In Reply To #3 Why is it not a true IPA? WHat are the characteristics? I have the same question with the McEwan's IPA. I really liked this beer, tasted like a Brown Ale, but am curious why bashing the IPA label?

Sooooo...I've done some research on the topic, cuz I'm at work, it's Friday and I'm thinkin about the beers I'll be drinking shortly. An IPA is: "A decidedly hoppy, moderately strong pale ale" Well, that describes my Keith's! Also: "Hop flavor is medium to high, with an assertive hop bitterness. Malt flavor should be low to medium, but should be sufficient to support the hop aspect. Despite the substantial hop character typical of these beers, sufficient malt flavor, body and complexity to support the hops will provide the best balance. Very low levels of diacetyl are acceptable, and fruitiness from the fermentation or hops should add to the overall complexity. Some alcohol warming may be sensed in stronger versions" THAT ALSO DESCRIBES MY KEITH'S!!!! However, and this is where there may be the problem IPA's Color ranges from medium gold to deep copper, with English versions often darker than American ones. Should be clear, although some haze at cold temperatures is acceptable. This, sadly, does not describe my Keith's. Keith's is very light in colour.

In Reply To #5 Wow, if your McEwan's IPA tasted like a brown ale, then it's surely an extremely bad IPA! I've never tried it, but most I've talked to who have had it said it wasn't good. The owner of a local well-known beer store told me one day that he wouldn't recommend buying it.

In Reply To #7 Yes it did taste a little like a Brown Ale, but why does that make it a bad beer? I thought it tasted great! Maybe it was categorized wrong, but that doesn't make it bad, that just makes it misinterpreted.

In Reply To #8 If a company calls it an IPA, it should taste like an IPA. If it tastes like a brown ale, then it should be labeled as a brown ale. Simple as that. When I'm rating a beer, if it doesn't fit into the category it's labeled (see Old Rasputin, Magic Hat Humble Patience, McEwan's IPA, Dogfish Head 120 minute), I deduct points. I will note however, whether or not I liked the taste, regardless of the label. Rating the beer should be rating it according to style. Also, he didn't say it was a bad beer, he said it was an extremely bad IPA, which is true IMO.

In Reply To #9 Yeah, a beer may not necessarily be "bad" if it doesn't fit the style it's intended to be, but it's common practice to judge a beer based on the style, and that's how i rate them. Of course, in the end, you gotta drink what you like, regardless of ratings, style, label etc.

In Reply To #10 I agree. I think I probably take into account the style and how much I liked it (regardless of style). When it's all said and done, it really depends on how you liked the beer.

I think the point is this: If it tastes good to you, drink it. On the other hand, if I bought what was labeled as a stout and upon pouring it saw it to be light in color, I'd be pissed.

In Reply To #12 Understandable.

In Reply To #7 I feel the need to make a correction. I just had the McEwan's IPA again last night, for the second time and the beer is not good. Didn't really enjoy it at all, I must have been drunk when I reviewed it the4 first time. More characteristics to a Brown Ale than an IPA for sure, but still really didn't like the taste. I have changed my review....