Rarely do I sit down for a full session with just one beer, but the experience is delightful. A session ale really doesn't show its chops until pint three, when it needs to be just as fresh and interesting as the first sip. Any faults will, after two pints, be evident to the drinker--and annoying. Ah, but a good session is greeted by the tongue as an old friend, one who can recognize and appreciate its good qualities. I would say Willamette Dammit was about 8 BU out of balance, but that was perfect for me (if a bit much for Sally)--especially on pint three. Also a joy was the name, a lovely homage to the pronunciation of our famous river (the two words rhyme)--all doubly perfect when watching the Ducks play. I only wish it wasn't a single batch.
NB. Here's an interesting question: is balance an objective or subjective concept? We don't have to agree that beers should be in balance to agree that such a thing exists objectively. Some regions will prefer beers skewed toward malt, others toward hops, but I wonder, would all parties agree that their beers were in fact skewed? Or is balance like chili fire--a subjective continuum where each taster is his own judge?
I tend to think balance is mostly objective--say objective within a range--but I might be kidding myself.