Woodford Reserve Maple Wood Finish

[cowdery]

"Resiny finish" is an apt description but that didn't spoil it for me. I found it drinkable. Certainly not sink-worthy.

[MissinER101]

Thanks "Crash Test Dummy Guy" WRMF was on my list of bourbons to try when I get home, now I can move another candidate up the list....So many bourbons; so little liver.

[wormil]

The Maple Finish is a bit sweeter and definitely smoother than Reserve with an almost rum-like finish. I am a fan of the previous Oak Finish and I'm a fan of the new Maple Finish. They are definitely on to something here.

[paris1129]

I received a bottle of this for X-mas and finally got around to opening it. It isn't too bad, a bit sweeter than I would like, but certainly drinkable. I think my wife would really like this bourbon alot. I am going to come back to it a couple more times before making a final decision, but right now I would say that it is okay, but certainly not the best bourbon I've ever had.

[DreamTheater]

I'll open with saying that liquor is a very subjective topic and I'd never deign to copping the attitude that "I loved it and you guys are nuts for not loving it".

I also realize that these very small batches WHOLLY lend themselves to inconsistencies year to year. Certainly is true of the dozens of scotches I own.

But, with all that said, my buddy and I just cracked into my Maple Wood and his Seasoned Oak last night. We both agreed that they were absolutely amazing. Truly a joy. He, VERY surprisingly liked the Maple more and I liked the Seasoned Oak more. Opposite to how we usually are.

I got a significant "wood" finish from the Maple. It was a little tough to pin down simply b/c it was not the oak finish that is usually the lay-up flavor you get from bourbon. It had a nice sweetness to it but not too much.

Best bourbon ever? No. Worth the $85 I paid for it....um...yes but only just. That is a big kick in the ass for bourbon.

I will, however, pay up to $100 for both the Sweet Mash and my own bottle of Seasoned Oak. Just to complete the collection.

[RegChumpington]

I will, however, pay up to $100 for both the Sweet Mash and my own bottle of Seasoned Oak. Just to complete the collection.

I like Seasoned Oak by quite a fair margin over regular Woodford. (It should be noted i'm not a huge fan of WR though).

Have you had Sweet Mash yet? I wouldn't pay $100 for it. It gets sweeter.. and sweeter... and sweeter... a little too one-dimensionally so. Much less agreeably so than the Maple. To me, it's an epitome of "try it once".

I understand the complete-the-collection desire though.

I would not extend that to the Sonoma-Cutrer finish though, which is easily one of the worst I've ever had. I only had 2 oz and that was a challenge.

[DreamTheater]

I am a pretty big fan of sweet liquor though so I'm inclined to say I'll like Sweet Mash.

The Chardonnay one though sounds...bizarre. (I misspoke when I said "complete collection" in the context of there only being three in the line - i understand there are 5 although I've only heard of Sweet Mash, Seasoned Oak, Maple, and the Sonoma one).

I've done a very modest amount of research online - at WR's site they say there were 5 in the series but only showed 3 on their site and I cannot find the fifth. Am I understanding things right?

Tell me more about the Sonoma one. It, like I said, just seems...ridiculous. Chardonnay suck as it is (totally my opinion) and it is a light and highly oaky/dry wine usually. To age delicious, rich, vanilla-y bourbon in a light wine barrel....uh...what?

[bourbonNOOG]

I am a pretty big fan of sweet liquor though so I'm inclined to say I'll like Sweet Mash.

The Chardonnay one though sounds...bizarre. (I misspoke when I said "complete collection" in the context of there only being three in the line - i understand there are 5 although I've only heard of Sweet Mash, Seasoned Oak, Maple, and the Sonoma one).

I've done a very modest amount of research online - at WR's site they say there were 5 in the series but only showed 3 on their site and I cannot find the fifth. Am I understanding things right?

Tell me more about the Sonoma one. It, like I said, just seems...ridiculous. Chardonnay suck as it is (totally my opinion) and it is a light and highly oaky/dry wine usually. To age delicious, rich, vanilla-y bourbon in a light wine barrel....uh...what?

There are technically 6 in the collection. They released a KY only release of the Four Grain in 2005 (I believe there were only 3,000 bottles distributed). Because it sold out so quickly they rereleased the Four Grain again in 2006, but this time nationally with a bottle count of 9,000. In 2007 they released the Sonoma Cutrer, 2008 was the Sweet Mash, 2009 was the Seasoned Oak and 2010 was the Maple Finish.

Sonoma Cutrer is by far the worst tasting in the collection. What's weird is I've had 2 bottles. The first was extremely tasty, so I stumbled upon another and jumped on it. The second bottle is hardly tolerable. Same thing happened with my bottles of Four Grain. I had a bottle of the 2006 second release, which I thoroughly enjoyed. When I got a chance to grab the rare 2005 KY only release, I did. It's much better than the Sonoma Cutrer but has a has a very dry, sour, metallic taste to it.

The Sweet Mash and Seasoned Oak are by far my two favorites. The Maple Finish was too sweet for me. Almost rummy and overly smooth. I prefer my bourbon to have a bit of a bite.

Either way I really enjoy the experimentation that goes into these WRMC offerings as well as the BT Experimental offerings. I do with that Woodford offered theirs in the 375ml for $45-$50 in stead of the 750ml for $85.

[Josh]

I know I always post this but if any relative newbies have not read the infamous 4 Grain thread, you should. I love it so much. I love it even more having met and drank with many of its participants.

http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showthread.php?p=71949#post71949

[OscarV]

I know I always post this but if any relative newbies have not read the infamous 4 Grain thread, you should. I love it so much. I love it even more having met and drank with many of its participants.

http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showthread.php?p=71949#post71949

Yep that was a classic.

All time best thread!

_

AGHI2

[Lost Pollito]

Thanks for posting that Josh. Absolutely fantastic thread.

[Gillman]

Yeah, I don't think I've read it since the first time around. Makes me sad for Tim of course.

Gary

[DreamTheater]

I'll read it sometime. Well, it sucks knowing that they dont release one of each type each year. I assumed that is how they did it. Well, if I see a sweet mash I better get all over it.

I wonder why the jackasses would release something so bad. I mean...yes - all edibles are subjective to a degree but really, if you have some respectable palates available and they dont meet something with a "this is very drinkable" you are doing your brand a disservice. It is pure bullshit to tempt people based on your good reputation to buy something and then drop a turd on them. I understand that great money goes into these things but bourbon...I mean, come on guys, isnt this stuff crafted in the South where there is purportedly there is a lot of pride and careful, slow craftmanship?

Well, I feel good knowing that I just need to get my seasoned oak and sweet mash and call it a day.

[cowdery]

FYI, I'm going there next week for the unveiling of the new rye. I tasted it about 18 months ago and am looking forward to the finished product.

[tmckenzie]

I'll read it sometime. Well, it sucks knowing that they dont release one of each type each year. I assumed that is how they did it. Well, if I see a sweet mash I better get all over it.

I wonder why the jackasses would release something so bad. I mean...yes - all edibles are subjective to a degree but really, if you have some respectable palates available and they dont meet something with a "this is very drinkable" you are doing your brand a disservice. It is pure bullshit to tempt people based on your good reputation to buy something and then drop a turd on them. I understand that great money goes into these things but bourbon...I mean, come on guys, isnt this stuff crafted in the South where there is purportedly there is a lot of pride and careful, slow craftmanship?

Well, I feel good knowing that I just need to get my seasoned oak and sweet mash and call it a day.

While I have not like all of the releases, and the sweet mash is my favorite I think you are a little out of line calling them jackasses. Nobody on this forum ever talks about folks like that. I have had the pleasure of speaking with Chris Morris on several occasions he is the master distiller at Woodford, and he for sure is not a jackass.

[bourbonNOOG]

I'll read it sometime. Well, it sucks knowing that they dont release one of each type each year. I assumed that is how they did it. Well, if I see a sweet mash I better get all over it.

I wonder why the jackasses would release something so bad. I mean...yes - all edibles are subjective to a degree but really, if you have some respectable palates available and they dont meet something with a "this is very drinkable" you are doing your brand a disservice. It is pure bullshit to tempt people based on your good reputation to buy something and then drop a turd on them. I understand that great money goes into these things but bourbon...I mean, come on guys, isnt this stuff crafted in the South where there is purportedly there is a lot of pride and careful, slow craftmanship?

Well, I feel good knowing that I just need to get my seasoned oak and sweet mash and call it a day.

I'm with tmckenzie here... show a little respect. Taste is completely subjective (like you yourself said). I for one like all of the WRMC offerings and applaud Chris Morris for his attempts at creating something "out of the norm." Do I like some more than others, yes, but none of them are undrinkable or even horrible in my opinion.

You haven't had the stuff, so "don't knock it until you try it", as some would say. I'm positive that WR and Chris Morris didn't bottle any of their WRMC offerings to simply mislead their loyal followers. Logically, they wouldn't intentionally bottle something that tasted horrible and risk tarnishing the name of their premium line of bourbon.

We don't resort to childish name calling here on SB. We are a forum made of individuals, who are passionate about bourbon. Don't make us all look like childish uninformed college freshmen excited about $1 jager shots.*

*it should be noted that I expect a response similar to "don't get so bent out of shape, I didn't mean it in a negative way, chill out, you're over reacting, etc."