I'm from Ireland, where filling beers precisely up to the brim is practically a religion, & many barmen will even take the glass back & top it up if they see the head diminishing too quickly in the space of time it takes you to pick the freshly poured pint up.
One thing that always struck me as odd is how the culture is seemingly the opposite of this in apparent beer meccas like Belgium - not only are the glasses typically much smaller (this is fine) but they also leave massive gaps at the top. The glass capacity is never treated as being close to the rim at all.
> not only are the glasses typically much smaller (this is fine) but they also leave massive gaps at the top
I'm wondering if this is due to the prevalence of cask ales vs bottle/keg conditioning. The former is relatively uncommon in Belgium and you want the head from the latter.
That said, oversized glassware (e.g. Duvel's tulip for aromatics) and/or fill lines are also used to accommodate the head while still not cheating the customer out of volume.
It could well have emerged as a cultural norm from the prevalence of heads, but I've seen it often for very moderate heads, with a gap left above the foam.
> not cheating the customer out of volume
I don't think it's cheating if its the norm. One would expect prices to be set appropriately for the average volume served (i.e. a full glass would be a bonus rather than the gap being a loss).
I do just find it odd, coming myself from the opposite culturally.
I remember watching the cornetto trilogy ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Flavours_Cornetto ) and always wondering why on earth they fill up the glasses up to the brim. It is uncomfortable to transport this way and not spill beer.
When CAMRA was new in the early 1970s, they started a campaign for oversize glasses holding a pint to the line instead of a pint to the rim, so that there would be space for a pint of liquid and a head in the glass. The big breweries hated this idea and mounted a reactionary campaign arguing things like it would be too expensive to replace all the glasses, or serve customers the full measure they had paid for. (My father was a new recruit at Guinness and sadly one of his early tasks was the pint-to-brim campaign.)
Belgian glasses, like wine glasses, leave room for head and aromatics.
Belgium is also fanatical about matching the glass with the beer, and Europe has the very sensible pour line on glasses, so it is designed for a certain fill and filled to the design.
My understanding is Belgian beer culture considers the aroma to be an important part of the experience. But I’ve never been, that’s all through osmosis.
The only sensible approach here is pint-to-line glasses. I don't want my glass filled to the very top where I'll spill it, I want it filled to the pint line. Sadly in the UK up to 5% of the pint is allowed to be foam, but I'd expect any sensible barman in the UK to top me up to the pint line if I asked, and be apologetic about it.
My experience in Belgium is that people also have very different expectations for foam and aroma. Also: our beers are quite strong and often double or triple fermented (or more), so there’s plenty of space in a glass to account for foam. Just a few guesses.
Reminds me of backpacking up and down the east coast of Australia. I learned that Fosters is only northern New South Wales for beer. Every place had their own preferred beer, but maddeningly they all had their own glass. A tenner, a schooner. Each a slightly different size. I made friends with a guy in Hobart that was staying in the hostel as he was doing research there, I think he was a biologist. He took me to his favorite pub as they served imperial pints. I think who ever is behind this site needs to do some serious research in Australia as they could, at least, double the "know your glass" section...
I got poured a pint by a newbie behind the bar at a hotel recently and she looked embarrassed as it was about 40% head, but to her credit she went to fetch the shift supervisor before I said anything.
He explained after pouring it better that, even the remaining head (It had ~3/4 inch even after fixing it) might still be met by derision by many customers. "They'd be asking if you would be charging them for just for the half" etc.
There's a bit of leeway but you'll quickly hear about it if you short a pint too much.
In the US at least it's pretty common to see bars using cheater pints. They look like 16 oz pint glasses but with a few tricks wind up only holding 14 oz
In Canada (and I’m sure elsewhere) there are surprise inspections where government inspectors show up at petrol stations and see if the pump actually gives you what it claims.
Glad to see I'm not the only person that this bothers. I've been to more than 75 countries, to 43 US states, more than 2500 breweries, and I have drank more than 10k unique beers. Many beers styles should be correctly served in different glass shapes than a standard pint glass, but short pours are endemic, especially in the United States and in Canada. I always appreciate when I get a pint at a bar and see that they're using actual imperial nonic glasses with a pour line at 16oz/568ml.
I enjoyed reading this site and appreciate the passion and the effort.
The "loss of the pint" is basically shrink-flation. When a bar's costs and/or overhead goes up, they must do some combination of cutting expenses and raising prices. Raising prices means either selling the same stuff in the same quantity for more, or selling cheaper stuff OR less of the same stuff at the same price. Most bars will opt for the latter options to avoid raising prices, because raising prices is more likely to create complaints. All caveats apply, of course -- drop portions or quality too much or too often and you'll get complaints for sure, but "within reason" it's the lesser of two evils.
This is why I personally don't feel like I'm being cheated out of 2oz when I buy a $8 14oz shaker pint of IPA. Clearly, the cost per oz at this bar is $0.57. A 16oz glass would cost $9.14. They don't owe me the 2oz for free just because they used the word "pint". If the state government started enforcing pint measures again, bars would just drop the word "pint" from their signs and menus.
This is the sort of goodness the internet was made for. I'm no beer drinker myself, but I'm already sharing it with those in my circles who do.
Also a great way to teach folks on how to hold others honest and accountable, a skill sorely underdeveloped at present. Start with the pours, and push upward from there.
I think you'll all love this. I just made a study of this in the US, which you can read at isitapint.com This is very new and I'm between jobs having some fun.
I also made a free app that maps measurements of pints (or any pour) that users make, meaning you can share where short pints are poured and more importantly where honest pints are being poured. It should work in the UK, but I set this up in the US. I intend for it to work internationally. Eventually the app will have a large enough database of poured pints that have been measured by scale that a simple photo will give a very accurate measurement if the glass is recognized.
If you compare the US and the UK regarding the alcoholic beverage servings, then you can reach two conclusions, depending whether you think drinking alcohol is good or bad. If you think it's bad, then the US is better, because the restaurants in the US tend to serve smaller sizes. I am in this camp. In the UK, by comparison, the restaurants are much more generous; wine glasses seem gargantuan compared to wine glasses in the US. I suppose some people like that, but I am not sure that's really something to admire.
On the subject of the weights and measures to check that a pint is a pint, I remember the father of a friend of mine at university who was responsible for the weights and measures for Staffordshire. I think he was the undersheriff or something like that, and that the official pint was part of the collection.
This would have been in the late 80s - i've no idea if it was still in use, but i've a feeling that the law hadn't necessarily moved on, so I guess the official measure could have been required if challenged in court.
One thought I keep coming back to is the immense consequences of how our units of length, weight and volume were defined. Products are often sold with round numbers (1 liter, 0.5 liter, 1 kg, etc). If you could go back in time and fiddle with e.g. the definition of a pint, you'd see that reducing its volume would lead to people drinking less, until it's so small that people just order two pints.
162 comments
One thing that always struck me as odd is how the culture is seemingly the opposite of this in apparent beer meccas like Belgium - not only are the glasses typically much smaller (this is fine) but they also leave massive gaps at the top. The glass capacity is never treated as being close to the rim at all.
> not only are the glasses typically much smaller (this is fine) but they also leave massive gaps at the top
I'm wondering if this is due to the prevalence of cask ales vs bottle/keg conditioning. The former is relatively uncommon in Belgium and you want the head from the latter.
That said, oversized glassware (e.g. Duvel's tulip for aromatics) and/or fill lines are also used to accommodate the head while still not cheating the customer out of volume.
> not cheating the customer out of volume
I don't think it's cheating if its the norm. One would expect prices to be set appropriately for the average volume served (i.e. a full glass would be a bonus rather than the gap being a loss).
I do just find it odd, coming myself from the opposite culturally.
Belgium is also fanatical about matching the glass with the beer, and Europe has the very sensible pour line on glasses, so it is designed for a certain fill and filled to the design.
It's designed for experience, not volume.
Guinness glasses are exactly a pint, so the Guinness head means you're getting less than a pint of actual beer.
This is tolerated/expected and so de facto correct but de jure perhaps not.
He explained after pouring it better that, even the remaining head (It had ~3/4 inch even after fixing it) might still be met by derision by many customers. "They'd be asking if you would be charging them for just for the half" etc.
There's a bit of leeway but you'll quickly hear about it if you short a pint too much.
McDonalds cups have a line for ice.
I volunteer for the pub equivalent of this.
The "loss of the pint" is basically shrink-flation. When a bar's costs and/or overhead goes up, they must do some combination of cutting expenses and raising prices. Raising prices means either selling the same stuff in the same quantity for more, or selling cheaper stuff OR less of the same stuff at the same price. Most bars will opt for the latter options to avoid raising prices, because raising prices is more likely to create complaints. All caveats apply, of course -- drop portions or quality too much or too often and you'll get complaints for sure, but "within reason" it's the lesser of two evils.
This is why I personally don't feel like I'm being cheated out of 2oz when I buy a $8 14oz shaker pint of IPA. Clearly, the cost per oz at this bar is $0.57. A 16oz glass would cost $9.14. They don't owe me the 2oz for free just because they used the word "pint". If the state government started enforcing pint measures again, bars would just drop the word "pint" from their signs and menus.
Also a great way to teach folks on how to hold others honest and accountable, a skill sorely underdeveloped at present. Start with the pours, and push upward from there.
I also made a free app that maps measurements of pints (or any pour) that users make, meaning you can share where short pints are poured and more importantly where honest pints are being poured. It should work in the UK, but I set this up in the US. I intend for it to work internationally. Eventually the app will have a large enough database of poured pints that have been measured by scale that a simple photo will give a very accurate measurement if the glass is recognized.
I hope it helps humanity.
This would have been in the late 80s - i've no idea if it was still in use, but i've a feeling that the law hadn't necessarily moved on, so I guess the official measure could have been required if challenged in court.