fiulijn (7420), Como; Lausanne (CH); Malmö (SWE), Italy
| 2.9 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 3/5 | 5/10 | 3/5 | 11/20 | May 23, 2004 Golden color. Quite nice Barley Wine-like aroma. Really thin body, with an exaggerated bitterness. Odd… Cornboy (417), Eastampton, New Jersey, USA
| 1.8 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 3/5 | 4/10 | 2/5 | 6/20 | May 22, 2004 Clear light orange with very little head. More like a lager, not much aroma or taste. I wont buy this again. Jeppe (2638), Ølbutikken, Denmark
| 2.2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 3/5 | 5/10 | 2/5 | 8/20 | May 20, 2004 Sampled from bottle at Danish Beer Festival 2004 (#35). Clear dark orange beer with a disappearing head. Aroma is weak, little malt and Anchor yeast. Flavor is thin and watery with a bit of malt and bitter hops. Has the distinctive Anchor taste. Engelsmann (653), Copenhagen, Denmark
| 1.9 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 2/10 | 3/5 | 2/10 | 2/5 | 10/20 | May 17, 2004 Not much to say about it. It’s very bitter, with almost no sweetness to offset it. badgerben (3605), Blaine, Minnesota, USA
| 1.3 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 2/5 | 2/10 | 2/5 | 4/20 | May 8, 2004 Cool brewing idea, bad outcome. Very light color with zilch head. Bitter yes, but not in the good way that bitters usually are, more in the way where you wrinkle your nose and ask "what the hell?" Just nothing redeeming for me about this. beerinmarch (2829), Washington, USA
| 2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 2/5 | 5/10 | 2/5 | 6/20 | May 1, 2004 other than a cool brewing concept of ol’ not many good things to say, tastes like really bitter water. No color, not much for flavor, very little hops. Pigfoot (2226), Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| 3.1 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 3/5 | 6/10 | 3/5 | 13/20 | Apr 17, 2004 I've got to applaud the very existence of Anchor Small for several reasons, that they dare to still produce something in so uncommercial a fashion, that they are still experimenting with ancient traditions. This, according to the neck label, is the lighter, weaker second running from the mash of Old Foghorn. Hmm! Would they have similarities? Should they? What are we talking about? Hey, I've got an idea! Just drink it!
Appearance: clear, bright amber color, large fluffy white head, that takes it's time in settling down. Aroma: mostly dry and clean, but many interesting minor notes make their presence known, hints of citrus, bread, sour dough. It's more complex and intersting a melange the more I comsider it.
Taste: nice and hoppy, right upfront, and swift to mellow thereafter, though the complex citrusy flavor remains on the palate and begs one to consider it further. A coppery, citric tang rings throughout the finish, though it is short. Light body, little malt, or hops, texture hasn't too much to say. Taste is too unique to neglect, though. Do I like it, though? I think not...exactly.
If it wasn't only in these poorly distributed 220z bottles, and perhaps had a catchier name, and maybe a touch of sweetness, or a little extra flavor, they'd have a decent, popular ESB or something.
But perhaps that is not the Anchor way...so be it.
heemer77 (4311), Savannah, Missouri, USA
| 2.9 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 3/5 | 6/10 | 3/5 | 11/20 | Apr 16, 2004 This pours a light copper color with a medium off-white head. Lots of malt and a little orange peel aroma. The label is correct. This is like a bitter. There are just enough hops to keep this interesting. I think it is a little underrated. Other raters seem dissapointed that this doesn't taste like Old Foghorn. It's not the same beer! This is not meant to be a barleywine. I did not get the bitterness that others describe.
|