor, almost certain to appeal as a beer to fish.

Averaging in at 5 % alcohol, anyone can bulge this down an evening without notice, but the real class of this beer is its seedy, slightly acidic dimension. I cannot remain honest here without admitting I'm not a fan of Weissbier and its yeasty taste in general, but if anyone appreciates this sort, Franziskaner offers what is certain to be a satisfying end product. The Monk on the front label looks happy.