Guinness Two-Point Pour

Oriel

Right folks,
Can we get this cleared up? I'm sick of people getting this wrong.
The only reason for a two-point pour is to perfect how the Guinness pint looks.
When the first pour is completed, the head settles and compresses/compacts - meaning that when the top-up is performed, the head takes on a unique curved "dome" shape. That is all.

If you pour it all in one, the pint will still taste the same. If you taste a difference, then there is something wrong with you.
More importantly, if you pour it all in one, the head of the glass will be flat and if left, will start to sink under the rim of the glass (and turn yellow and manky, as we all know).

Anybody disagree with me?

Steve.

noby

It's not the only reason for the two part pour. It's also to fit in with Guinness's own myth/spin/marketing campaign.

monkeyfudge

Well the first taste is with the eye... so if it looks like sh*t then it's going to taste terrible too.

The Sweeper

And so that Irish people can start rows with barmen/maids in foreign countries about not being able to pour the drink of our forefathers and the only thing that got us through 800 years of colonisation. ...or is that a different thread?

But seriously - actually sinecura I'm going to go out on a limb here and say I think there IS a difference between a well-poured pint of the black stuff and a badly poured one. For starters, I like a sup of the creamy head with the sharpness of the stout when I'm having a pint. There's nothing worse than a soap-sour, flat yellow head. Also, I think that guinness ages fast in the pint glass, and in my experience the better the head, the nicer the pint throughout - given say a 45-60 minute drinking duration per pint.

ball ox

Gotta go with the OP on this one, there is no difference in taste. I was working as a barman for a few years and the ould fellas at the bar would have heart failure if you suggested drinking a pint poured in one. I dont understand how people can think it affects anything other than appearance, if you think it tastes different please explaine the physics to me because I cant make sense of it. If I get a pint in a nightclub - a dodgy decision, I know - I will ask for it to be poured straight to save time and most of the time the barman will either look at me like I'm an escaped mental patient or just ignore me and do the two part pour. Good marketing though.

The Hill Billy

I find that there is a significant difference in taste if the head isn't right on a pint & I've never seen that achieved in one pour. A bad head deteriorates quickly leaving a very bitter taste. A properly poured head stays creamy for longer & prevents the pint from becoming over-bitter.

That said, there is a lot of b0ll0xology around the 3/4 full, 45-degree angle, 1min 32.5sec wait, etc, etc. Two barmen in separate locals out my way both do the first pull to within a gee-hair of the top of the glass & then finish off with a quick dash when the pint looks right (not after a prescribed time). Both pints are truly delicious & retain their flavour until the last sip.

While I think about it - I also feel that the timing of the first sip is also important. If taken too soon the head doesn't have time to settle & goes watery. Likewise, if the pint is allowed to stand too long before the first sip the head "yellows" & the bitterness sets in. Regular drinks from the pint move the head & for some reason keep it creamy to the end.

There's a limit to how long the head will stay & IMO that's only around 25 to 30 mins.



I've thought about this way, way too much for only 8 o'clock in the morning.

Blub2k4

sinecurea wrote:

Right folks,
Can we get this cleared up? I'm sick of people getting this wrong.
The only reason for a two-point pour is to perfect how the Guinness pint looks.
When the first pour is completed, the head settles and compresses/compacts - meaning that when the top-up is performed, the head takes on a unique curved "dome" shape. That is all.

If you pour it all in one, the pint will still taste the same. If you taste a difference, then there is something wrong with you.
More importantly, if you pour it all in one, the head of the glass will be flat and if left, will start to sink under the rim of the glass (and turn yellow and manky, as we all know).

Anybody disagree with me?

Steve.

The brown head comes from oxidisation, hence you should never scrape off a pint of Guinness (I could stop that sentence there, but it does have to be done sometimes) with a metal scraper, always use the Guinness approved nylon scrapers. The metal causes a quicker oxidisation whereas nylon doesn't.

rubadub

I ask for one-pour pints the odd time, never get the same head, most barmen start asking "are you really sure", as though you asked them to spit it it or something!

I do find a difference, due to the head. I imagine if I drank both from the bottom with a straw it would be the exact same. The head hits the tongue and is nice and velvety, it has a different texture. So scientifically it may technically "taste" the same, just like a liquidised fillet steak with onions pepper sauce and potatoes technically "tastes" the same as one that has not been liquidised, but I know which one I would rather have...

Appearance and texture mean a lot to an enjoyable pint or meal.

Blub2k4 wrote:

always use the Guinness approved nylon scrapers. The metal causes a quicker oxidisation whereas nylon doesn't.

I have never seen a pint being scraped in Ireland. I hate seeing it done in germany and holland, nice big foamy head and the bastard scrapes it off!

noby

OK, appearance is impotrant, and careful keeping and pouring of beer adds to it's quality. But a lot of the hyperbol over the two-part pour is still IMO pure spin. The world won't end with a one partpour, and you should still get a pretty decent pint. It all goes back to people's perception that stout should have a creamy nitro head, which comes from Guinness and their spin.
An off-white (yellow or tan) head and bitterness are surely characteristics of a stout, are they not?

The two pint pour might give the creamy head, and keep that head to the bottom of the glass, but surely this is mainly a visual thing.

The Hill Billy

noby wrote:

but surely this is mainly a visual thing.

Not for me. I find that there's a noticable difference in the taste of a pint that is poorly poured. Then again I'm very fussy when it comes to my pints & how they are poured, so it could just be psychosomatic at this stage.

Maybe I've succumbed to the Guinness marketing in that mentally I taste a difference in a good looking pint? Drink is probably like food in that respect, in that it is more appealing to the tase-bud if presented well.

Blub2k4

Germans have a similar concept with the "7 minute pils" they do a two part pour also, the first pour is intended to knock a lot of the Co2 out of the beer and the second to finish the head correctly and the standing period is to allow the beer also to come up to the 7 degrees that they say is the ideal temperature for serving.
We used to do beers a lot quicker when busy but it did make some difference if the time was given to do it right.

noby

Hill Billy wrote:

Not for me. I find that there's a noticable difference in the taste of a pint that is poorly poured. Then again I'm very fussy when it comes to my pints & how they are poured, so it could just be psychosomatic at this stage.

Maybe I've succumbed to the Guinness marketing in that mentally I taste a difference in a good looking pint? Drink is probably like food in that respect, in that it is more appealing to the tase-bud if presented well.

I agree. But surely you realise there is a big difference between a poorly poured pint and a non two-part poured pint?
I'm not knocking Guinness, and the fact that they put a lot of effort into training people to how to pour a good pint should be applauded, but the issue here is whether the two-part pour is the be-all-and-end-all. And I'm not convinced that it is.

The Classic pint with it's dark ruby, almost black body and creamy white head is a great striking image, and of course it's image is part and parcel of the whole drinking experience, but a bottle of Guinness with it's frothy tan head does more for me, visually speaking.

The Hill Billy

noby wrote:

But surely you realise there is a big difference between a poorly poured pint and a non two-part poured pint?

Any time I've had a single pour pint (granted this was mainly in England) it has been just as bad as any poorly-poured pint I've had.

noby wrote:

The Classic pint with it's dark ruby, almost black body and creamy white head is a great striking image, and of course it's image is part and parcel of the whole drinking experience, but a bottle of Guinness with it's frothy tan head does more for me, visually speaking.

But that's like comparing draught Smithwicks (* shudders *) & a pint bottle of McArdles. Both drinks have their own distinct taste & appearance.

noby

Any time I've had a single pour pint (granted this was mainly in England) it has been just as bad as any poorly-poured pint I've had.

That's not to say that you can't have a well poured one-pour pint, though is it?

But that's like comparing draught Smithwicks (* shudders *) & a pint bottle of McArdles. Both drinks have their own distinct taste & appearance.

Yes, I realise that. My point is that a nitro-poured stout is visually very striking, but beers can be visually appealing in other (less dramatic) ways.
In a blind taste test, would there really be a noticable taste difference, or is it purely visual?


On a related note, the use of mixed gases seems to becoming more popular these days, where you seem to be getting ales, and occasionally lagers with creamy nitro heads. I don't want to be going all CAMRAesque, but is it a case where keeping your beer/lines/glasses etc in top condition to ensure a good pint is not as essential, as you can just pump it full of nitro and get a nice creamy headed pint? Drop the temp a few degrees aswell and you'll help to disguise any slight off tastes.
or am I just being paranoid?

The Hill Billy

noby wrote:

That's not to say that you can't have a well poured one-pour pint, though is it?

As I've never had one & would be interested to hear from anyone who has.

noby wrote:

My point is that a nitro-poured stout is visually very striking, but beers can be visually appealing in other (less dramatic) ways.
In a blind taste test, would there really be a noticable taste difference, or is it purely visual?

If you mean a blind taste test between draught Guinness & bottled Guinness (I'm assuming Extra Stout here by the description of the "frothy tan head") - there would be a very noticable difference in taste. They are entirely different drinks (for example, the latter is carbonated).
IMO - There is less of a difference (but noticable nonetheless) between draught Guinness & bottled Guinness "draught".

noby

Sorry, I meant a blind taste test between a (well poured) one and two pour pint.
Poorly poured and one-pour do often go hand in hand, but if you were in a good Guinness pub, with a good bar person, I wonder would their carefully poured one-pour pint be that much different. I think this is the point I'm trying to make.

(in re-reading my own post I can see that I'm rambling a bit, and my point isn't coming across very clear. If only I was after half a dozen pints...)

The Hill Billy

The next time you're in Dublin give me a shout & we'll give it a shot.
(For scientific purposes & the great good of humanity obviously. )

Oriel

You cannot taste any difference between a pint poured in one pour and a pint poured in two. Simple as that.

CiaranC

As many people have pointed out, the head of a one-point pour will degrade quicker, meaning there will be a taste difference over the life of the pint. A pint with a proper creamy head tastes different from one with a fallen, yellowish one, so its not really 'as simple as that'.

rubadub

sinecurea wrote:

You cannot taste any difference between a pint poured in one pour and a pint poured in two. Simple as that.

This all depends on the definition of "taste", as I mentioned about liquidised steak having the same "taste" as normal steak. You have texture, flavour, aroma, appearance, temperature, sensation (e.g. gases on the tounge).

I was saying drinking the pints with a straw from the bottom of the glass will have the same taste (or rather flavour depending on your definitions). But 2 pints can have different gas contents depending on pouring technique (ever have an aunty pour your can at christmas, a pint of head that settles to a flat piss).
The sensation of the head is extremely important. I would bet anything that if I poured 2 pints, one well, and one very badly, tasted them, was blindfolded and tasted again that I could tell the difference. I could tell with the texture of the head alone. Even with a straw I could make one less gassy and tell by sensation.
In my local I always go to the bar to get my guinness, since it is hit and miss with lounge staff, I have my preferred barman pour mine, I can get noticeably different pints from the same keg.

monkeyfudge

Okay... we'll have to test this out at the next boards beers... I'll bring the blind folds.