(draught) Clear dark yellow; white head. Nose of full fresh hops, very good: like crumbling fresh hop cones. Hoparoma and bitterness probably can't go any further - and yet it tastes alright in this case. There must be malt underneath it, but it is - well, ruined, I suppose. Burning mouthfeel, but only a little. Ever so slight oily touch (the hops?). If you're open to it, this one's great.

Reasonably bright orange-amber; no head. Real pine-wood, resiny hopscharacter already in the nose. Very hopbitter. Good underlying malt, but stops just short of balancing. Thick, oily hops keep filling the palate. One question. I have had the Arrogant B., Double ditto, IPA, etc. etc. And loved most of them. But aren't they never interested in changing it just that little bit to get something original?

(draught) Pale gold. Rather dense, slim head, yellowish. Nose like a freshly opened bale of hops. Unrefined, lager-like malt under harsh metallic hops-taste. Medium bodied. Aftertaste is again - just more hops. This is not bad, but, by Jove, beer has to be more than just hops on steroids.

Bottle. Rich amber color with little head. Caramel flavors. Big hop flavors with a good malt presence. Warming presence from the alcohol. Lingering taste of grapefruit. A tad too much malt for the hops, but its a good beer and would be better in coolor weather.

This actually isn't all that different from Arrogant Bastard, with a toned-down hops profile and more emphasis on the caramely malts. Still, a powerful experience, with pine and grapefruit leading the charge. The refreshing lack of bitterness keeps things interesting. I have little to add that hasn't been written already, but this is indeed another quality offering from Stone.

2003 bottle. Aroma is hoppy. Not citrusy-hoppy. There is definitely some sugary malt smell in there, almost like molasses. Very poignant, though I was expecting a much more profound aroma. Beer is clear. Why is this filtered?? Booooo. Unimpressive appearance. Looks like any other IPA. Nice small white head. Good amber color. If you cant already tell, I was disappointed with this beer. I heard so much that hyped it up, but I will try not to be biased and not base my rating on expectations. Opens up with a fairly acidic hops flavor that is clear and bold. However, malt rushes in immediately. After my first few sips, I thought, too much malt?? Wow, I was surprised, I definitely applaud balancing out an IPA with good caramel malt, but this almost seemed like too much. It added a fuzzy texture and seemed to detract from the hops flavor. This reminded me of Sam Smiths IPA which was quite traditional and balanced. Unfortunately I feel the hops flavor here is not as clear. The hops succumbed and did not persist, distinctly, on the finish. I think the addition of so much alcohol prevented Stone from achieving what Samuel Smiths did, a soft balanced traditional ale. With only about 66% of the alcohol, Sam Smiths presents a much less acidic, hoppy treat. This certainly was drinkable though, good floral notes, surpringly lacking in citrus (relatively speaking), but had a lot of molasses/brown sugar appeal towards the middle of the body. The beer was also flat. Some more carbonation (perhaps derived from a bottle fermentation, hint hint), would have added some much needed zip. Will definitely try again and rerate. Would imagine this to gain a lot of points on tap, hopefully i can test that theory soon.
2004 bottle
Well either I was on drugs last time I had this, or a lot has changed. Bitter. Pure soily fresh hops on the nose. Flavor starts out hoppy, gets bitter and extremely fresh and hoppy. Neither citrus nor floral notes dominate, but the malt is there only in texture. It is lightly sweet on the finish. Just pure, brutal, let’s-see-how-hoppy-we-can-make-this beer. My score reflects the quality of the beer, not how much I like it.
2005 draught It’s nice to try this fresh on draught and damn is it bitter, but the quality is impressive, really good hops flavor, tons of thick malt. It burns on the end still, and makes me cringe. Can only finish a glass if I make a point to do so.

Orangey-gold colour. Rich woody nose with orange, toast, peach, kumquat. Long hoppy palate, some biscuity pale malts. Standard issue stuff, moderate bitterness and a bit fruitier and more approachable than most examples.

Pours a chocolatey brown, with a creamy off-white head. Aroma of chocolate and roasted malts. Bitter, dry, roasted chocolate and woodiness dominates the malty palate, with slight smoked notes joining the proverbial parade of flavor. Still, I prefer edgier takes on the style, and Stone plays it "safe" on their version.

Sampled at From The Vine monthly beer tasting Aug 4th, 2003: The 6th anniversary Porter was a bit of a letdown, but this beer is more along the lines of what I was hoping for. Pours a rich amber color with a medium thick light beige head. Decent lacing and mildly effervescent. Nice citrusy/hoppy aroma. More hoppy flavor than their regular Pale which is a good thing, and it retains a good balance. The finish is very resolute in the amount of hops as well. The finish is thorough and hoppy all the way. Well done.