PDA

View Full Version : War of the (Four) Roses: Single Barrel



smgrey24
04-13-2012, 11:40
To protect my Top Shelf image, I tend to turn up my nose to most Four Rose products … until now. As a reader of Jim Murray’s Whisky Bible 2012 my interest was piqued when he bestowed a 96.5 rating on Four Roses Single Barrel. For comparison’s sake, Jim’s highest rated bourbon is George T. Stagg, which topped the Murray scales with a 97.5 rating. Therefore, you can see why I was intrigued.

Here is what Jim writes about Four Roses Single Barrel:
"If you have ever wondered if Four Roses has the wherewithal to play amongst the super-elite of the whiskey world, then track down this particular bottling and all will be revealed…for me the finest Four Roses I have ever come across" --- Whisky Bible 2012

As a Stagg lover, if FRSB rated almost as high – then this would definitely be a treat for my taste buds (and wallet). My friend (and drinking buddy) is a fan of the Four Roses Mariage (whose ratings dip to low 88.5 on the Murray meter). My friend and Jim can’t be wrong … so it was high time to rethink my stand on this brand. Took my first pour and waited. Nothing. Nada. No Stagg-esque qualities. :skep: Granted my palate is still in its formative years … but I do not see the comparison between FRSB and George T. Stagg. Personally, I preferred the Mariage. FRSB was not a bad pour by any means...but perhaps I’m expecting too much and bought into Murray’s hype? Therefore, was wondering how the more experienced and mature tasters rate this one?

http://i1156.photobucket.com/albums/p572/smgrey24/DSC_0005-1.jpg[/font]

Bmac
04-13-2012, 12:01
Stag is Stag....and not red. The only thing that will ever compare to Stag....is another bottle of Stag. Let's just clear that one up :D

4 Roses is in my opinion one of the best widely available single barrels out there (for my tastes). When I started on the bourbon path, I wasn't very impressed with many of the mainstream bourbons until I cracked open 4RSB. It was delicious right out the bottle (which many needed some air time before it became palatable.)

My first bottle was TN 76-5T. I picked that particular bottle because of "TN" being the call letters of Tennessee ;). I still have 3 fingers left. So I bought a bottle to bunker: OS 42-1C I picked for no real reason other than it came with two 4R glasses.

I picked up the 2011 4RSB LE which I have yet to get into (QN 17-2K)

Today I was allowed to purchase the 2009 Mariage Collection (no 1106/3432). I want to open it....but...I may wait and savor it. The reviews I read when it was the BOTM were that it ranked up there with the VW line of bourbons. So I have high expectations for it.

However, I thought we already discussed that some of Jim Murray's decisions seem to be...off base quite a bit.

thezenone
04-13-2012, 12:02
I think your first mistake was assuming that it would be similar to Stagg based on similar rating number, and so when it didn't taste like your bourbon of choice, it was a let down. Personally, I thought the standard single barrel was just okay. I rather enjoy the small batch, and they always seem to have it on sale around these parts. I also find the standard yellow label to be pretty good for the price, and a great mixer. As for tasting notes, I find the whole Four Roses line to be quite a bit more floral than many bourbons for lack of a better word. I certainly wouldn't compare it directly to Stagg because to me they are so unalike in taste.

jaycamm
04-13-2012, 12:11
To be fair to Jim, he didn't compare 4RSB to GTS. Ratings aside, expecting any similarities seems to be wishful thinking. On the other hand if you can track down the Four Roses 100th Anniversary Limited Edition Single Barrel from a few years ago, you won't be disappointed. It's a barrel strengh 17yo that should be right up your alley. It's full of dried fruits and leather and is one of the best bourbons I've ever tasted.

jaycamm
04-13-2012, 12:16
However, I thought we already discussed that some of Jim Murray's decisions seem to be...off base quite a bit.

That's the understatement of the day.

smgrey24
04-13-2012, 12:32
However, I thought we already discussed that some of Jim Murray's decisions seem to be...off base quite a bit.

Yeah…we did. However, I have two friends that are die-hard Jim Murray believers. (They even have his book and iPhone app). As a result, his ratings are continuously being bantered back and forth. :27: My take has always been that Jim may know his scotches but bourbon is not scotch. They seem to disagree with me. Was hoping to use these posts as my rebuttal. :cool:

jcg9779
04-13-2012, 12:50
To protect my Top Shelf image, I tend to turn up my nose to most Four Rose products … until now. As a reader of Jim Murray’s Whisky Bible 2012 my interest was piqued when he bestowed a 96.5 rating on Four Roses Single Barrel. For comparison’s sake, Jim’s highest rated bourbon is George T. Stagg, which topped the Murray scales with a 97.5 rating. Therefore, you can see why I was intrigued.

Here is what Jim writes about Four Roses Single Barrel:
"If you have ever wondered if Four Roses has the wherewithal to play amongst the super-elite of the whiskey world, then track down this particular bottling and all will be revealed…for me the finest Four Roses I have ever come across" --- Whisky Bible 2012

As a Stagg lover, if FRSB rated almost as high – then this would definitely be a treat for my taste buds (and wallet). My friend (and drinking buddy) is a fan of the Four Roses Mariage (whose ratings dip to low 88.5 on the Murray meter). My friend and Jim can’t be wrong … so it was high time to rethink my stand on this brand. Took my first pour and waited. Nothing. Nada. No Stagg-esque qualities. :skep: Granted my palate is still in its formative years … but I do not see the comparison between FRSB and George T. Stagg. Personally, I preferred the Mariage. FRSB was not a bad pour by any means...but perhaps I’m expecting too much and bought into Murray’s hype? Therefore, was wondering how the more experienced and mature tasters rate this one?

[/font]

Early into my bourbon exploration I had the FRSB and FR 2011 LE SmB...and was not overly impressed with either. I was the fortunate enough to be able to try a cask strength OBSV, OBSK, and OESO...all of these blew me away. After trying some of these different mashbills the LE SmB made much more sense and was much more enjoyable.

I think that FR is producing some of the best bourbon around right now, especially given their cask strength single barrel offerings and their private barrel program. The standard FRSB (which is OBSV) is good as an every day drinker (especially when it can be found for under $35 here in Atlanta), but I think their best offerings come in the form of the cask strength single barrel offerings and the limited edition bottles.

Brisko
04-13-2012, 12:58
I've found the standard single barrel to be quite subtle. As others have said, it's a totally different style from Stagg.

Remember, even with a reviewer whose ratings you trust, "as good as" is not the same thing as "tastes like."

Trey Manthey
04-13-2012, 14:15
When doing your taste comparison, did you lower the proof of the Stagg to 100? I would think that would be a first step if you are looking for similarities.

tommyj1986
04-13-2012, 14:39
First off, I personally am a big fan of all of the Four Roses products and feel they all have there place.

That being said I am not a believer in any way in the 100 point rating system for any type of beverage. There is a number of reasons.

First and foremost, everyone tastes things differently than everyone else. Unless you find a reviewer who tends to rate things the same way you would there scores are not helpful.

Second, taste is subjective and many factors, including what you ate that day and even what time of day you are tasting will effect your tastes. Trying to translate your experience into two numbers seems to undermine the very experience.

Third, it isn't even a 100 point system, what is the range from lowest score to highest, 70 to 96 or 97 ? its actually more like a 30 point system.

And forth, and I mean no offense by this, but people who aren't experienced drinkers may buy products that aren't right for them, because the scores say they are the best. What do I mean by this, just because Jim likes something and gives it a 95 or 96, doesn't mean that you will like them (back to point two). The whole rating system is another form of marketing, meant to help consumers make purchasing decisions, by providing them the quick and dirty. Thats not how it works and I don't think we should pretend it is. It is going to take trial and error for everyone to find out what they like and don't like.

Personally I like products of all types in almost all price ranges and I don't care one bit what Jim Murray thinks about them. If you like a whiskey, by definition its a good whiskey for you. Nothing is better just because its rare, more expensive, older, or has a higher score, thats just not how it works.

But thats just my 2 cents.

yountvillewjs
04-13-2012, 15:18
I generally agree with the above poster. I work in the wine business - where critics & scores are even a bigger deal.

The most important thing in wine/food/spirit criticism should be the tasting note. If the reviewer is able to reasonably & accurately relay the experience of the bourbon, then the job is done and down well. Is the alcohol prominent? Is the barrel influence too strong, not strong enough? If you can also provide the mashbill, you are my new favorite critic.

I personally find scores helpful within the context of a certain winery or distillery. If I like 4 Roses and a critic I follow and respect says the 2013 4R 1B is the best yet, I'll be sure to look for it. I like Redbreast -- and the scores/feedback on the CS made me actively seek it out. Ultimately, a score or tasting note is only an impression of a certain thing at a specific moment in time. Not truth, never gospel.

Stormeh
04-13-2012, 16:29
Four Roses SB is my least favorite expression of theirs. The first FR expression I ever purchased was the standard Yellow Label, which I quite enjoyed. Having tried their cheapest option, I then stepped up to SB, which I thought was ok but not great at the price point. Since trying the standard SB, I recently purchased the TPS SB Barrel Strength OESK, OBSK, and OESO, all of which are FANTASTIC, and I am now a true FR convert.

I think if you're going to compare to something like Stagg, at least compare one of the barrel strength offerings, although even then I feel like even that comparison on point scale is like comparing apples and oranges.

Bmac
04-13-2012, 18:32
Also you're comparing an 18 year old, cask strength, non-filtered, bourbon's bourbon to an 8 - 9 yr chill-filtered and watered down to 100 proof.

There can't be a comparison even if you get the cask strength single barrel. GTS still has age over it. I think therewas an over aged 4R release some years ago that comes close to matching in age....but I dont know if it was barrel proof.

Josh
04-13-2012, 19:58
I've said this before, but I think Mariage 2009 is the best whiskey I have ever tasted. The 40th, 120th and 2009 ltd ed single barrels are also right up there.

Four Roses is an idosyncratic distillery. Stagg is great, but Stagg is Stagg. Four Roses is a whole 'nother kettle of monkeys. Or something like that. They are such different styles, I don't think there's much use in comparing them.

And not to be Captain Obvious, but Four Roses Single Barrel is a single barrel. There is a lot of variation from barrel to barrel. I've had some that were mind-blowing and some that were just good. But all in all, I think 4R SB is the best non-special release bourbon available.

nivto
04-13-2012, 20:11
I've said this before, but I think Mariage 2009 is the best whiskey I have ever tasted.

It's up there for me, but I might put the recent Rutledge selection of 16 yo OBSV barrels ahead of it. That is a wonderfully mature Four Roses bourbon with all the classic FR rye and fruit, and a nice mellow oakiness that rounds it out.

I find the flavor profiles and the overall experience of drinking Four Roses to be like no other bourbon. That doesn't mean it's better or worse, but I find it in its many variations to be very unique and coming from a distillery that still has the benefit of the enthusiast in mind. It's a great time to be a Four Roses fan.

kyrocklover
04-13-2012, 20:38
Barrel 2 of the 16YO OBSV is the best bourbon I have ever tasted.

SMOWK
04-13-2012, 20:52
Why does anyone care so much about what others think about a whiskey? Four Roses...:rolleyes:

nivto
04-13-2012, 20:54
Barrel 2 of the 16YO OBSV is the best bourbon I have ever tasted.

That's the exact barrel that I was speaking of, as well...

T Comp
04-13-2012, 21:24
First off, I personally am a big fan of all of the Four Roses products and feel they all have there place.

That being said I am not a believer in any way in the 100 point rating system for any type of beverage. There is a number of reasons.

First and foremost, everyone tastes things differently than everyone else. Unless you find a reviewer who tends to rate things the same way you would there scores are not helpful.

Second, taste is subjective and many factors, including what you ate that day and even what time of day you are tasting will effect your tastes. Trying to translate your experience into two numbers seems to undermine the very experience.

Third, it isn't even a 100 point system, what is the range from lowest score to highest, 70 to 96 or 97 ? its actually more like a 30 point system.

And forth, and I mean no offense by this, but people who aren't experienced drinkers may buy products that aren't right for them, because the scores say they are the best. What do I mean by this, just because Jim likes something and gives it a 95 or 96, doesn't mean that you will like them (back to point two). The whole rating system is another form of marketing, meant to help consumers make purchasing decisions, by providing them the quick and dirty. Thats not how it works and I don't think we should pretend it is. It is going to take trial and error for everyone to find out what they like and don't like.

Personally I like products of all types in almost all price ranges and I don't care one bit what Jim Murray thinks about them. If you like a whiskey, by definition its a good whiskey for you. Nothing is better just because its rare, more expensive, older, or has a higher score, thats just not how it works.

But thats just my 2 cents.


I generally agree with the above poster. I work in the wine business - where critics & scores are even a bigger deal.

The most important thing in wine/food/spirit criticism should be the tasting note. If the reviewer is able to reasonably & accurately relay the experience of the bourbon, then the job is done and down well. Is the alcohol prominent? Is the barrel influence too strong, not strong enough? If you can also provide the mashbill, you are my new favorite critic.

I personally find scores helpful within the context of a certain winery or distillery. If I like 4 Roses and a critic I follow and respect says the 2013 4R 1B is the best yet, I'll be sure to look for it. I like Redbreast -- and the scores/feedback on the CS made me actively seek it out. Ultimately, a score or tasting note is only an impression of a certain thing at a specific moment in time. Not truth, never gospel.

We've had some discussions on ratings here before...but continued discussion is a good thing too :grin: :

http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14400

http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14400

I love most 4Rs (Yellow label definitely not) but don't you find it really unbourbon like? I know enough scotch drinkers who find it the most likeable of bourbons for them but I'm not saying it's scotch like either. SMOWK has talked about 4R having some Slivovitz similar tastes and I think I know what he means. I have a friend thinking the Binny's #3 bottling, a few years back, was a Grand Marnier knock off...of course what's that saying bout nothing good happens after midnight...especially when dumb-ass friends are powering through your bourbon :lol: .

spinningrecords
04-14-2012, 05:34
Yeah…we did. However, I have two friends that are die-hard Jim Murray believers. (They even have his book and iPhone app). As a result, his ratings are continuously being bantered back and forth. :27: My take has always been that Jim may know his scotches but bourbon is not scotch. They seem to disagree with me. Was hoping to use these posts as my rebuttal. :cool:


First off, I personally am a big fan of all of the Four Roses products and feel they all have there place.

That being said I am not a believer in any way in the 100 point rating system for any type of beverage. There is a number of reasons.

First and foremost, everyone tastes things differently than everyone else. Unless you find a reviewer who tends to rate things the same way you would there scores are not helpful.

Second, taste is subjective and many factors, including what you ate that day and even what time of day you are tasting will effect your tastes. Trying to translate your experience into two numbers seems to undermine the very experience.

Third, it isn't even a 100 point system, what is the range from lowest score to highest, 70 to 96 or 97 ? its actually more like a 30 point system.

And forth, and I mean no offense by this, but people who aren't experienced drinkers may buy products that aren't right for them, because the scores say they are the best. What do I mean by this, just because Jim likes something and gives it a 95 or 96, doesn't mean that you will like them (back to point two). The whole rating system is another form of marketing, meant to help consumers make purchasing decisions, by providing them the quick and dirty. Thats not how it works and I don't think we should pretend it is. It is going to take trial and error for everyone to find out what they like and don't like.

Personally I like products of all types in almost all price ranges and I don't care one bit what Jim Murray thinks about them. If you like a whiskey, by definition its a good whiskey for you. Nothing is better just because its rare, more expensive, older, or has a higher score, thats just not how it works.

But thats just my 2 cents.

I agree with many points here. I'll add that the 100 point system would benefit from all reviews being done blind. I'd be dramatically more interested to see their commentary and rating if they didn't know what it was when they tasted it.

spinningrecords
04-14-2012, 05:38
Barrel 2 of the 16YO OBSV is the best bourbon I have ever tasted.

I've not seen this edition. Any ideas where to find it readily?

dohidied
04-14-2012, 05:59
I've not seen this edition. Any ideas where to find it readily?

It was only sold at the distillery gift shop late last year.

bad_scientist
04-14-2012, 06:37
I love most 4Rs (Yellow label definitely not) but don't you find it really unbourbon like?


Serge Valentin described the 4RSB as tasting like "oak liqueur". I don't really think of it like that, but I can see how the description fits, and I think it's an awesome tasting note.

kyrocklover
04-14-2012, 06:41
It was only sold at the distillery gift shop late last year.

I bought it at the distillery.

SMOWK
04-14-2012, 06:41
Serge Valentin described the 4RSB as tasting like "oak liqueur". I don't really think of it like that, but I can see how the description fits, and I think it's an awesome tasting note.

I've tried a lot of 4R, and Oak is not something that I would say is very prevalent in any of them.

Josh
04-14-2012, 07:36
I enthusiastically agree with what has been stated about ratings. Everybody's palate is different. SMOWK's baffling dislike of 4R is a good example.:confused: :lol:

It's a rookie mistake to assume that high age always equals high quality. The rye version of Vintage 17, ER 17, Pappys 20 & 23, 4R 100th anniversary 17 y/o are all among the most disappointing and dull whiskeys I have ever tasted. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of age statements, but one of the great things about bourbon is that there are some very tasty options at single digit ages and in the NAS category.

cigarnv
04-14-2012, 07:48
Why does anyone care so much about what others think about a whiskey? Four Roses...:rolleyes:

Sky... now I know you are a closet 4R drinker and to some degree coming around to some of their more interesting offerings....:grin:

As for why people care about what others like.... well 90% (my estimate) of folks fail to trust themselves and prefer others tell them what they should like.....

bad_scientist
04-14-2012, 09:17
Anyone tried more recent distillery-only bottlings? Last month they had barrels 5 through 7 bottled.

SMOWK
04-14-2012, 10:30
SMOWK's baffling dislike of 4R is a good example.:confused: :lol:



Sky... now I know you are a closet 4R drinker and to some degree coming around to some of their more interesting offerings....:grin:


Josh, Make no mistake, it's not that I dislike 4R, I just find it is at or near the bottom of my ranking of distilleries. It is still a head and shoulders above any non-bourbon distilleries in the world. I like age, the older the better, and 4R just doesn't offer much in this realm. The ones that are "old", just don't taste like it. I have yet to find a bourbon that was too old, yet I shall keep trying.

Reid, I keep trying and buying. Being an IT guy, I spend a lot of time in closets and under women's desks. I love me some cougar bourbon.

bad_scientist
04-14-2012, 10:35
Reid, I keep trying and buying. Being an IT guy, I spend a lot of time in closets and under women's desks. I love me some cougar bourbon.

That's about the best job recruitment pitch I've ever heard :)

smgrey24
04-14-2012, 12:55
Why does anyone care so much about what others think about a whiskey? Four Roses...:rolleyes:

Two reasons for me...
1.) As a newbie, my knowledge base benefits from the recommendations of others. Honestly, I don't even know what I don't know. So when I hear what others enjoy, I add it to my shopping list. Will the tasting notes of others sway by opinion? ...perhaps but not usually. Those who know me know that I make up my own mind. However, I am a strong believer in making an informed decision.
2.) My Jim Murray Bible toting, thumping friends could stand a smack down. :grin: When they quote the ratings of their whisky god, I simply pull up the posts of the wise, sage tasters on this forum. You guys are my Jim Murray. :bowdown:

Bmac
04-14-2012, 13:07
It's a rookie mistake to assume that high age always equals high quality. The rye version of Vintage 17, ER 17, Pappys 20 & 23, 4R 100th anniversary 17 y/o are all among the most disappointing and dull whiskeys I have ever tasted.

I hear a lot of smack about ER17. You all should have a sip from my bottle because I just dont see/taste the issue. It tastes smooth and flavorful and actually different from Stagg. I have the 2011 release which should be the worst by most acounts and i have the 2010 GTS open. They're just night and day.

I was almost certain all the BTAC is small batch, but they could be numerous small batches? That might account for why my ER17 tastes so good.

smgrey24
04-14-2012, 13:24
I think your first mistake was assuming that it would be similar to Stagg based on similar rating number, and so when it didn't taste like your bourbon of choice, it was a let down.

You are exactly right! I was equating the ratings scale with taste profile. Never thought of it like that but I was expecting them to taste similar because of their high ratings. Alas, I'm afraid nothing can compare to my beloved George. :yum: Thanks for helping me think outside the (bourbon) box.

c2walker
04-14-2012, 13:32
You are exactly right! I was equating the ratings scale with taste profile. Never thought of it like that but I was expecting them to taste similar because of their high ratings. Alas, I'm afraid nothing can compare to my beloved George. :yum: Thanks for helping me think outside my (bourbon) box.

If you're looking for something similar to Stagg I recommend Abraham Bowman 18 year bourbon. I've heard there are still some floating around the MD/VA area. I did a side-by-side a few weeks ago and the two are very similar (which is unsurprising given the Bowman's age, proof, and origin).

Josh
04-14-2012, 15:02
I hear a lot of smack about ER17. You all should have a sip from my bottle because I just dont see/taste the issue. It tastes smooth and flavorful and actually different from Stagg. I have the 2011 release which should be the worst by most acounts and i have the 2010 GTS open. They're just night and day.

I was almost certain all the BTAC is small batch, but they could be numerous small batches? That might account for why my ER17 tastes so good.

Small Batch is really a completely meaningless term. ER, Stagg, Buffalo Trace, Old Charter, E.H. Taylor are all the same mashbill. So they make more from that mashbill than of any other one they make, or so I would guess.

I know a lot of people who like Er 17, and I have passed bottles of it I have found along to them. I think it's really dull. I feel the same way about Saz 18. I think your ER 17 tastes good to you because you are one of the people who like it. Different strokes for different folks!

AaronWF
04-14-2012, 15:55
It's a rookie mistake to assume that high age always equals high quality. The rye version of Vintage 17, ER 17, Pappys 20 & 23, 4R 100th anniversary 17 y/o are all among the most disappointing and dull whiskeys I have ever tasted. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of age statements, but one of the great things about bourbon is that there are some very tasty options at single digit ages and in the NAS category.

I loved the 100th Anniversary bottle I had. It was one of my first 4R experiences, and I savored every last drop of the bottle. I'm find the 120th to be much, much more stiff - I'm holding out for it to open up over time.

I'm starting to learn that I like certain 4R profiles more than others, namely I prefer the bottlings that surprise me with flavors you don't normally find in bourbon. I prefer the exotic to the more classic lip-smackers like the 2010 LESmB.

I think there can be a fair amount of variation in the LE1B offerings.

Josh
04-14-2012, 16:10
I loved the 100th Anniversary bottle I had. It was one of my first 4R experiences, and I savored every last drop of the bottle. I'm find the 120th to be much, much more stiff - I'm holding out for it to open up over time.

I'm starting to learn that I like certain 4R profiles more than others, namely I prefer the bottlings that surprise me with flavors you don't normally find in bourbon. I prefer the exotic to the more classic lip-smackers like the 2010 LESmB.

I think there can be a fair amount of variation in the LE1B offerings.

Well put and I completely agree about the variations and the exotic flavors. I didn't mean to imply that I thought only rookies like old bourbons. What I meant to say was that drawing a straight line between age and "goodness" is an easy mistake to make when starting out.

Bmac
04-14-2012, 18:29
Small Batch is really a completely meaningless term. ER, Stagg, Buffalo Trace, Old Charter, E.H. Taylor are all the same mashbill. So they make more from that mashbill than of any other one they make, or so I would guess.
Wow, that's a a lot of product that uses Mash Bill #1. So, I should be able to taste a similarity with Old Charter 8yr to ER17?

I know a lot of people who like Er 17, and I have passed bottles of it I have found along to them. I think it's really dull. I feel the same way about Saz 18. I think your ER 17 tastes good to you because you are one of the people who like it. Different strokes for different folks!


True enough :)

WhiskyToWhiskey
04-14-2012, 18:55
FRSB just became available here north of the border. I enjoy it and as far as pricepoint goes it's better than almost anything available here.

I like to read the odd whiskey review for the taste profile, I know what appeals to me...I don't really care so much about the number it's given. I have noticed that brands put the highest review they get to promote their product. Corner Creek was given a 92 by the BTI...and most would rate this much lower I'm sure.

StraightNoChaser
04-15-2012, 09:54
Jim Murray is just another guy with another opinion. His opinion may not reflect yours or anyone else's as we all have different palates.

Personally 4R1B is my all time favorite regular offering. It's smooth, balanced, refined and tastes damn good. Stagg is too intense to be a session drinker and I consider it more of a novelty than anything else.

Trey Manthey
04-15-2012, 13:19
Stagg is too intense to be a session drinker and I consider it more of a novelty than anything else.

Seriously. Make no mistake, it's a delicious liquid, but when I see pictures of people's collections with 10+ bottles of it, my liver aches for them. If I pour a healthy dram out and finish it within an hour it's a feat, and then I'm totally hammered.

cigarnv
04-15-2012, 14:43
Jim Murray is just another guy with another opinion. His opinion may not reflect yours or anyone else's as we all have different palates.

Personally 4R1B is my all time favorite regular offering. It's smooth, balanced, refined and tastes damn good. Stagg is too intense to be a session drinker and I consider it more of a novelty than anything else.

As I have said before I would like to see the "professional" reviewers do blind tastings ... I sense you would see some very different scores and most likely a fair amount less "expertise" exhibited. I find the "hobbyists" blind tasting reviews and scores the most honest given they spend their own money and don't derive benefits of any kind from the beverage industry.