There's been a little chatter about this recently. Some of this may be because of the newer variations starting to appear. It's also showing up in more areas of the country too, so I figured why not make WW the BOTM.
IMHO, I've been pretty good about not saying too much about the BOTM's lately. Sorry, but not this time around. This time I've got a lot to say. I'm not trying to be a braggart, but I probably know more about WW than almost any other member here. Notice, I did preface this by saying almost. Over the years, I've chatted with Steve Nally about WW on a number of different occasions. I've also been to the distillery, and tasted the white dog just off the still. I had a bottle from one of the first batches, and also a couple from more recent ones. So, I'm gonna say that somewhat qualifies me.
First off, I'd like to say that I don't consider WW to be a craft distillery. (Yeah, I know I might get some arguments here.) While they may be a smaller distillery, they never sourced any distillate for their bourbon. They never put out other spirits while waiting for their bourbon to age. And, they make only one product, or now, variations on that one product.
The original WW was a wheated bourbon. That I know for certain because Steve Nally told me so. Considering that he has a preference for wheated bourbons, and that he was at one time the master distiller at MM, that's only natural. Another thing he told me way back when, was that he also was "getting some help/input from HH". He was pretty busy at the time he told me that, so I didn't inquire any further. Now I wish I would have.
I'm pretty sure that distilling in the Wyoming climate and altitude had its challenges. I'm guessing that may be why the first few batches may have seemed a bit off. I tasted a sample from Batch #1, and it was just so-so. My bottle from Batch #3 was better, but did taste a bit young and light. My latest bottles from Batches #26 & 36 tasted just fine to me.
Before I get into my tasting notes, I have one thing that I just have to relate about tasting the WW white dog right off the still. I've tasted white dog a number of times from a few places, and I'm sure many members here have too. Most times there's a popcorn or buttery popcorn nose and flavor. What I remember from the WW white dog, was that it was more of a toasted or roasted (for lack of better terms) popcorn nose and flavor. It wasn't regular or buttery, but at the same time, it wasn't quite like burnt popcorn either. Strange I know, but I just had to relate this.
My tasting notes FWIW:
Legs-No Betty Grable here. Basically no legs at all. Up the glass and back down rather quickly with no separation.
Nose-Vanilla, corn, with a bit of nuttiness added in.
Taste-Light vanilla/caramel, a touch of oak, and way in the background a slight hint of citrus. This surprised me a bit. Rarely have I tasted citrus notes in bourbons. Even HH stuff.
Other-I "taste" bourbon neat, but usually drink my bourbon with a cube or two. WW is different. I don't know if it's the (odd) 88 proof or what, but to me, WW is better sipping neat, rather than drinking it with a couple of cubes.
Even though there may be a family resemblance, it ain't MM, and it ain't Larceny. Maybe it lies somewhere in between? Being the wheater lover that I am, I have to say that I like WW. Overall, I'd say that WW is a pretty decent bourbon, and worth a shot. That's just my opinion, and we all know about opinions.
Now that I've put everybody to sleep with my incessant ramblings, let's hear what y'all have to say about Wyoming Whiskey. Cheers and happy posting!
PS. Here's a couple of links to previous threads about WW with some good information and pics.
This is another bourbon that's had some discussion here lately, so I thought we should revisit it. Why not? It's been quite a long time since I've had a bottle of this, but I do have to say that with what some folks have posted here recently, I've been tempted.
Not much from me again. The last time I purchased RR 10/90 was probably six or seven years ago. I was on a mission out of town, and had enough time to stop at a couple of liquor stores on the way. One place had it on sale for $19.99. Of course I bought a couple of bottles. From what I remember, I thought it was a pretty decent bourbon. The problem for me back then was, I came into possession of a couple of bottles of RR 10/101 at the same time. No comparison. While the RR 10/90 might be pretty good in and of itself, there's pretty much no comparing it to the old 10/101. 'Nuff Ced.
To borrow from a Thanksgiving saying, "Gobble till ya' wobble!" Let's here what y'all have to say about Russell's Reserve 10/90.
Well, after a month hiatus, I'll try and get things back on track.
I have to admit I have yet to see, let alone try this one. Yet it intrigues me a little. Here's why.
My first taste(s) of bourbon was many, many years ago (early 1970's, and yes a little underage ) when I had no clue what bourbon even was. A few of my buddies and I would pool what little money we had, and get an older friend to buy us some whiskey. He bought either Rebel Yell or Yellowstone. Needless to say, we had some good times.
My personal history with Rebel Yell aside, there's been a lot of discussion about it here lately, so I figured it would be a good BOTM.
Cheers and happy posting! Let's here it for Rebel Yell 10 yr old Single Barrel.
Trick Or Treat! I'm on time for a change.
I saw this on sale for $19.99 a few weeks ago, so I bought a bottle. I figured what the heck. After trying it, and reading the thread about it, I thought I'd give it a go for this months BOTM.
I don't quite know what to make of Beam Double Oak. It seems to taste different every time I have a pour. One time it's dry with a heavy wood flavor and the Beam "funk" right up front. The next time it tastes better. A bit of the Beam "funk" is still there, but not quite so apparent. Nutty with, as others have said, vanilla and spice. Add a cube or two, and it's different yet. With some ice, it seems more earthy, with mint and a musty, grassy flavor almost reminiscent of BT from a few years back. A different bird for sure. It's a tweener for me. I don't love it, but I don't hate it either. It's decent enough, but I doubt I'll buy another bottle. One real positive for me at least. Like I posted in the regular thread about Beam Double Oak, I really do like the new bottle.
Cheers and happy posting!
Howdy y'all. I know I'm late by a couple of days, but I did come up with a BOTM. I'd been contemplating a BOTM for the last couple of weeks or so. I had a couple in mind, but had my reservations about those. I even thought about skipping a BOTM this time around. But…...
I decided to open a bottle today. I've been extremely busy with a lot of things recently, so I decided to treat myself to something a little out of the ordinary. Besides, I only had four bottles open. I reached in the back of my cabinet and pulled out an old label/bottle of ORVW 10/107. I opened my bottle of ORVW 10/107 today and had a couple of pours while slaving in the kitchen over my first batch of chill for this season. Then it hit me. I had this month's BOTM.
For once I have some things to say. I like ORVW 10/107. It's one of my favorite bourbons. I've had many bottles over the last number of years, and I never had a bad one. I finished a new bottle a couple of weeks ago, and as I said, I just opened an old label. While I perceived a difference in the two, it was minimal. The newer bottle seemed a bit richer and sweeter. The old bottle I just opened has just a little more depth of character to it, for lack of a better term. It seems to have a tad more "oomph" to it. Unlike the wheater it is, there's a nice, slightly spicy edge to it. To me, the old bottle drinks like it's 107 proof, while the newer bottle belies it's proof somewhat.
Just a couple more things. I still remember the first bottle of ORVW 10/107 I bought. I found it while on vacation in Florida. My buddy and I, okay, well mostly me, finished it off mid week. Of course I went back and bought another to bring home with me. (pics below) And finally, IMHO, I believe that ORVW 10/107 has probably been the most consistent of the Van Winkle bourbons over the years. There's been times that after tasting them, I turned down Pappy 15 & 20 and LotB, and bought ORVW 10/107 instead. Just my thought. YMMV.
Cheers and happy posting! Joe
About the pics. I thought it would be kinda interesting to make it seem like we found the bottle on the table by the pool with a note inside. Just my way of having some fun.
There's been some chatter about this one on the site, so I thought it might be a good BOTM.
I have noticed that it may have been called Russell's Reserve SmB Single barrel or Russell's Reserve Single Barrel SmB as well as Russell's Reserve Single Barrel. Whatever you choose to call it, it's the BOTM this time around.
I've seen this in a few places, but for some unknown reason I've never pulled the trigger on one. In other words, since I haven't had it before, I can't comment on it. Although…………… I do happen to know someone that has a couple of bottles. Maybe before the month is out, I might just git a lil taste. (Hint Hint)
Cheers ya'all, and happy posting.
Well, we're back at it this month. Thanks to a suggestion from a fellow member, the BOTM this time around is Bowman Brothers Small Batch.
I don't have much to say about this one. I have had a couple of bottles of this in the past, but it's been quite a long time. From what I can remember, I thought it was a fairly decent bourbon. Of course I may be slightly biased because it was first distilled at BT before being sent to A. Smith Bowman for a second distilling and storage. Maybe a wee bit high on the price, but other than that, pretty good stuff as I recall.
Cheers and happy posting.