Slightly smokey nose and a chocolately, slightly smokey taste. Do smoked beers exist just because people can make them? We think so. They don't make them because they should. A novelty beer.

"Fuggles hops from the West Midlands offer lusty country flavour, aroma and stalwart bitterness." It went on, but we won't bore you. Bronze by name, bronze by colour. Reasonably low carbonation. Label proclaims it a "real live ale" but it's not real lively. No head whatsoever. Flavour is quite nice, but it's just a dead beer. Promises much. Doesn't deliver. Perhaps this deserves a retasting … maybe it's been subjected to a little rougher-than-usual handling, treated like a bit of uncovered meat. Perhaps the effect on this beer is a chaste, blah, blah.

No "e" in blond. Is this a male beer? No, as it's a very nice beer. Neutral nose, apart from a hint of malt. Tastes a little English. Hopped with Saaz. Label says "smooth, lingering maltiness". We agree. There's also a lingering bitterness. Copper colour. A delicious beer

Thin but tight head. Cloudy. Flavoursome. Bubblegum nose, almost like a wheat beer. Strong alcohol flavour, which is hardly surprising! On par with, and possibly more impressive than, previous vintages. Rich and well balanced.

Clean, crisp, slightly yeasty nose. Nice creamy head. Clean, crisp, slightly yeasty taste. Easy-drinking, sessional beer. Nice enough. Reasonable body.

Tastes like a homebrew stout, and a good one. A big stouty nose. What a great way to finish a day of beer tasting!

A gluten-free beer.

Pale in a watery way; that sort of water that comes out of a tap when there’s rust in the pipes and the tap has not been turned on for a while. It’s got a soft, hard-to-describe flavour, almost as if someone has dissolved a Disprin in it. There’s a fizziness at the back of the tongue.

Geoff even suggested there was a hint of quinine or iodine (it was getting late in the night by this stage). This was another beer from this tasting session that required a consensus. Oliver thought it worthy than more than 2.5 stars, Geoff thought it worthy of fewer.

Claims to be "handmade Australian beer". Thin head and light copper colour. MS: "Awful." The distinct lack of information on this label about the beer's origins prompted us to ask: Is there something to hide? Is this a novelty beer? The beer equivalent of a stuffed koala holding an Australian flag?

Very, very floral. “F---ing hell. I don’t think we’ve had a beer like this before.” Is this really in the style of Bavarian lager, as the label claims? It’s more of a rich dessert beer. Strong tasting, strong smelling; perhaps of hay. Is this the Sauvin hops, we wonder? Lisa described it as having a “floral, pissy smell”, but also being “a little bit yummy and tasty”.

This was the fourth time Oliver had tried this beer, and each time it had been significantly different in the degrees of aroma and taste.* If we were the Movie Show, we’d say: “This is groundbreaking cinema; I loved every moment of it. A completely enthralling film. Two stars.” But we’re not the Movie Show, and we say: “An interesting and bold beer. Three-and-a-half stars.“

* We find this variance intriguing. Winestate Magazine, reporting on the launch of this beer in 2006, quotes “master winemaker and brewer” Paul Smith as saying: “Wines vary with each vintage, reflecting the season, the oak and of course, the fruit. Unlike winemaking, brewing requires a strict discipline to ensure consistency.” So how does one explain this being one of the most inconsistent beers we've ever drunk?

Floral, malty nose. Geoff was right (if Oliver may be so humble) when he agreed with Oliver’s assertion that it was a pilsner by name but not by nature. This is more of a nondescript lager in that it’s not clean-tasting and not as bitter as a pilsner should be. In relation to the way it smells, Geoff described it as having “a touch of the toilet lollies about it”.

Smells like a freshly painted house. Tastes decidedly better. Slightly overcarbonated. Foamy head. Tastes a bit rough. However, it’s greater than the sum of its parts.

Copper colour. Geoff: "Smells like a hoppy bastard." In fact, it smells like a bag of hops. However, it doesn't taste at all hoppy. Does this make it complex or flawed? We say flawed. It promises much, but delivers little.

Copper coloured. An OK beer but not a good or a great beer.

Brewed using green hops. The Marijuana Kid says: It tastes like I've just smoked some fresh, wet head." Whatever that means.

There was something wrong with this bottle. It tasted rank. Oliver has had this beer before and has reasonably fond memories of it. This one, however, is just wrong. It was deemed a “tip-out” and a retasting at a later date was ordered.

It gets one star only because it has to get a rating.

Very strong roast-grain nose. Dark colour. Astringent and soapy. Earthy and not particularly nice.

An all-malt lager. Brewer claims to be “Australia’s craft brewer”. Well, they are a little isolated over in WA. Hang on .… what about Little Creatures, Feral, Buffalo or even the original Australian craft brewer, Matilda Bay? Anyway, this is a tasty, malty, clean beer.

Smells disgusting. But, overlooking that fact, it's not a bad beer. It's well balanced and strong.

We bought this in error, prompting us to demand a warning on mid-strength beers so that other poor souls don’t suffer the same ignomy as us. We suggest a picture of Kevin Rudd on all mid-strength beers and a picture of Bob Hawke on all full-strength beers, just so there’s no confusion.

MS: “You could drink 85,000 of these and it wouldn’t touch the sides. Why bother? ” Oliver and Geoff couldn’t argue with that. It’s got no taste of which to speak. It’s nothingness, and certainly not a pilsner.

The label claims that this is a “superior midstrength lager”. In our view, “superior” and “midstrength” are mutually exclusive terms when it comes to beer. This beer proves our assertion.

Described variously on the label as “Honey wheat beer” and “Honey ale”, both of which could be correct, but how ‘bout some consistency?
MS: “That’s yummy. I love that.” You can smell the honey, but can’t really taste it. Cloudy, due to the natural carbonation. Classy, says Geoff, but “not real outstanding”. A much, much better “honey beer” than the awful Beez Neez.