Brewers Cup Wrap Up
So I (Nate) felt really pleased with my first round Brewers Cup extraction. I still do, though I was not selected for finals. And that has got me thinking some interesting things about how Brewers Cup currently works, and why competing this year was both great for me and a total competitive dud, all at once.
I can’t over-emphasize how good it’s been for me to prepare to compete. I previously estimated I spent about 1,000 minutes preparing for each minute on stage, and I’ve already reaped the true value of that preparation: the ability to quickly and beautifully brew any coffee while offering an excellent customer experience.
The process pushed me to search for a time-efficient way to brew any coffee accurately with minimal adjustments. Hence my decision to use a cupping method variant, with an inert steel mesh medium to ensure a consistent and transparent picture of the coffee in the cup. I came to enjoy and respect cupping’s transparency, and cupping against other methods made me very aware of the distinct flavor emphases caused by various brew methods. That was invaluable in itself.
The preparation process also became much more aware of the variance in extraction parameters of brewed coffee, particularly between paper / cloth-filtered coffees and non-absorbent filters. Simply put, traditional brewed coffee is a paper or cloth-filtered extraction which contains only dissolved solids and little or no oils. That’s not bad, or good. It just is. And over time I’ve come to enjoy brewed coffee very differently than most: I like filters that let the oils through. I find the resulting brewed coffee fattier and better balanced, with a fuller flavor reminiscent of the best of crud-free French press.
Not that my preference should be normative. I understand that most palates instinctively connect brewed coffee with a paper or cloth-filtered beverage, and that’s fine. But here’s where the irony of the Brewers Cup process strikes home: my preparation for Brewers Cup led me to develop a brew method that (in retrospect) was probably doomed to failure in the first round. Simply put, the challenge of the “mystery coffee” round is is to take a strange coffee and make it taste as good as possible – not necessarily to extract that coffee accurately (flaws and all).
The challenge of a steel-filtered cupping method is that it is both ridiculously good to outstanding coffees, showcasing the full range of flavor curated by roaster and farmer, and yet ridiculously unforgiving to coffee flaws. It is, after all, a brew method in the cupping family, a process designed to show the truth about a bean.
So that’s what I did. I extracted a coffee that was very quiet hot, and that gradually gave off a delicate sweetness and pomegranate-fruitiness when cooled, with just a little acidity. It was specialty coffee, but it was nothing especially special, and believing that the quality of extraction mattered more than extra juicy, sour or salty flavors that come from up-dosing, I just left it as it was.
That, I think, was a mistake from a competitive point of view. But I think it was the honest choice for the coffee, and part of me wonders if the standings on Saturday would have been different if we all received a mystery 95 point coffee instead of what we had.
Things might also have been different if the Brewers Cup was organized like it’s cousin, the Barista Championship, with baristas allowed to select their own coffees in the first round. As I write this, the best roast of one of the best coffees I’ve ever enjoyed is sitting on my kitchen counter (Gichathaini by Kuma Coffee). It will never be presented, and that’s a shame and a disgrace.
The current Brewers Cup process is incredibly wasteful of delicious coffees. 16 competitors worked hard with specialty roasters to develop outstanding roasts of delightful coffees. Ten of those roasts were completely wasted. Ten competitors in the northwest alone slaved to prepare specific extractions and presentations showcasing their passion for a particular coffee, exemplifying barista dedication and craftsmanship at its best, and their work was never seen.
Furthermore, the first round of Brewers Cup seems suspiciously like a concession to cost-effectiveness rather than an honest test of barista skills. True baristas get to know their coffees, and learn over time how to present them best. Adjusting in 30 minutes to a mystery coffee is no more a skill required to brew coffee than it is required to brew espresso, and yet the espresso competition notably does not include a mystery grab-bag first round.
What would it take to do the Brewers Cup properly? Ten minute presentations, our own coffees, and the top six move to the finals. It doesn’t seem that hard. I’d volunteer to help, except I’d probably be competing again. 
I’ll be waiting for that day, anyways.
And one more thing: congratulations to the (as yet) uncrowned 2012 NWRBC Brewers Cup champion. Whoever you are, you will deserve the trophy and be an awesome representative of our region at nationals!
I did feel almost like I let Mark (from Kuma) down. He was so helpful, personal, and generous for working with me on this amazing coffee. And I tasted my coffee yesterday and it was explosively delicious, and would have done so well on the score sheets. But I plan on doing Portland, but unfortunately that coffee won’t be around.
Interesting about the cupping extractions too. Many people did that this year and put that method as being optimum because we cherish cupping so much. But filtered coffee can accent and mute certain parts to represent a coffee how you like it. Ie, cupping isn’t the best flavor for every coffee ever. Just extremely naturally balanced and forgiving coffees.
Another note, I did give lots of coffee away to people that I know would drink It and love it. So that was satisfying to know that it wouldn’t go to waste or unappreciated.
@Christos, I definitely feel like I let Mark (from Kuma Coffee) down. I think we both knew there was no guarantee of moving to the finals, but like everyone else I hoped my preparations would be sufficient to give me a chance to present the coffee.
I think what’s been especially difficult for me is that I still don’t know what I’d change or how I’d improve if I did it all over again. Given the first-round coffee, I brewed the best coffee I could.
My conclusion at this point is that I did my best, and for some unknown reason, wasn’t selected. I wish I had a better narrative than that!
[...] to learn right now – people like Nate really encourage me and teach me a lot. Check out his post on the NWRBC here. 2. Jamie Ferguson and her Coffee Adventures: I think I thanked Jamie earlier this week, but I [...]