 johndoughty (2159), cheslyn hay, West Midlands, England
| 3.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 4/5 | 8/10 | 4/5 | 14/20 |
Aug 11, 2004 A very pleasant and easy to drink pils.Its overiding characteristic is its softness and a gentle maltiness. Nice head and it retains its flavour.Highl;y recommended.
neilrichards (191), Leicestershire, England
| 3.4 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 3/5 | 7/10 | 4/5 | 14/20 |
Mar 30, 2002 A good Pilsner, without being as good as some of the more famous varieties. Still, for the price that I paid for it, this is a decent effort.
bierkoning (6077), La Tropica, Netherlands
| 3.4 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 4/5 | 7/10 | 4/5 | 13/20 |
Sep 1, 2003 Golden color, big creamy head. Soft Zatec hops and just a hint of orange in the aroma. Fruity (orange) flavor with a fair deal of hops coming up almost immediately. Soft, but with a good hoppy bite. Good quality pilsener.
duff (5475), Surrey, Greater London, England
| 3.3 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 3/5 | 7/10 | 4/5 | 13/20 |
Dec 4, 2001 half decent czeck pils, yes, a little bit cheap and nasty in comparison with other czeck pils, but it was still OK, i picked up a spice in it aswell eczematic (ginger?), and it was malty at first and then bitter on the finish, in the end, i thought it was quite well balanced without being exceptional.
eczematic (1198), Sydney, Australia
| 3.3 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 3/5 | 8/10 | 3/5 | 14/20 |
Nov 30, 2001 This tastes a hell of a lot like Gambrinus to me, but in a different bottle - presumably repackaged for export. Like Urquell made with cheaper ingredients and not much effort. Nice red-gold colour, and big head that slowly fades into characteristic Czech icefloes on the top of your glass. Very bitter, but slightly metallic and thin hop flavour: obviously hop extract rather than whole cones. Some quality honeyish czech malt gets past the piercing hoppiness, and there are hints of pepper and coriander in the finish, but really it’s cheap and nasty (although why should I pay $5.50 for a bottle when Urquell itself is $3?). But at least it’s bitter.
motelpogo (4395), Plzen, Czech Republic
| 3.2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 3/5 | 7/10 | 3/5 | 12/20 |
Jul 15, 2002 dead average for a czech beer. not as soft or subtle as one would expect
Sully (1367), Woolloomooloo, New South Wales, Australia
| 3.2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 3/5 | 6/10 | 3/5 | 14/20 |
Nov 11, 2003 I think it is great that this has to be considered average. In comparison to the typical Aussie macro stuff available this is a standout. Compared to a Budvar or PU it does fall down a bit, but only in the face of stiff opposition. Nevertheless it has a good softness, hop presence and malt flavour that make this style an eminently drinkable one.
rauchbier (3002), Isle Of Beer, Lincolnshire, England
| 3 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 3/5 | 6/10 | 3/5 | 12/20 |
Mar 15, 2004 Bottled. Gold, good white head and moderate condition.Good malt and grain aroma with some fine hoppiness. Malty in the mouth but quite thin with some gentle hop flavour. Shortish finish with slight hop bitterness dominating. Not bad, just not as good as Urquell or Budvar.
|
Statistics
Find This Beer (Want/Have)