Why is Guinness always so bad in hotels

Ballso wrote: »

The two part pour is a pain in the hole. It's cheap bland macro beerswill I'm ordering, not fine wine, just put it in the glass ffs. Last time I ordered Murphy's stout the woman behind the bar refused to do this and i had to stand there like a spa while it "settled" ðŸ˜‚

Load of ridiculous nonsense

As it settles the head thickens and allows the head to sit proud of the glass meaning the head is the correct thickness.

irishgeo

while i dont drink Guinness , i was in a hotel in cornwall last year and they had a non widget can and vibrating base to serve it.

The Guinness expert in our company nearly ran a mile when the barman got a can out, but when the barman put the half poured glass on this vibrating guinness tap, he had the whole groups attention.

The expert said it wasnt bad. This is what Guinness give to hotels in the UK who dont sell enough to warrant a keg.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zjx0rTyZys

Ballso wrote:

You'll often find that Guinness etc is the least worst option in a pub down the country with their ****e taplists, it's always fresh and in good nick and is pretty inoffensive stuff all in all. Standing around waiting for it like a spa is annoying.

Big Nasty wrote:

Guinness control everything about their beer until it comes out of the tap. The only other factor that can affect the taste is the glassware. That doesn't necessarily mean dirty glasses, in fact a place that uses too much / strong a concentration of detergent can also result in a below par pint.

Big Nasty wrote:

A glass that has a residue of detergent or grease (often found in places that serve a lot of food) will result in a sub par pint. This goes for lagers and ales too but is far more evident in stout.

Big Nasty wrote:

IMO the two part pour is essential as otherwise the meniscus will be flat or concave. Allowing the pint to settle enables the server pour a pint with a head that is proud of the glass, hence sealing it.

100% correct, however an awful lot of bar staff do the double pour incorrectly. The second pour should be pushing the handle back instead of pulling it forward.

hetuzozaho

Bambi wrote: »

You see this type about a bit, too much time on the internet.

Was sitting at the bar in Hedigans once nursing a 25 yr old rebreast, and some smug young hipster comes up to the barman and orders a pint of Guinness, informs the barman ( Who himself is only a callow youth not out of his teens) that its to be pulled straight, no pause to settle. I'd imagine his nibs was a member of some craft beer facebook group and knows the two stage pull is all just marketing and nostalgia. Isn't he the smart boy not falling for that guff and so forth. He wanders off very happy with himself and me and the young lad just look at each other and go :rolleyes:

It's gas that the guy who wants the liquid just put in the glass without 45degree angles, domes, settling etc is referred to as 'his nibs'

BeerNut

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Your average punter (me included) might not know why that is, but they know what they like.

No doubt. It's ones who present good and bad Guinness as a matter of fact rather than opinion that I'm questioning. And by golly they don't much like being questioned.

andekwarhola

irishgeo wrote: »

The expert said it wasnt bad.

Wonder if they did one of them up on the sly in Mulligans and gave it to him, what would he have said.

Probably would have put it up on Instagram with a Ronnie Drew quote.

Big Nasty wrote: »

IMO the two part pour is essential as otherwise the meniscus will be flat or concave.

Flat or concave! The horror!

You know I'm going to slurp it right into my mouth as soon as I get it right?

Mongfinder General

andekwarhola wrote: »

I must be lucky. I've drank Guinness all over the country and Dublin and can't remember the last time I got one of these subpar pints that seem to be such a risk.

You are lucky. I had two pints of the stuff one evening and my arse was spewing chocolate lava all night. I had an arse like a Japanese flag the next day.

Mongfinder General wrote: »

You are lucky. I had two pints of the stuff one evening and my arse was spewing chocolate lava all night. I had an arse like a Japanese flag the next day.

Second mention of this now. What do you think is in Guinness that isn't in other beers that causes people to **** themselves?!?

andekwarhola

Feisar wrote: »

As it settles the head thickens and allows the head to sit proud of the glass meaning the head is the correct thickness.

Is the nitro head an aesthetic thing or does it affect taste? Not claiming to be an pint of plain scientist like some on here although I've drank Guinness on and off for years.

In a blind test, with one 'bishops collar' and one with the 'perfect head', would anybody here taste the difference in what, a centimetre of nitro head?

andekwarhola

Mongfinder General wrote: »

You are lucky. I had two pints of the stuff one evening and my arse was spewing chocolate lava all night. I had an arse like a Japanese flag the next day.

Well it is a dark beer. I'd say a lot of the Guinness trots stories are more down to sinking loads of it or a fast food pit stop during the sesh.

It's just another aesthetic twist to the marketing. Real Pint Men suffering on the throne after a hard night on the porter etc.

andekwarhola wrote: »

Is the nitro head an aesthetic thing or does it affect taste? Not claiming to be an pint of plain scientist like some on here although I've drank Guinness on and off for years.

In a blind test, with one 'bishops collar' and one with the 'perfect head', would anybody taste the difference in what, a centimetre of nitro head?

No discernible taste difference, I was a barman for years and done blind taste tests with lads when the subject would arise.
Although since the look can effect the perceived taste and it does seem better looking with the domed head.

Look, I'm not denying there is a certain pleasure to be had in the aesthetic of a nicely poured beer (the look of the nitro stouts are certainly more interesting than their flavour), but they could still do away with the stupid two part pour. This would be achievable with a single pour with a different setup at the tap.

Back to Guinness in hotels, function rooms not being used often is a big reason, pints sitting in the line all week are manky. Also layout is a thing, there may be one cold room serving the bar, and a few function rooms, the lines would be really long.

Ballso wrote: »

Look, I'm not denying there is a certain pleasure to be had in the aesthetic of a nicely poured beer (the look of the nitro stouts are certainly more interesting than their flavour), but they could still do away with the stupid two part pour. This would be achievable with a single pour with a different setup at the tap.

I don't see how as it's the thicker consistency of the head that only comes to the top as it settles that allows it to sit proud of the glass.

Open to correction here, I'm no expert on stouts or anything.

Ballso wrote: »

Look, I'm not denying there is a certain pleasure to be had in the aesthetic of a nicely poured beer (the look of the nitro stouts are certainly more interesting than their flavour), but they could still do away with the stupid two part pour. This would be achievable with a single pour with a different setup at the tap.

How would you set up the tap differently?

Big Nasty

Ballso wrote: »

Flat or concave! The horror!

You know I'm going to slurp it right into my mouth as soon as I get it right?

Drown yourself in it for all I care

Big Nasty wrote: »

Drown yourself in it for all I care

If I'm going to drown in beer (and I might yet), it'll be in something more interesting than boring bland old Guinness draught

jt69er wrote: »

How would you set up the tap differently?

Turn the flow control right down and change the gas mix I'm guessing? I've had the bottoms-up fill Guinness before, it tasted exactly like I was expecting. Other beer styles withspecific head types (Hefeweizen and the like) seem to manage without the Jedi pint training so advanced that eastern Europeans can't master it

Mongfinder General

Ballso wrote: »

Second mention of this now. What do you think is in Guinness that isn't in other beers that causes people to **** themselves?!?

No idea, but since the smoking ban the flatulence caused by the demonic red brew has reached chronic levels. The stench is unbelievable.

Ballso wrote:

Turn the flow control right down and change the gas mix I'm guessing? I've had the bottoms-up fill Guinness before, it tasted exactly like I was expecting. Other beer styles withspecific head types (Hefeweizen and the like) seem to manage without the Jedi pint training so advanced that eastern Europeans can't master it

No flow control on Guinness Tap, gas mix specific to stout, why change it because you don't want to wait a few seconds for a pint?

Snotty

One other thing, the beer lines need to be cleaned once a week and that did happen for years, but Diageo realised that they could cut it down to once every 4 weeks and save a fortune, if the pub complained they were just given the equipment and fluid and told to do it themselves.
Most bars don't have someone there who even knows how to clean the lines, but plenty still do as well.
And in fairness Heineken still clean their product lines once a week or at least they did when I left the industry which wasn't that long ago.

See post #85, modern system lines don't need to be cleaned weekly and Heineken certainly don't clean theirs once a week.

jt69er wrote: »

No flow control on Guinness Tap, gas mix specific to stout, why change it because you don't want to wait a few seconds for a pint?

Change the taps then? What other beer would it be acceptable to have to pour in two goes? It makes zero sense. And I thought you'd to wait 120 seconds for a "proper" head?

The easiest option here is obviously to just avoid the sort of pub where Guinness is your only drinkable option, easily done in Dublin thankfully.

Don't know of any pubs where Guinness is the only drinkable option, don't think they would last long if there was.

[Deleted User]

Ballso wrote: »

Sure there are probably pubs whose environments are so poor it affects the quality of their beer, but this has nothing to do with Guinness stout.

So, you're now admitting that some pubs can serve worse pints than others. Fair play.

[Deleted User]

BeerNut wrote: »

No doubt. It's ones who present good and bad Guinness as a matter of fact rather than opinion that I'm questioning. And by golly they don't much like being questioned.

I agree, the fat feckers propping up the bar waxing lyrical about the pints in X pub are talking out of their hoop, and if you pulled them on it all you'd hear is "sure everyone knows the long hall serves the best pint in town" ad infinitum.

The fact remains, sometimes a pint is not as good as it could be, for whatever reason. If this wasn't the case, there'd be no reason to have the lines cleaned every 4 weeks, would there?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So, you're now admitting that some pubs can serve worse pints than others. Fair play.

This is possible but highly unlikely. Unlikely to the point where it's not worth discussing. Guinness tastes the same practically everywhere. It's quality is more uniform than other beers in my experience.

jt69er wrote: »

Don't know of any pubs where Guinness is the only drinkable option, don't think they would last long if there was.

In said hotel where I had the Murphy's I was presented with only the Murphy's and other Heineken lager options. If it wasn't for the novelty of having a Murphy's i wouldn't have bothered tbh.