Does the ‘perfect’ bourbon exist? Buffalo Trace's quest for "The Holy Grail".

[MacinJosh]

Hey guys,

Stumbled across this article today. It was posted back in mid-March. Some of you might have already seen it (and yes Thad, I combed through the open threads and I didn't see one on this topic yet ).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifest...9tY_story.html

What do you guys think? Does Harlen Wheatley have something up his sleeve and in the works to be released later this month? Something that goes beyond just the Experimental Collection?

As a huge Buffalo Trace fan (they set the bar and are the industry standard in my humble opinion) I certainly hope so. While I can't imagine better bourbons or ryes than The Antique Collection.....I for one would be thrilled to be proven wrong!

Let's hope it happens....

Josh

[OscarV]

I ain't holding my breath.
I don't think Buffalo Trace has anything that comes close to the best of WT or 4R.
Except for BT's Antique Collection the rest of their line up is to piney/grassy for me.
But they do put on a good show.
I will say havever they are better than the Old Forester/Woodford/Jack Daniels line and Jim Beams of the world.

[aea6574]

Howdy Josh:

I hope you are great.

Thanks for sharing this, it was very interesting. Wonder what this will cost???

Best regards, tony

[soad]

They're wasting their time, I'm drinking the Holy Grail right now....OGD 114. Last night I drank the Holy Grail....Weller 12. The night before the Holy Grail was ORVW 107......

[fishnbowljoe]

Hmmm. I thought it was Weller Centennial. Maybe they should start making it again. Dooooh! I forgot we already covered that in another thread. My bad. Cheers! Joe

[CorvallisCracker]

A number of semi random thoughts here.

First, seems to me that the goal of getting 100 points from Malt Advocate reflects an implicit assumption that such a rating would be compellingly persuasive. I think they're wrong about that. Although Hansell is a respected reviewer, he does not carry the same status in the whiskey community that Parker does in the wine community (and Parker's influence has diminished; more on that later). The serious whiskey drinking commmunity is small compared to the number of people who are trying to identify & buy top wines, and is, I believe, qualitatively different in that the former trust to their own evaluations much more than do the latter.

Second, just as no two consumers are likely to agree on every whiskey, neither are any two reviewers. Even if they got a 100 from MA, they would probably get less from Murray, Pacult, or BTI. Who ya gonna believe?

Third, reviewers reduce their own credibility when they hand out 100 point scores. Some years ago, the aformentioned Robert Parker gave 100pts to a Bordeaux, the 1990 Chateau Montrose. I happened to have acquired a half case of this as a futures purchase, getting them for $27 each (after the WA score was published, prices shot up to $150). I'd also bought a half case of the 1989 (94pts) and over the years pitted the two against each other in a number of tastings. It wasn't until 2008, when I opened the last of each, that the 1990 was judged better by a majority of those at the tasting. Even then, as good as it was, it was not the best Bordeaux I'd ever had (that would be the 1986 Lafite-Rothschild, which Mr. Parker gave a 99).

I can cite other examples.

As consumers themselves become more experienced, they replicate these results, and learn to trust to their own taste rather than rely on "experts". As I said before, I think most serious whiskey drinkers have already reached this point.

Finally, if you want to go by BTI (Beverage Tasting Institute, www.tastings.com), the "perfect" bourbon has already been named: Pappy van Winkle 20yo, which is the only one to ever get 99 points (if you analyze the BTI scoring system you'll realize it's not possible to get 100 points). Do I think PVW 20 is perfect? Sometimes. Other times, it seems too woody. So much for perfection.

[BFerguson]

Will is be something outstanding that they come up with, absolutely.

Will is be something that each one of will go "That was the best glass/bottle that I ever had in my life....." probably not, but it will still be a very fine glass, I'm sure of that.

Besides, the best ever, could have already existed, or may exist, or not even be barreled yet. That is the mystique. I can remember my dad saying, "No matter how good you are, there is always somebody better out there. You may never meet them, but they exist nonetheless.

The mystique of the perfect is what keeps most of us in the hunt and the love of what we do.

Ahhh....but the real question is, will I buy it when/if is comes out? Without a doubt!

[NorCalBoozer]

I find it weird that their basis for success is when Malt Advocate anoints it as such. It's hard to read that article and not sense that they are really on a marketing quest to find and badge something as a holy grail before someone else does.

[White Dog]

To get 100 from Hansell is "perfect" for Sazerac because then they will sell lots of Bourbon. Nothing more, nothing less.

[tehbeardman]

Perfect leaves a lot to interpretation as well. Perfect doesn't have to mean it is the most awesome super magically wet yourself best whiskey to ever grace this earth.

What if perfection is the best tasting well rounded whiskey at a value that can't be beat. Maybe they don't even care (much) about ratings?

I think most of us could agree that it is a marketing/talking point to easily create a buzz in the community.

Also, if they are trying to make the 'perfect' tasting bourbon, they need to be careful, because 'perfection' can be boring.