welone wrote: ...
The only 'standard' I know is the one from traditional italian espresso bars (singles!) - I would appreciate you could give me a ballpark value for it!

They run from 1 to 3.5, with the bulk being around 2.5 to 3.

Crema in Italy is mostly a 0 (over 50% no crema) with occasional 2s. There's a cultural difference not reflected in WBC rules -- the ideal Illy espresso is uniform hazelnut with reddish tint, but no flecks or tiger stripes. This would rate a 2.5 to 3, since flecking is required for higher scores. A bulls-eye, darker rim, lighter towards the center, non-uniformity is a major flaw to Italians, and a minor one to the WBC.

A score higher than a three requires an espresso shot that has a non-generic, memorable taste that is accurately described to the judges ahead of time. This is hard to do, and is supposed to be that way -- it is a national or world barista championship, not a can you pull a decent espresso competition.

My shots range around 3 to 4, with occasional lapses and even rarer high points, despite all the work I pour into them. Fours are roughly the starting point for anyone with a chance of making the USBC finals or winning there.

I hope this clarifies the scoring system: basically the "Unacceptable," "Acceptable," "Fair," Good," "Very Good," "Excellent," and "Exceptional" scoring means what it says when the terms are interpreted as applying to the work of the best shot pullers on the planet, and not to that of any old espresso maker.

My shots have been getting better. I would say 4 normally with an occasional 0.5 swing on either side.

«missing video»

Practice makes perfect, that shot was not perfect, but very good.

another_jim wrote: I hope this clarifies the scoring system: basically the "Unacceptable," "Acceptable," "Fair," Good," "Very Good," "Excellent," and "Exceptional" scoring means what it says when the terms are interpreted as applying to the work of the best shot pullers on the planet, and not to that of any old espresso maker.

In this light, I'm truly hoping that the 'very good' and 'excellent' scores I was giving my shots are taken as the purely subjective grades that I was giving them. My scores were in no way supposed to represent the criteria that Jim just put forth. 'Excellent' for me is when I start to get to the 3.5 level on Jim's criteria. I'm guessing that I can sometimes get to a four, just because I end up with a beautiful shot that actually tastes like what it has been described as by the roaster and other connoisseurs, a giant head of crema that seems to last forever, and an aftertaste that doesn't remind me of grapefruit rind.
My criteria (and this has nothing to do with this thread, as far as I can tell, other than to explain how I scored my shots in the previous post) are:
1. Nothing that resembled espresso came out of the spouts. *
2. Something that resembled espresso came out of the spouts, but not close enough that I'd consider drinking it.
3. Reminiscent of espresso. I could call it a ristretto or a cremosa, and give it to my Folger's swilling friends.
4. A good shot. Good crema, somewhere within 2-28 seconds before blonding, I'd drink it and like it.
5. A very good shot. No squirts, little donutting, good color, tiger stripes, crema lasts, and starts blonding right at 26-27.
6. Great shot! The stars align, the humidity and the grinder coincide, and the dream that every one has ends up in my cup.

These last ones are happenstance rather than planning. If I were to sink more of the fours rather than accept them (I find it difficult to sink something that I'd not mind drinking) I'd end up with more sixes, I'm sure. Time and money, and knowing that once I start following the rabbit down the hole, I'll end up in Wonderland (but am I willing to trade the rest of my free time and cash for it?), I've accepted my present level of satisfaction, and I'm sometimes jealous of my bud's who happily swill Starbucks drip made in a thirty cup aluminum pot.

*Recently I awoke at the GF's house, where Silvia spends her time, only to discover that I had warmed her up (Silvia, the GF was still asleep) and had no beans. The roommate had purchased some Starbucks preground French Roast, so I decided to experiment. I overdosed and over tamped, and ended up with a ten (maybe) second blonde gusher. I did put both of those into a sugary latte to try to disguise them. Those were both 0-1, at best. No, I didn't drink it...

Is it possible for one to grade their own espresso?

I suppose there's always the risk of bias when evaluating your own work. It's worth "calibrating" your evaluations with others. For example, USBC sensory judge candidates spend much of the two day workshop discussing and participating in mock competitions to confirm their scores are consistent with the stated evaluation criteria and senior judge assessments. I recommend volunteering to be a sensory / technical judge purely for the learning experience.

another_jim wrote:They run from 1 to 3.5, with the bulk being around 2.5 to 3. ....
A score higher than a three requires an espresso shot that has a non-generic, memorable taste that is accurately described to the judges ahead of time. This is hard to do, and is supposed to be that way -- it is a national or world barista championship, not a can you pull a decent espresso competition.

Thanks for the clarification on the scores of italian singles, it helped me a lot for getting an idea. So I'm probably hanging somewhere between 2 and 3 with half a dozen outliers above.

When judging the capabilities of a barista it seems necessary to apply a rating of the shots from what's expected (from the outset of pulling it). Notwithstanding for rating my own shots, I would find it more helpful to apply a scoring 'exclusively' based on the sensory experience the shot outcome. The term 'exclusively' is of course more of an theoretical idea to approximate as good as possible.

I had mentioned earlier in the thread that the problem with judging's ones own shot is the reference point you are judging them from. I have been lucky enough to have some shots pulled by a couple of stellar baristas, and that is my benchmark for judging and target shot quality. So the problem now becomes, are you judging based on the average cafe, or worse yet StarBucks, or a world class competitive barista. I believe most of the Home-Barista readers have surpassed the quality of the latter but aspire to reach the quality of the pros.

cannonfodder wrote:I had mentioned earlier in the thread that the problem with judging's ones own shot is the reference point you are judging them from.

Which Jasonian put rather succinctly, and I put rather eloquently (read: long-winded and windingly...) in my posts. Subjective scores are either too generous based on a lack of experience, or too harsh based on a lack of experience. Jim Schulman's method of scoring is a bit closer to an objective set of criteria to score on, but it's still hard to get an idea of what you look like to others by looking in a mirror.

cannonfodder wrote:I had mentioned earlier in the thread that the problem with judging's ones own shot is the reference point you are judging them from. I have been lucky enough to have some shots pulled by a couple of stellar baristas, and that is my benchmark for judging and target shot quality. So the problem now becomes, are you judging based on the average cafe, or worse yet StarBucks, or a world class competitive barista. I believe most of the Home-Barista readers have surpassed the quality of the latter but aspire to reach the quality of the pros.

Well, here's the thing. I had never had a good espresso until I learned to make it on my own at home. I have never been to a "mecca"-ish coffee retailer to draw a comparison.

I HAVE compared tasting notes with people who I believe to be good baristas, though whose espresso I have never personally tasted.

I have tasted espresso made by people who I have taught.

I find it very difficult to grade my own espresso since the best espresso I've had so far has been made by me. It's hard to grade based on experience when I haven't had the chance to experience anything better.

I am a (not world class) competitive barista... or, rather, I will be in about three weeks. (first ever SCRBC)

I guess we'll see how I compare to others in my region. Still, though, the coffee has a huge impact as well. A much greater impact than the skill of the barista, actually.

I'd be curious to know how I'd "officially"(is that possible?) score, though.

I agree with not being able to find a measuring stick.

My problem has been that when I ask for a single espresso at a shop in my area
(including starbucks)
I get at least 3oz of liquid in a cup. Not that it tastes bad, but its not really
an espresso anymore (at least not by the brewing ratio charts Ive seen here), so its
kind of apples and oranges really..