What should judges do if they cannot reach a consensus score on a beer?

When judges cannot reach a consensus score on a beer, it is important to ensure that the evaluation remains fair and accurate. Consulting judges outside the table, upon agreement, is the best approach, as it allows for a fresh perspective or additional insights that may help bridge differing opinions. This communication can facilitate a discussion that may clarify points of contention and lead to a more informed consensus.

This approach also maintains the integrity of the judging process by drawing upon a broader pool of expertise, rather than relying on an arbitrary or random guess, which would not reflect the true quality of the beer. Additionally, simply submitting scores without reaching a consensus can undermine the collaborative nature of the judging process. A tiebreaker beer could be considered in some cases, but it may not be necessary if a consultation can resolve the disagreement effectively.