Competition recipes are fascinating because they show what successful brewers actually did.
But they need to be interpreted carefully.
A championship recipe is evidence of what worked in one complete brewing system.
It is not proof that one ingredient caused the result.
The 2025 World Champion
The 2025 World AeroPress Champion, Némo Pop, published a recipe using water at approximately 125 ppm.
The recipe used an APAX prototype water and included a substantial bypass component.
That is interesting for several reasons.
First, the brewer deliberately controlled the water.
Second, the recipe did not treat water TDS as an isolated variable.
Third, bypass was part of the final beverage design.
The runner-up tells another story
The 2025 second-place recipe used approximately 60 ppm APAX water.
That is dramatically different from 125 ppm.
Both recipes were successful.
That alone should make us cautious about claims such as:
"Competition AeroPress water should be around 125 ppm."
The championship recipes don't support that conclusion.
What does this actually tell us?
It tells us that elite brewers are comfortable using substantially different waters.
It also tells us that water is being treated as a controllable part of the recipe.
But it doesn't tell us:
125 ppm is better than 60 ppm.
Or:
APAX water is universally superior.
Or:
a particular ion caused a championship result.
The coffee and entire brewing system matter.
A recipe is a system
Imagine copying the champion's water.
But you use:
a different coffee
different grinder
different roast
different temperature
different agitation
different brew ratio
different bypass
You are no longer brewing the champion's recipe.
You are borrowing one variable from it.
Competition recipes are useful as hypotheses
This is how we think championship recipes should be used.
Not:
"Use this."
But:
"What can I learn from this?"
Maybe water composition is worth controlling.
Maybe bypass is worth experimenting with.
Maybe a particular mineral balance is interesting.
Maybe the brewer's water strategy suggests a sensory direction.
Then test it yourself.
TDS is only part of the story
The competition examples are especially useful because they show that there isn't one universal TDS target.
The water profile and the complete brewing recipe matter.
This reinforces a principle we return to repeatedly:
Composition gives the number meaning.
What about APAX?
APAX appearing in championship water recipes is interesting because it demonstrates that custom mineralised water is not merely a theoretical specialty-coffee concept.
It has entered competitive brewing practice.
But competition adoption does not automatically prove every mechanistic claim associated with a water profile.
Performance and mechanism are separate questions.
What should a competitor do?
Study the recipes.
Look for patterns.
Then run controlled experiments.
For example:
Test your baseline water.
Test a lower-mineral profile.
Test a higher-mineral profile.
Keep the AeroPress recipe constant.
Then repeat with different coffees.
Patterns become more meaningful when they repeat.
The Water Artist
Championship recipes are not commandments.
They are data points.
They show us what excellent brewers are willing to control.
And that is enough to make water worth experimenting with.
Water is the canvas.
You're the artist.