What should judges do after discussing their initial scores?

After discussing their initial scores, judges should aim to adjust their scores to be within seven points of each other to ensure a more consistent and fair evaluation of the entries. This practice helps to foster a collaborative approach among judges, allowing for the integration of different perspectives and interpretations of the beer being judged. The seven-point range establishes a standard for scoring that can mitigate significant discrepancies and promote a more comprehensive consensus about a beer's characteristics, quality, and adherence to style guidelines.

This adjustment process encourages dialogue about specific tasting notes and aspects of the beer that may have been overlooked during initial scoring, leading to a deeper understanding and a more accurate final score. By aligning their scores within this range, judges are more likely to reach a consensus that accurately reflects the overall assessment of the entries, which ultimately benefits the brewing community and provides valuable feedback to the participants.