RateBeer

Left Hand Twin Sisters Double IPA

Percentile
87
overall

bottled
common

on tap
available

Broad Distribution
Find this beer

Add Distribution Data
send corrections | shelftag |
RatingsAverageScoreSeasonalABVStyle PctlServe in
3163.5/5.03.48/5.0Special9.6%36.7Snifter, Tulip
Commercial Description:
Thanks for purchasing another offering in our series of "Big Mo" Beers. For as long as people have inhabited Colorado's Front Range, the Twin Sisters have had a strong impact on Colorado residents. The views from atop the 11,428' peaks are breathtaking and afford sweeping views of the entirety of Rocky Mountain National Park. As an expression of admiration we have crafted an ale that exhibits a profound impact all its own. At 11428 IBU's (just kidding), Twin Sisters is a mountainous testament to hops, and that they bring. A feeling of ease and relaxation become apparent for all whom would dare to climb it. So for all that enjoy summiting ales with copious hops additions to achieve a felling of contentment and awe, we offer Twin Sisters Double IPA. Enjoy!
 Most Recent Top Raters Highest Ratings Who's Rated This?  
 Zinister (1201), Houston, Texas, USA
3.9 Aroma Appearance Flavor Palate Overall
6/105/58/104/516/20
Jan 9, 2007  
Bottle. Great copper-orange color...very clear. Two finger head with nice lacing that leaves the thinnist of head after 5 minutes. Balanced nose (malt, light hops), although surprising not strong for 9% alcohol. Got nailed with hops right from the first sip...then quickly moved to caramel malts mixed with toffee. The hop layer on mine was persistant throughout the entire taste (and subsequent tastes)...which I just love. Many review notes low hop flavor, but this one has it. Really enjoyed this beer.


 Pailhead (2593), Allen Park, Michigan, USA
3.1 Aroma Appearance Flavor Palate Overall
5/104/56/104/512/20
Jan 6, 2007  
Bottle: Courtesy of 11026 I believe. The aroma is very weak for a IIPA. There’s just some faint caramel and virtually no hops. It pours a transparent reddish-orange with a small withe head that leaves decent lacing. The flavor is almost all malt with lots of caramel and toffee up front. There are some very minimal hops in the finish. It sort of has an badly aged barley wine character to it. Certainly not what I expect in a IIPA.


 thedm (3836), Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
4 Aroma Appearance Flavor Palate Overall
7/105/58/104/516/20
Jan 4, 2007  
This corked and caged bottled brew was actually my 2700th rating. It came from a bottle shop for $11.59 and poured a very large sized head of foamy fine to medium sized tan colored bubbles that were mostly lasting and left behind a slightly hazy softly carbonated orange brown colored body and a thick foamy lacing. The strong hop aroma was hoppy and contained caramel malt notes. The mouth feel was tingly at the start and strongly tingly at the finish with a mild hop bite. The flavor contained notes of malt hops and mild caramel. A decent one that I would consider buying again.


 theshocker (329), Marietta, Georgia, USA
2.9 Aroma Appearance Flavor Palate Overall
4/104/56/103/512/20
Dec 25, 2006  
I don’t know why yeast sediment would raise a rank. I think bottle conditioning is generally BS. Plus the autolysis from bottle conditioning will do nothing for this style. Anyways, I’ve seen this beer for around $11 at various places and wondered why it was so expensive, but I refuse to pay that much for a beer unless it is some extremely hard to find beer made by some Belgian monks (who are allowed to bottle condition). Then I saw it for sale for $7.99 and figured why not. The beer pours reddish tan with a huge head with multisized bubbles, fades slowly. The aroma is surprisingly lacking. Just a touch of citrus and spice, but not as strong as I’d hope. The flavor is pretty smooth, bitter but not overwhelming. There’s some hop flavor but overall I find the beer boring, boring, boring. The aftertaste is slightly sour and sticks with you a while. Even at $8 its a rip-off.


 Braudog (3766), Dayton, Ohio, USA
2.8 Aroma Appearance Flavor Palate Overall
6/103/56/103/510/20
Dec 24, 2006  
Very highly sedimented pour. Very deep rusty amber and opaque with a firm head. Puckeringly tart at first ... settles into a normally hoppy brew. Slightly warm from the alcohol. OK, but not as good as I’d hoped.


 hotstuff (3175), Indiana, USA
3.4 Aroma Appearance Flavor Palate Overall
7/103/57/103/514/20
Dec 16, 2006  
Corked and caged bottle. 2006 bottle conditioned. Medium sized off-white head that was mostly lasting, hazy, virtually no lacing, visible carbonation, and an orange brown hue. Nose was caramel, hoppy, citrus, grapefruit, and some spicyness. Flavor was a tad too hoppy for my palate. Caramel, citrus and very hoppy tasting. Hoppy mouthfeel. Medium body.


 SmellGood (318), Memphis, Tennessee, USA
3.9 Aroma Appearance Flavor Palate Overall
9/104/57/103/516/20
Dec 15, 2006  
If there is a yeast sediment, then my rank automatically rises. Hops, hops and more hops. Not my favorite I2PA but ranks up there. Aroma is magnificent.


 ilikestuff (222), Fort Worth, Texas, USA
2.9 Aroma Appearance Flavor Palate Overall
5/103/55/103/513/20
Dec 4, 2006  
I have to say, loving hops more than anything, this brew completely let me down. It tries to call irtself a double IPA, when it clearly lacks the complexity and the hop pressence to be such. Considerably less bitter than I had hoped for. Don’t get me wrong, this is a great brew, but why buy it when there are so many better regular IPA’s that don’t cost $12 per bottle. For some reason mine had a sticker over the 9.6% alcohol that said 9%.



CONSIDER FREE RATEBEER MEMBERSHIP



Join us! RateBeer is made by beer enthusiasts for the craft beer community. Your basic membership is free and allows you to read all beer ratings. Click here to create your account... and give your opinion!

SIGN UP NOW »

View Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32


About RateBeer | Add A Beer | Log In | Edit Personal Info | 100 Beer Club | FAQ | Feedback?
Copyright © 2000-2009, RateBeer LLC