WE'RE BACK!

After laying dormant for what is rapidly heading towards 3 years, the blog that once almost featured on Richard & Judy has returned! The Beer & Chocolate team is revived, revamped and ready to once again address that important question: "Is [insert beer or chocolate here] good or is it not really that good?".

Our team has gone national, based as it is both in London, virtually on the site of the now sadly closed Young's Ram Brewery, and in the Westcountry between the renowned breweries Otter in Devon and St.Austell in Cornwall.

This day marks the re-starting of a journey to find the best beer and the best chocolate in existence, via the longest possible route.

We might even come up with a rating system but probably not.

Defeat tastes like pisswater

What feels like many months ago now, I voiced an intention to write a review of a beer I typically drink in the pub, say Carling or Fosters, combined with the sweet taste of victory. I put it off. In retrospect I should have done it when I had the idea, around the same time that Liverpool won the F.A. Cup in truly spectacular fashion. Unfortunately my procrastinating ways left the idea festering in the back of my mind, ready to resurface on, what now seems a ridiculous notion, the glorious day that Beckham held aloft the World Cup to the cheers of a nation. That would have tasted mighty fine, but it wasn't to be. It won't stop me trying that temptress ever resident in Sainsbury's, Young's (I think) English Ale, though.

On the day the dream died I was at the birthday BBQ of a very good friend of mine, and although victory wasn't around to sweeten things, the beer certainly tasted great. We had a 38 litre polypin of Rebellion, brewed across the road from his house that very morning. It does actually have its own quite sweet taste and that combined with the company made up for England's defeat, especially when my next adpoted team to support beat Brazil later in the day.

Tis not a Season for Confection

Due to the hot weather, chocolate eating is not currently recommended by JG's beer and chocolate blog given chocolate's tendancy to melt and become sticky.
In due course, JG's beer and chocolate blog will be purchasing a bag of M&M's to see if their claims of 'melt in your mouth, not in your hand' hold true through the summer months.

Beer however, is still strongly recommended for consumption during these sweltering days.

Budweiser and Hershey's Syrup

It may seem that Dan's getting more air time on here than me. That's either because he's successfully masterminding a corporate takeover or just that he's unsuccessfully trying to urge me on and encourage me to post more than once a year. Whatever it is, the following was his doing.

Dan hails from America (sort of) and as a sort of American he has stupid taste buds and likes Reece's Peanut Butter vomit. He went to America recently and brought back some American wholesomeness in the shape of a bottle of Hershey's Chocolate Syrup. Since our beer of choice at home is usually Budweiser (Fosters if we're being cheap), that's what we were drinking. For some reason I can't remember now, I'd had half a bottle and put the rest in the fridge for later, which I'm sure contributed to the ease with which I was convinced to partake in the charade (it seemed less of a waste, should it go badly, as most of the beer was already drunk and enjoyed). Dan suggested that my beer and chocolate blog really should be graced with some sort of ultimate combination of the two and, although a perfectly good chocolate ale - which I had tasted some time around christmas - is available from Youngs, our local brewery, the concoction of choice was the previously mentioned Budweiser and syrup.

I mixed it around a bit. The syrup was of course a fair amount heavier than the beer.

I swigged it a bit. It was ok.

I swigged a bit more - more chocolatey and actually not bad.

I made Dan try some since a) it was his idea and I'd done it so fair's fair and b) he didn't believe me and thought I was acting and as soon as he'd had some I'd empty my guts into the sink.

It really wasn't that bad but why on Earth would you actually do this? Budweiser is much nicer without chocolate syrup in it. I'm sure chocolate syrup is much nicer when not mixed with Budweiser. It's kind of a waste really.

JG's Top Tip

Drink your Budweiser without any food products of any kind submerged in it. And that doesn't mean sieve it into your mouth through a brandy basket. Actually that might be alright...

Eat your chocolate syrup on something sensible like vanilla ice cream. These types of combinations are well known because THEY WORK. YOU HEAR ME RAMSAY? Him and his crazy experiments.

If you absolutely have to combine beer and chocolate into one consumable, I highly recommend Young's Double Chocolate Stout. Or if you're Scottish, a Mars Bar in beer batter.

Chocolate Warning

DON'T BUY FREDDOS! THEY'RE POISONED!

A peanut mistake

I stand corrected. This comment from Dan appeared in the Peanut Butter KitKat entry:

It is unfortunate, JG, that on such a prestigious and high-quality blog such as this, the Beer and Chocolate Blog, that such a glaring error was commited. I bring to your attention, lovers of beer and chocolate alike, that most unappreciated confectionary that is the Peanut Lion Bar.

While it's position on the coiled shelf of snack machines country-wide was prematurely ended, it was a gloriously delectable stint. The Peanut Lion Bar surpassed the normal Lion Bar in dozens of ways, technically, it's construction of wafer surrounding smooth peanut butter was one of legend. It provided a cataclysm of taste once your bite broke through the wafer box which, it could only be described, caged the savage butter treat that lay within. Beyond it's lucious peanutty centre the Peanut Lion had all the conventional Lion Bar could offer; wafer, caramel, crisp cereal pieces and smooth milk chocolate. What more could you want than this most toothsome of treats, this King of Confection, this Deity of Desserts?

You requested correction if you were wrong, and in this comment your correction lay. To imply that the KitKat is the first of Nestle's creation, or indeed any of our sweet providing corporations, to infuse chocolate with peanut buttery goodness is a most grave ommision. And I would challenge any who deny it's position.

The Peanut Butter KitKat Chunky

This is an interesting move in the world of British chocolate bars. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that, apart from Reece's, this is the first to feature a peanut butter filling. I do like peanut butter. I prefer it accompanied by jam (that's 'jelly' Nicks fans) and anything from the Reece's range is invariable vile, sickly and resembles a flavour far from that of a peanut. I also like KitKat Chunkies. I still haven't decided if I like them more or less than the traditional KitKat. With that, you see, you get 4 fingers, but they're dainty like a lady's. Sometimes you want something big and chunky to munch on. I think the intended distinction is that a KitKat is for girls and the Chunky was invented because men demanded something more meaty. But I'm not a particularly large or manly man. I have size 7 feet. When I bought my Dunlop Green Flash trainers the guy had to go and get some from the women's store room because the men's section doesn't go that small. Luckily, Green Flash are unisex in essence. Anyway, my point is that it's ok to have something supposedly designed for girls, and by this I don't mean for all the men reading this to go out and buy a pair of pumps for this friday down the Coach and Horses. Although that's ok if you want, whatever, each to their own.

What was I talking about again? Oh yes, chocolate. KitKat's are fun to eat in layers. I like the way the stuff in the middle tastes by itself so I often eat the top layer of wafer/chocolate, then nibble the chocolate down the sides, leaving this delicious middle bit as the treat and then the base of more wafer/chocolate for pudding. This, for some reason, is either not so easy or just not so enjoyable with a Chunky, and certainly not a Peanut Butter Chunky with it's extra layer of goop.

On the whole though, this bar was perfectly enjoyable. It's not overloaded with peanut butter, which by the way almost has a hint of peanutty flavour and therefore naturally outstrips Reece's products by a country mile being, as they are, both completely un-peanutty and overloaded with the sugarry mush. The peanut butter added a salty quality that can be quite complimentary but is possibly an acquired taste.

There are three main negative points that, for me, defined the Peanut Butter KitKat Chunky:

1. I don't like the packaging. It's a personal opinion, but I just don't think yellow is a good colour for chocolate bar wrappers.
2. It's not good for dipping. KitKat Chunkies aren't great for it to start with, leaving bits of wafer floating in your tea (normal KitKats are actually ok for this - another score on that front), and the peanut butter taints the flavour of the tea.
3. It's fundamentally not as good as the original Chunky.

To sum up, and you can quote me on this, I thought it was ok but I doubt I'll ever buy another one.

JG's top tip

Buy a KitKat Chunky. Or better yet, but a 4-finger KitKat. I'm beginning to think they're the best of the lot.

The Cadbury's Creme Egg Bar

The Creme Egg is a work of art. It has all the basic anatomical parts of an egg - the shell, the white and the yolk - but it's sweet as hell and you don't have to cook it (although I've heard of it being done - not to be recommended). And it's popularity is such that it is, to my knowledge, the only chocolate egg enjoyed by the Great British public all year round, not specifically easter. I think the closest thing is the Mini Egg but I don't think I've seen them eaten thoughout the year, plus it's essentially a big Smartie and Smarties are better. Fact. The CCE is unique in its simplicity.

As a fan of the Creme Egg (can't you tell?) I was curious to see what the bar equivalent had to offer. What's the point of it? It's the same thing in a different shape, which, quite significantly I thought, is not an egg shape. So in its nature, this taste test was relatively pointless, the differences being, as they are, obvious. Perhaps pointless is the wrong word - it was more simple. So in-keeping with this, I will keep the review simple by listing the advantages and disadvantages:

Advantages:

• It's easier to eat. Ever tried to eat a Creme Egg 'on the run'? Commuting to work perhaps? No, nor me. We all know how stupid we would look licking out an egg on the train. This bar offers the solution.
• As commented by my friend Jamie, "It has a higher chocolate-to-filling ratio". That stuff can get pretty sickly and this shift in balance prevents that sugary dry-mouth that can often occur with the classic egg.
• From Cadbury's point of view, I'm sure it's easier to make given that they already make several bars the same shape - Dairy Milk, Caramel, etc. Just pump a different filling through the machine. This also means that it fits in with their chocolate bar range so they can boost the brand image of several bars at once. It inspires recognition of quality in the consumer. They're doing it with all sorts of things; it started with changing the Caramel to the Dairy Milk Caramel and now it's spreading - look out for the Turkish Delight bar.
• Now they're putting the filling into other things it surely can't be long until they incorporate a small Creme Egg into Cadbury's Roses. Once they do, Quality Street is as good as dead.
  

Disadvantages:

• It has a higher chocolate-to-filling ratio. I know I said it's an advantage but some people just can't get enough of that gooey filling. Why ruin it with more chocolate, eh? I though I'd better cover the bases anyway.
• It's not an egg. They must have faced this dilema. People know what a Creme Egg is. If they'd called it the Dairy Milk Creme would anyone make that association? Doubtful. But at the same time it's not an egg! Can't blame them though, I don't know what I would have called it. It's still not an egg though. Idiots.
• Is this the end of the Creme Egg? What if this takes off? Is it really worth their while to keep manufacturing the eggs when they've got a standard machine that makes bars all the same shape? Only time will tell.
  
• The whole 'how do you eat yours?' thing goes out the window. That's half the fun of the egg. They built their whole ad campaign around it and now people really do discuss it pretty much every time more than one of them is eating a Creme Egg. (Incidentally, I usually bite off the big end and lick out the filling while nibbling around the outside to keep the insides in range - much the same way I eat a Cornetto. I used to attack the egg - boiled eggs too - from the small end before I realised that it restricts access. Think about it.)

So I'll let you make up your own mind based on these, quite frankly predictable, thoughts. I liked the Dairy Milk Creme Egg bar, it was nice. But it's not an egg.

JG's top tip

I didn't experience the full wonder of the bar until I dipped it into a mug of hot tea. The majority of all bars should be dipped for maximum pleasure and this is no exception. You can hardly dip an egg can you? On the other hand, you can dip Cadbury's Fingers into the egg so it's swings and roundabouts.