Part of the appeal of Guinness is in the presentation. Guinness recommends a multi part pour where you pour part of the beer, let it settle and then top it off. Some people – myself included – will let the beer settle again and then do a second, smaller top off. Guinness says it should take 119.5 seconds for the perfect pour.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Guinness drinkers swear by the multi stage pour. I’ve seen people claim that if their Guinness is not poured correctly it will impact the taste. A lot of non Guinness drinkers think this is marketing bullshit. But is it?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In an effort to put this to the test, I’ve given myself a triangle test. After having a proper 20 oz pint (to purge the line of any beer), I pulled three 16 ounce pours of Guinness. Two of them I poured with a three stage technique. That is, I held the glass at about 45 degrees and poured until the beer was at the top. Then I let it settle and topped it off to the top of the harp. Then I let it settle again and, pushing the tap away from me this time, I added a small top off to the rim of the glass. The third glass I poured straight down in a single go while pushing the tap away from me. I then had the glasses shuffled around and let them sit so that there would be no temperature difference. If pour technique impacts taste then I should be able to pick out the single stage pour.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The result? I couldn’t find a difference. I thought the first pour that I tried tasted a little thinner than the rest. With maybe a touch <\/em>more bitterness. But that wasn’t the glass that was poured differently. I gave myself the test a few more times. Making sure that I had drank them to similar levels and then having them reshuffled. The one time I got it right I thought I perceived sharper bitterness. But when I repeated the test with an idea of what to look for I couldn’t reliably pick out the single stage pour.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What does this mean? Not a whole lot. Triangle tests are not statistically relevant with a sample size of 1. Maybe my ability to discern minor differences in Guinness needs more fine tuning. I will do my best to work on that. I will also try to give the test to others to see if anyone else can pick up differences that I don’t perceive. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Will I change anything about how I pour my Guinness at home? I don’t think so. I’ll probably continue to pour the beer and let it settle. That’s part of the charm of Guinness. Plus, that waterfall effect is always a beauty to behold. And I do think it has an impact on the thickness of the head. In other words it really is all about presentation. At least for my palate. In the future, if I get a bad pour at a bar I’ll avoid blaming it on the bartender; unless they are the ones in charge of having the lines cleaned.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Part of the appeal of Guinness is in the presentation. Guinness recommends a multi part pour where you pour part of the beer, let it…<\/p>\n