Two-part Guinness pour - Your own thoughts?

fabbydabby

Anyone really thought about this, and if so, what are your own thoughts, and what is the basis for them?

I was enjoying an occasional pint of G with mates yesterday and I had to wait for mine while they went to their seats with their beers. This prompted the debate.

I believe the Guinness 'two part pour' to be a load of clever marketing and unnecessary ritualistic bollocks. What possible difference could it make?

i would like to hear people's opinions on this and why you harbor them. One of the lads yesterday said that one time he asked a barman to pull the pint in one go, and the barman wouldn't... is this the general feeling?

Mint Sauce

It makes a difference, if you tried a one pour pint you'd know. Not sure about over here, but one or two of the pub chains in the UK tried it (possibly o'neils), it was quickly discontinued.

Bruthal

My one is a 10 or 12 part pour, depending on how many sips i take.

humanji

As far as I know, the reason it started was because publicans would use an old barrel of Guinness and top it up with a new one, so that people wouldn't notice. It's not needed now because the Guinness is pumped full of chemicals to preserve it and the barrels are metal, which also keeps it longer.

The reason you have to do a two part pour now is because the taps are designed that way. It's all marketing.

Sergeant

Nitrogenated beer. The two part pour makes no difference what so ever. Clever marketing which arose from the move to nitrokegs in the late '50s. Before that, it did serve a purpose, fresh "fizzy" stout was added to stale Guinness to create a pint. Guinness kept on the ritual so the plain people of Ireland wouldn't view the new product with suspicion.

That said, there is loads of really good stouts being brewed in Ireland at the moment. Even Aldi have a lovely one for €2 a bottle.

ancapailldorcha

2 parts. Over here some places do the 2 part pour but they allow no time for settling which is a disgrace. It could all be in my head but I reckon it affects the taste.

pmurphy00

the one part pour is ****e..
just ask for it next time your out
doubt you'l ask again
sure isnt the waiting half the fun..

Lapin

If you pour a pint in one go, the head on it will be about an inch thick.

It makes no difference to the taste.

onlyrocknroll

irish-stew wrote: »

It makes a difference, if you tried a one pour pint you'd know. Not sure about over here, but one or two of the pub chains in the UK tried it (possibly o'neils), it was quickly discontinued.

I'm living in Belgium and the Irish pubs all give two part pours. The pints aren't that great. Guinness isn't good abroad because the quality control on the lines isn't as rigorous as it is in Ireland.

In a pub I worked in Ireland we did a blind tasting of one and two part Guinness, we couldn't tell the difference.

If you ask me it's just clever marketing from Guinness.

KingEnda

The waiting and anticipation is all part of the excitment. I am normally a larger man but go for the guinness every so often for the bit of Irish culture

humanji

KingEnda wrote: »

The waiting and anticipation is all part of the excitment. I am normally a larger man but go for the guinness every so often for the bit of Irish culture

Congrats on losing the weight.

Dravokivich

T'is all part of the ritual, why change it?

onlyrocknroll

Sergeant wrote: »

Nitrogenated beer. The two part pour makes no difference what so ever. Clever marketing which arose from the move to nitrokegs in the late '50s. Before that, it did serve a purpose, fresh "fizzy" stout was added to stale Guinness to create a pint. Guinness kept on the ritual so the plain people of Ireland wouldn't view the new product with suspicion.

Guinness do have a sort of scientific-y explanation for the two part pour, but if you read it, it's just basically a long winded way of saying that the head settles after the first pour and goes a little stale (for want of a better word, I mean the nice way the head goes a little hard) and then you top that up.

Even Guinness don't mention flavour in their explanation.

I guess that it makes sense that the two part pour from the days when it was served in two seperate casks was a nice tradition that they wanted to maintain for marketing purposes, so they invented a reason.

onlyrocknroll

Dravokivich wrote: »

T'is all part of the ritual, why change it?

Couldn't agree more, I might be sh**ing on the explanation for it here but it's a nice tradition and i enjoy waiting for it.

PeakOutput

I like the two part pour but it hasn't served any practical purpose for years and years

I like it and I miss it.

cosanostra

Its to give you time to drink your short of whiskey!

onlyrocknroll

It's to give this man a chance to finish his dance

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69MpLiYhsXw

Samba

humanji wrote: »

As far as I know, the reason it started was because publicans would use an old barrel of Guinness and top it up with a new one, so that people wouldn't notice. It's not needed now because the Guinness is pumped full of chemicals to preserve it and the barrels are metal, which also keeps it longer.

The reason you have to do a two part pour now is because the taps are designed that way. It's all marketing.

Not quite but almost, I can't remember the exact details and don't have my beer encyclopaedia at hand but it's something to the effect that the first part was served with a younger brew of Guinness and for the second pour they used a stronger and more mature brew, wasn't to fool anyone though

enda1

No real taste difference. The only real difference is that with a two pull pour, you have a nice rounded head which is retained when its ready to drink (all black), whereas with a single pull pour, its receded down the glass a bit by the time its settled.

ilovelamp2000

There is virtually no waste if you do the two part pour, properly. You would get a huge head on the pint with a single pour and have to tip out plenty to bring the head down to the size it should be. The way its poured has no bearing on taste. Glass and line hygiene does though.

airman101

there's somethin in my head telling me that 1 pour is just wrong!!!!

onlyrocknroll

ilovelamp2000 wrote: »

There is virtually no waste if you do the two part pour, properly. You would get a huge head on the pint with a single pour and have to tip out plenty to bring the head down to the size it should be. The way its poured has no bearing on taste. Glass and line hygiene does though.

Not always though, taps vary a lot with things like this. Even two taps in the same bar can be quite different.

dagdha

A pub I go to sometimes do a two part pour on every drink from the tap(I don't think they have a cider tap). The pints in the place are absolutley lovely though, the Heineken is really nice. I don't know if the two part pour makes for a better pint or if the pints in there are just nice anyway without the two part pour. It can be a bit of a nightmare when the place is busy and your trying to get a round in.

orourkeda

Good things come to those who wait.

thebigbiffo

it's a load of s'hite!!

the best guinness i drink regularly comes from a typical 'auld lads' pub in the village i grew up in. they pour it right to the top and - however - leave it at the tap until it's mostly settled. if the head happens to be a bit large they might scrap off a little at the top and pour a little in to compensate - this can also be done with lagers and can help head retention instead of running off the froth while pouring.

i regularly in busy pubs ask the barman to just pour it to the top and hand it to me unsettled - queue strange looks...but it doesn't make a jot of difference to the taste.

Angeles

yep its a waste thing, 2 part pour is necessary to prevent loss of alcohol which is a tragic thing!
Gas in guinness is a pain to manage, even at the right temperature and gas level you can still end up with your pint being half foam, 2 part pour prevents this waste by allowing a settle to see how much of a head is actually created, also allows the barman to judge back pour or full on top up, taste won't change but the amount you get will.

Ask a barman to pour to the top so you can take it and let it settle, i'll guarantee 6/10 times you'll find yourself feeling ripped off.

Son Of A Vidic

The two part pour really just caps of a nice head on the pint. But at the end of the day, only well maintain pipes will give a good pint. Sadly, the standard seems to be deteriorating every year.

biko

I have had both but like the two part better, as for some reason the pint feel "thicker".

From After Hours.

Agricola

The bane of all Guinness drinkers - waiting for your pint in a busy pub when your friends have all got theirs!
I can imagine that there would be no real difference to the taste, but pubs the length and breath of the country still employ the 2 part pour as a rule. Isnt it amazing what long tradition and habit can make people believe. Its the alcoholic equivalent of Catholicism!

Feardorca

pmurphy00 wrote: »

the one part pour is ****e..
just ask for it next time your out
doubt you'l ask again
sure isnt the waiting half the fun..

Whilst in Jame's Gate on business c.1970 I observed employees drinking their allocation of free stout whilst still foaming in the glass, not waiting for it to settle, I being a Guinness supporter was amazed.