I just picked up a 6 pack of Hofbrau Oktoberfest, which I love and look forward to every year. I took a glance at the BA rating, and was shocked to see that it is only a cumulative 81. I'm curious to see if there are beers that have jumped out to people as being rated far lower than they expected or believe they deserve.

The answer to your question is probably that it's all in the eye of the beholder. I'm a liberal rater, so I see many beers that are rated below what I think they should be. And your example is one of many.

I’m a firm believer in rating to style.
But many aren’t, and that translates into lagers having lower ratings than heavier or hyped styles.

Tons, and they shift with the times. Back in the day pretty much any lager that wasn't a massive doppelbock was lucky to be considered anything above pretty good. All while anything remotely Belgian was considered to be a Godsend. Now that has borderline flip-flopped.

My quick two cents.......craft beer was born out of developing something that stood in contrast to "light, yellow, fizzy beer." The identity became an adventure in doing everything you could to not be like the macros. Big stouts, IPAs with 70 metric tons of hops, etc. etc. became all the rage. Those became the beers that got the high ratings. When the same people who were drinking 12% abv stouts French pressed with S'mores then drank an Oktoberfest they were like, "Meh, it's better than Coors Light, but it doesn't have enough flavor." Lagers, in particular fell victim to this. That vibe lead to lower ratings and everyone who saw said rantings started to adjust their expectations and experiences accordingly. As a result, there are countless beers in the database that are absolutely fucking awesome, but, because of the poor perception of the beers in the early days, it's hard for them to boost their scores up.

I don't sweat it if my rating deviates either way. I will admit to being influenced by ratings if deciding whether to pull the trigger on a new beer.

My 2024 review said that Hofbrau Oktoberfest was only as good as it had to be. I gave it a 3.26. So I suppose I could complain that the BA 81 is too high? I just recognize that my palate is out of step with the modern taste. I still think a fest beer should have more malt body, and my rating reflects that.

This right here.

NA suffers from this. Historically apparently almost tasteless or even bad. Now a different story emerges. I'm a 4-rating guy, so rating easily one point above the average.

There's a specific part in Todd's 'How To Review A Beer' post that most users seem to neglect:

Keep Style in Mind
We don't expect everyone to judge like a pro, but keeping the beer's style in mind will help you approach each beer a bit more objectively.

"Pro tips:

• Check out BeerAdvocate's Beer Styles. They’re not perfect and need an overhaul, but it's a good place to start.
• Review with an open mind. Judge the beer for what it's trying to be, not what you think the beer should be; like that that kick-ass India Pale Ale that you just finished drinking.
• Don't review styles that you know you don't like. Your opinion will be tainted, and it's not fair to the brewery. A beery characteristic that you might not like could be due to style and shouldn't be deemed a flaw. Examples:
  • Buttery notes (diacetyl) in a Scotch Ale
  • Sourness in a Lambic
  • Intense smokiness in a Rauchbier
• Check out the Beer Judge Certification Program (BJCP) and Brewers Association beer style guidelines, which are used by judges at homebrew and professional competitions."

  Too many people review based only on personal preference. That's why almost all of my reviews of less popular styles are rated higher than the average score.

Too many to count @zyskz, I don’t put much stock in ratings of any kind.

Personally always go to reviews to find comment threads to get an idea of said beer. This is why for me personally I will always review and never just leave a number.

I find them helpful and I hope others find mine helpful should they come through beers like I do.

Pilsner Urquell at an 83 is all I need to know that ratings are way off for lagers.

For what it's worth, you also have to factor in some additional things like freshness and upkeep with imports, too. Hofbrau beers at least used to be in green glass bottles. Not saying it justifies the ratings, but sometimes the ratings aren't misguided.

I suspect many BAs consider American Lagers unworthy of ratings as high as most craft beers, even though almost all of us started our beer quest by drinking macro-lagers. Now they're the ex we divorced and we take it out on their ratings. As a card-carrying member of Beer Snobs of America, I may be somewhat guilty of that.

I think a lot of people automatically devalue a beer if it comes from a large brewery. I’ve also noticed that a lot of people also equate more alcohol with better beer; 10+% IPAs are a great example of this. I personally factor in style pretty heavily so would likely rate Hofbrau’s Oktoberfest pretty high.

I've wondered if it's the ABV, taste, and/or cost that leads us to rating them higher? Also wonder if brewers feel compelled to 'jazz up' the higher ABV beers with add-junks, bottles, fancy labels, and waxtic to make us feel better about the price and drive it up further. Probably all of the above.

Rating to style is a kind of trap for the people who rate beer, but apparently not for the marketers. Pilsner Urquell is the preeminent Czech Pilsner. But the flavor today has lost the deep and complex body that lasted at least through the 70s. To me, it falls tragically short. I'd say that Rothaus Tannenzäpfle German Pils comes closer to my ideal "Czech Pilsner" than Urquell. Another example is American Adjunct lager, which has drifted slightly higher in alcohol, lower in perceived body, and definitely lower in hop character. German Fest beers and Austrian Maerzen have caused some style confusion because they both transformed over a few years from ambers to pale lagers. Don't get me started on IPAs.