opinionated alchemist

This topic is rather for the pro's for us. It is pretty controversial - and it is rather important when you teach. I believe though, that drinks categories are also important, when it comes to understand drinks and drinks culture - and to memorize many drinks - what you categorize you will remember... Let me be frank. Through more than 2 decades I found that below categories make sense. It is not the answer to anything - and I don't claim that. At the end it is a theorem, which depends on your views (but also off priorities and cocktail history). First shocker: cocktails are short drinks! Always.  We are not discussing here what average Joe (and Jane) are calling cocktails. This is about people who have an insight into drinks. No Piña Coladas and Mojitos are no cocktails. Neither are frozen drinks. The Cocktail Evolutionary Tree We can further consider categories as an evolutionary tree. There are "living fossils" being still created (and going strong)

Look - there are a ton of recipes out there to make an Espresso-Vodka (aka Espresso Martini). It is a drink which gets into its 30's  but it is still very popular. Why I do pick it up now? Because of the brilliant video below of "How to Drink". Even those folks are often a bit off - the videos are brilliantly entertaining - and more often than not inspirational. What more to say? First of all the elephant in the room (which more and more is accepted by a lot of bartenders - but it is and stays an elephant in the room): The Espresso-Vodka (the original name of the EM) is not   a martini cocktail! Please, please, please - stop to mix up and confuse categories of drinks with the glasses they are served in (or other common denominators). A warthog is not an elephant - only because of its tusks (and the fact that it is a mammal, has 4 legs, 2 eyes, a small tail - you get it). How stupid would it be to assume that one animal is another animal only because of its &quo

I like Punch. It is an online magazine about drinks. About cocktails. Mostly cutting edge. It is an inspiration. One of their latest article made me wonder:  Microwave Your Manhattan Ryan Chetiyawardana has an unorthodox method for upgrading stirred classics. Look, my routine of making drinks involves quite unique techniques (compared to a normal "mixologist"). Techniques include using immersion circulators (precision "cooking"), using a vacuum pump and off course vacuum sealers and so on. But Microwaving stuff? Nope. So I read this article - and unfortunately Ryan Chetiyawardana is squabbling quite a lot of sciency gibberish - which the editor of the article just loves to "take in" and spread. From my perspective, the microwave oven just offers one particular advantage: it heats up liquids quickly. To be honest, I love to cook things in the microwave (vegetables are steamed perfectly in a  microwave and it is quicker and easier than

This is a very controversial topic - and I try not to activate any "booby traps" (probably the first word, which could have been chosen more wisely - for this topic). I see myself as feminist. I am not afraid of women in the workplace. One of the best bosses I have had (EAM F&B and GM) were women... So I am probably the least biased person (at least who is a man). Should women earn the same as men? Hell yeah. Should women have the same chance as men? Off course! Should there be some "ladies only cocktail competitions"? A bit weaker yes for this one (would it be not a bit awkward, if there would be minority competitions e.g. for African-Americans only?) But I can understand, that it kinda makes sense... Should be women behind the bar a trend? Clear no! Why? Because it is basically the opposite of feminism. Most bars would not have women behind the bar, because they know as much (or more) than their male counterparts, but because they are "trend