Subsidiaries
7/10
—
Appearance 8
Aroma 7
Flavor 7
Texture 6
Overall 7
Old rating for the Irish version is gone...? But luckily I just sampled the Canadian stuff for the first time - or well, maybe thats not so lucky, because this is clearly not the same beer, nor is it even in the same league as that beer. Looks much the same though: deep dark mahogany with full fluffy tan haed. Aroma lightly roasty, with a light roast flavor and dry finish. No particular character. Some astringency and plastic apparent unless fully up to drinking temperature. So avoid the current recommendations from Guinness that it should be chilled for at least 3 hours - of course, even without the off-flavors, a beer of this style should not be drunk that cold.
Earlier Rating: 4/26/2000 Total Score: 4.5
Actually, I like the bottled extra stout better than the canned draught. It doesn't look as good in the glass, but its strength and roasted malt flavors are more present. I know I'm in the minority in my Guinness preference.
Earlier Rating: 4/26/2000 Total Score: 4.5
Actually, I like the bottled extra stout better than the canned draught. It doesn't look as good in the glass, but its strength and roasted malt flavors are more present. I know I'm in the minority in my Guinness preference.
Tried
from Can
on 21 Apr 2003
at 09:11
3/10
—
Appearance 2
Aroma 3
Flavor 3
Texture 4
Overall 3
Yellow and more alcohol than many others of the style. Has the dependable beer taste. Light on the palate. Drink it very cold.
Tried
on 25 Mar 2003
at 16:58
4.9/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 5
Flavor 4
Texture 6
Overall 4.5
This is a good cheap-beer standard. If you're itching for a festive beverage, yet don't want to spend the money for a craftbrew, you can do much worse than a case of Labatt Blue. It serves its purpose (intoxication) while remaining pleasantly swillable. A good college beer, in other words.
Tried
from Can
on 06 Feb 2003
at 18:36
1.6/10
—
Appearance 2
Aroma 2
Flavor 1
Texture 2
Overall 1.5
Had a can of this and a can of Michelob Light at a Bluejackets game. Back and forth I went between the two, back and forth, Labatt and Michelob, Michelob and Labatt. There literally was no difference. Both had next to no aroma or flavor. Both sucked sour frog ass. Taste tests between two crappy beers are not fun. At least they were free.
Tried
from Can
on 16 Jan 2003
at 06:37
3/10
—
Appearance 8
Aroma 3
Flavor 1
Texture 4
Overall 2
dusty aroma. Amber, ok head. Artificial sweetness, lightbodied, swill......
Tried
on 12 Jan 2003
at 11:03
4.1/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 4
Flavor 4
Texture 4
Overall 3.5
Initially a pretty strong almond aroma. Golden, ok head. Thin boring taste - still some almonds, but allthough i like almonds and marzipan a lot, I do not think it is fitting here. Sticky malt aftertaste.
Tried
on 10 Jan 2003
at 09:46
4.5/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 4
Flavor 5
Texture 2
Overall 5
...........................................................................
Tried
on 07 Jan 2003
at 10:10
4.8/10
—
Appearance 4
Aroma 5
Flavor 5
Texture 4
Overall 5
Rerate 12/30/02: This will still do in a pinch at a hockey game, I had this one rated too high. This is definitely a below-average beer. 12/30/01 (3.0): About the only lighter beer I can enjoy. It is a beer you don't have to think about too much as you drink it.
Tried
from Can
on 30 Dec 2002
at 08:22
4.2/10
—
Appearance 4
Aroma 4
Flavor 4
Texture 2
Overall 6
Canadian version:Very poor interpretation...................................
Tried
from Can
on 24 Dec 2002
at 11:31
7.8/10
—
Appearance 8
Aroma 7
Flavor 8
Texture 8
Overall 8
Bottled(330ml). -better than labatt blue, smooth............................
Tried
from Bottle
on 21 Dec 2002
at 06:23