 Round 2 did all but what to make things more interesting?
The point of the second test was not to find the difference between cheap and expensive beers but instead to compare a variety of top-of-the-line beers. Since the tasting panel had left the first round grumbling that cheap lagers were not a fair test of their abilities, this second round of testing was advertised to the panel as a reward. Every beer in Round 2 would be a fancy beer. One aspect of the reward was that they would presumably enjoy the actual testing more--fewer rueful beer descriptions along the lines of "urine" or "get it away!" were expected than in the first round. The other aspect of anticipated reward was the panelists' unspoken but obvious assumption that this time they would "do better" on the test. Intellectual vanity being what it is, people who had fought for and won jobs at Microsoft and who still must fight every six months for primacy on the employee-ranking scale (which determines--gasp!--how many new stock options they receive) would assume that their skill as tasters was on trial, just as much as the beer was. Of course they were right, which is what made this round as amusing to administer as the first one had been. Here is what happened and what it meant: 1. Procedure. This was similar in most ways to the experimental approach of Round 1. 2. Philosophy. This second round was All Fancy, and Mainly Not Lager.
 Learned everyone's favorite beers and included those in the samples
 Included some less high quality beers  Asked for people to label type if they could  Added a control drink  Learned everyone's favorite beers and included those in the samples